Code: [Select]

md5sum wallet.json; sha1sum wallet.json
4d0fb892b1d0ec7ef9eaee99b166f791  wallet.json
5f54991a811fdd63d22ca55f9264e2420760c905  wallet.json


So is this service ready to go?

Quote from: tbone on April 04, 2016, 11:19:42 pm

Quote from: bytemaster on April 04, 2016, 09:25:27 pm

I am looking for someone to create a step-by-step guide with screenshots on how to deposit OPEN.BTC into your BitShares account.

These instructions will be used as part of a marketing push for STEEM that will direct users to BitShares which will start out as the exclusive exchange where STEEM is traded. 

If we play this right BitShares can ride the STEEM publicity and we can get some new traders into the exchange.

Having exclusive assets that people want to trade is one of the best ways of bootstrapping BitShares.

Ideally the guide would be done in MARKDOWN.

This will be great to have in place so we can be ready for LISK traders as well.  LISK launches next Monday.

Ronny (@ccedk): will we have LISK trading on the DEX when it launches?

Have asked Max for an update via skype.

FYI:  Apparently Yobit participated in the Lisk ICO and have already made YOBIT.LISK available to trade on their site.  Currently it is trading at 15X ICO price.  It's creating a buzz for Yobit, which might even put them on the map.  That's exactly what OpenLedger needs.   @ccedk

https://yobit.net/en/trade/LISK/BTC

synereo is expected to be added first part of April, and soon to follow will come other major currencies from the OMNI group like Tether, maidsafe, and maybe also the Agoras Tokens within May with some various media backing the introduction.

In April will be added Synereo, LISK and DGD(digix), all three based on their recent or upcoming major media attention combime with strategic interest building OpenLedger as the place to be.

OpenLedger.hk almost there as supporting server for the far east region for quick access and mot probably few days left.

Hi Ronny (@ccedk), will you be incentivizing market makers to provide liquidity in order to help bootstrap these markets on the DEX?  If so, are you aware that we've been working on a mechanism that would help UIA issuers (or the committee for BitAssets) properly reward market makers for the liquidity they provide? 

The idea is that you would create a reward for a given market and for a given time period.  Shares of that reward could then be earned by market makers depending on how often they have orders on the book, the size of those orders, and the proximity of the orders to the price feed or best bid/ask.   At the very least, during bootstrapping of a particular market, you could use the fees you collect in that market to redistribute back to market makers that qualify for liquidity rewards based on above mentioned criteria. 

I think it would be great if you used this to help bootstrap the Synereo, LISK and DGD(digix) markets once you add them.  What do you think? 

I am looking for someone to create a step-by-step guide with screenshots on how to deposit OPEN.BTC into your BitShares account.

These instructions will be used as part of a marketing push for STEEM that will direct users to BitShares which will start out as the exclusive exchange where STEEM is traded. 

If we play this right BitShares can ride the STEEM publicity and we can get some new traders into the exchange.

Having exclusive assets that people want to trade is one of the best ways of bootstrapping BitShares.

Ideally the guide would be done in MARKDOWN.

This will be great to have in place so we can be ready for LISK traders as well.  LISK launches next Monday.

Ronny (@ccedk): will we have LISK trading on the DEX when it launches?

Perhaps @onceuponatime will consider immediately selling some of the stealth asset in order to not only recoup a chunk of his investment, but also to raise some funds to speed up implementation of stealth transfers / private balances.  This is a critical feature.  The sooner it gets implemented, the faster the Bitshares adoption rate will increase, and the sooner @onceuponatime will be in the black on his investment.

Quote from: tbone on March 15, 2016, 05:57:07 pm

@svk:  I've been meaning to comment on the last release and offer additional feedback, just been so busy lately.  But great job with the latest changes to the horizontal order book layout.   Also, the expand and contract buttons on the chart are very helpful.  And the chart timeframes make more sense now (e.g. there was no need for 5s).  Although if it's a relatively easy matter to add them, I would go ahead and add 1m, 2h, 6h, 12h and 1w.  If it's time consuming to add each one, I would add 1m immediately and hold off on the others for now. 

Also with respect to the chart, something has changed where the volume bars now obscure view of the candlesticks.  It was definitely much better before.  And final point about the chart...we once had a crosshair, and now it is just a vertical line.  Can you make it a cross hair again, and have the price of the vertical line's position show on the vertical axis as the crosshair moves?  That would mimic standard behavior. 

By the way, while the horizontal layout is much improved now, the vertical layout has taken a step backwards with the ticker (price history) now pushed further down.  For the very same reasons the price history has been moved immediately below the chart in the horizontal layout, the same should be true on the vertical layout. 

Also, when you click on the order book, it is adding the cumulative available orders and putting a value into the order box, but it's not calculating properly.  Can you take a look at that?

Beyond that, we really need to start working toward having some basic position management.  I mentioned in a previous post that the Open Orders box could be modified to include a Current Positions view.  So the box could have 2 tabs for the user to choose between.  The tab headers could include the number of items in the list like below.  Also, Open Positions could show the P/L (% gain or loss) for each position.  And each position could be hyperlinked so the user can click to load that market into the current view in order to assess the situation and/or close out or add to their position.

|  Open Orders (1)    |   Current Positions (5)  |

Finally, there is still some strange behavior with the Find Markets tab.  For example, if I enter "OPEN.EUR", it returns the OPEN.EUR pairs with BTS, BTC, USD, CNY...but not EUR.  Do you know why that is?

Position management like you say sounds nice, but not sure it's feasible with our current system. A margin position doesn't have any other information attached to it besides the collateral and debt. Whether you've gone short with it or not I don't know, so I don't see how I can define a gain/loss there.

I understand there are factors that make it difficult or impossible to offer true position management at this time.  But my original suggestion was to start at least for now by simply listing the Open Positions (i.e. balances) in each asset.  That would be very helpful because currently the only way to see your balances is to navigate into the account area.  Then you have to navigate back to the trading screen.  This makes for a very disjointed and inefficient experience.  Instead, the Open Orders box could have 2 tabs so you could also display Open Positions (again, that's simply the balances in each asset).  That would allow the trader to easily switch between those assets in order to assess each market's vitals and potentially close, reduce or add to one of the positions. 

Find markets looks for markets with 4 default quotes, the ones you mentioned. It's simply a case of having to limit the search results in order to not overload the witness node with searches, so I picked the 4 most important assets as I see it..

Perhaps you can display the EUR pair (or anything that doesn't fall under the primary 4) under "OTHER" so the results won't be unexpected and confusing due to missing pairs?

By the way, it used to be that clicking on the "Trade" main menu item when already on the Trade page would take you to Explore-->Markets.  That was very handy.  Now it requires a bunch of navigating to go back and forth.  Can you reinstate that original toggle or create a new one? 

One final suggestion, can you create a way for the user to toggle the My Markets / Find Markets column between normal and full length (i.e. toggle the mini depth chart in and out of view)?  That would be handy.

Thanks @svk as always for all of your effort on the UI.  It just keeps getting better and better!

Quote from: tbone on March 15, 2016, 05:57:07 pm

@svk:  I've been meaning to comment on the last release and offer additional feedback, just been so busy lately.  But great job with the latest changes to the horizontal order book layout.   Also, the expand and contract buttons on the chart are very helpful.  And the chart timeframes make more sense now (e.g. there was no need for 5s).  Although if it's a relatively easy matter to add them, I would go ahead and add 1m, 2h, 6h, 12h and 1w.  If it's time consuming to add each one, I would add 1m immediately and hold off on the others for now. 

Also with respect to the chart, something has changed where the volume bars now obscure view of the candlesticks.  It was definitely much better before.  And final point about the chart...we once had a crosshair, and now it is just a vertical line.  Can you make it a cross hair again, and have the price of the vertical line's position show on the vertical axis as the crosshair moves?  That would mimic standard behavior. 

By the way, while the horizontal layout is much improved now, the vertical layout has taken a step backwards with the ticker (price history) now pushed further down.  For the very same reasons the price history has been moved immediately below the chart in the horizontal layout, the same should be true on the vertical layout. 

Also, when you click on the order book, it is adding the cumulative available orders and putting a value into the order box, but it's not calculating properly.  Can you take a look at that?

Beyond that, we really need to start working toward having some basic position management.  I mentioned in a previous post that the Open Orders box could be modified to include a Current Positions view.  So the box could have 2 tabs for the user to choose between.  The tab headers could include the number of items in the list like below.  Also, Open Positions could show the P/L (% gain or loss) for each position.  And each position could be hyperlinked so the user can click to load that market into the current view in order to assess the situation and/or close out or add to their position.

|  Open Orders (1)    |   Current Positions (5)  |

Finally, there is still some strange behavior with the Find Markets tab.  For example, if I enter "OPEN.EUR", it returns the OPEN.EUR pairs with BTS, BTC, USD, CNY...but not EUR.  Do you know why that is?

I put the volume bars and the candlesticks on the same y-axis, it gives more space to each one so I prefer it that way at least. In the process the axis indexes changed which is why the crosshair disappeared, I hadn't even noticed but I'll put them back in.

I've been meaning to respond to this for some time, but I've been so busy.  In any event, I appreciate your reasoning here.  Having both on the same y-axis works well on Poloniex and TradingView, to name a couple.  But I guess with the colors those sites use, the volume bars don't obscure the candlesticks nearly as much.  And in TradingView you can easily hide and unhide the volume with the click of the mouse.  I often wish I could do that on Poloniex as well.  Maybe you can add that capability on the DEX.  It would be helpful.

The chart timeframes are defined in the backend, but I decided to filter out anything below 5 minutes because with the low volume we have it just doesn't show anything useful atm. If you really think 1m is useful I can set the cutoff there.

Once we start getting much more active trading in some of these markets, there will be traders who scalp that will need 1m charts. 

Clicking on the orderbook appears correct to me, I tried to be very careful when I refactored it and checking now I can't find anything wrong. It uses the Total and the Price for that order to calculate the corresponding Amount. That's how it works on Polo as well as far as I can tell. If you think it should work differently, can you give me an example please?

This is definitely not working properly.  What we want is for the total price of the buy/sell order to be populated with the sum of the prices of each row up to the one clicked.  What you're doing is taking the cumulative number of shares and dividing it by the price of the row clicked.  But that doesn't give the actual number of shares available. 

Poloniex, on the other hand, adds the number of shares row by row the way I'm suggesting.  That's what's good about how they auto-populate the order information.  But then unfortunately, when it comes to the price, they do something similar to what you're doing i.e. they calculate the total buy/sell price by multiplying the total number of shares by the price of the row clicked.  That overestimates the cost of the trade when they could easily give the exact total price of the actual shares available on the order book up to the row clicked. 

In summary, to be as useful as possible, both values (amount of shares to buy/sell, and total price of the transaction) should be sums of the corresponding values in each of the rows up to the one clicked.   This is another case where if we get it right, we'll be superior to the others.  That should bode well for us once we get what I hope will soon be an influx of people looking to trade LISK (and hopefully other assets) here on the DEX.