Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - monsterer

Pages: 1 ... 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 [123] 124 125
1831
Technical Support / blockchain_market_order_history - which order was removed from the book?
« on: October 11, 2014, 04:13:25 pm »
Using blockchain_market_order_history, is it possible to tell which order was removed from the orderbook during the trade?

I'm trying to condense the information down into more readable form.

In general, if an ask was removed from the book, it's classed as a buy and if a bid was removed, its a sell - just not sure I can tell that from the information returned by blockchain_market_order_history...

Cheers, Paul.

1832
General Discussion / Re: Major bitshares_toolkit flaw that needs to be solved.
« on: October 11, 2014, 01:11:14 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on October 11, 2014, 12:48:43 pm
yes .. but user experience will also suffer

Consider an outside investor from the world of Forex. They're used to using metaquotes, you can't flip the markets, you just have to go with what each broker has listed.

Now consider an outsider from the world of crypto - same story.

In fact, flipped markets is a feature novel to bitshares, isn't it? So the only people who might miss the feature are existing users?

Cheers, Paul.

1833
Technical Support / Should shorts be included with asks, and covers in bids?
« on: October 11, 2014, 01:07:18 pm »
When building a site to show the orderbook of a market, should shorts be included with the asks and covers with the bids?

1834
General Discussion / Re: Major bitshares_toolkit flaw that needs to be solved.
« on: October 11, 2014, 12:13:26 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on October 11, 2014, 10:40:13 am
Try to store and sort an order book in two different orientations and the problem is not trivial.

I suggest ditching the flipped market. Then wont all the problems simply 'go away'?

1835
Technical Support / Re: RPC returns timestamp in two different formats
« on: October 11, 2014, 10:33:54 am »
Quote from: xeroc on October 11, 2014, 08:22:14 am
what vikram wanted to tell you is that the internal date format is the ISO standard ... only the GUI and the client do pretty printing ... the RPC interface will give you the ISO string ..

maybe this can help you: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/919244/converting-string-to-datetime-c-net

Which ISO standard is it using? It sure isn't this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601, because that has separators.

1836
General Discussion / Re: Major bitshares_toolkit flaw that needs to be solved.
« on: October 11, 2014, 10:28:39 am »
Quote from: drltc on October 10, 2014, 10:34:46 pm
Then you have to decide which one is "natural" and which one is "flipped".

bytemaster says the "natural" market is BTSX priced in BitUSD, because US dollars are a relatively stable and familiar unit of value.

I say the "natural" market is BitUSD priced in BTSX, because BTSX is like "real money" (a limited-issue token) and BitUSD is some kind of derivative contract.

Letting each investor have their own preferences is a compromise between these viewpoints.

And that is literally the only reason for storing a ratio? Pretty *major* compromise for something so trivial.

What happens, if when down the line BTSX is valued as much as BTC you're talking about rounding off quite large sums as fees?

IMO, it looks like a bug. If you need to install confidence in the platform and attract institutional investors and big money, things like this will put them off.

Cheers, Paul.


1837
Technical Support / Re: RPC returns timestamp in two different formats
« on: October 10, 2014, 10:26:44 pm »
Quote from: vikram on October 10, 2014, 08:32:31 pm
The difference is only in the pretty-printed output when using the command line interface. The pretty-printing is something that we add manually and thus is inconsistent across different commands. The actual raw RPC output uses the same ISO YYYYMMDDThhmmss format.

The trouble is YYYYMMDDThhmmss is not actually a valid timestamp format in c#. You need the separators in order for the language to be able to parse the string. Is there any chance of making this consistently pretty printed across all API responses?

1838
General Discussion / Re: Major bitshares_toolkit flaw that needs to be solved.
« on: October 10, 2014, 10:22:07 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on October 10, 2014, 09:43:04 pm
I am not a CS expert ... but IMHO there just is no fix .. it's a issue of double<->float<->integer in combination with the inverse 1/x

What is the reason for not storing the actual price in the market? Why not keep things simple and ignore flipped markets?

1839
General Discussion / Re: Major bitshares_toolkit flaw that needs to be solved.
« on: October 10, 2014, 09:41:00 pm »
Quote from: Riverhead on October 10, 2014, 09:27:26 pm
Can you just floor or ceiling the irrational?

You can try to round it, but really this is a patch not a fix.

1840
General Discussion / Re: Major bitshares_toolkit flaw that needs to be solved.
« on: October 10, 2014, 09:24:29 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on October 06, 2014, 02:39:07 pm
Prices are represented as 128 bit. 64.64 fixed point.

The problem is not the representation, but the model.

Price is stored as a ratio, which means you will always have problems like this:

ratio = 1.0001
1 / ratio = 0.99990000999900009999000099990000 recurring - this cannot be stored accurately no matter the precision.

1841
General Discussion / Re: What's going on with FREE asset?
« on: October 10, 2014, 03:03:08 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on October 10, 2014, 02:25:08 pm
it's an ASK order ... more evidence:

Ok, now I know I'm not understanding something fundamental here. An ask order *is* a sell order, isn't it? Ask as in asking price?

That can't be different in bitshares than it is in forex, or bitcoin exchanges in general, surely?    :o

1842
General Discussion / Re: What's going on with FREE asset?
« on: October 10, 2014, 01:06:18 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on October 10, 2014, 11:25:39 am
nope ... s.o. is asking for FREE at a price

Code: [Select]
{ 
            "type":"ask_order",
            "market_index":{ 
               "order_price":{ 
                  "ratio":"0.1",
                  "quote_asset_id":27,
                  "base_asset_id":0
               },
That looks like a sell order to me?

Quote
all amounts on the blockchain are in larimers .. so you take that number and DIVIDE by 10^5 to get BTSX for the BTSX asset .. for the FREE asset you devide that number by just 1

Ok, got you. :)

Cheers, Paul.

1843
General Discussion / Re: What's going on with FREE asset?
« on: October 10, 2014, 09:55:49 am »
Quote from: xeroc on October 10, 2014, 06:48:11 am
I didn't even know people would PAY for them :)

These are sell orders, though?

Quote from: xeroc on October 10, 2014, 06:48:11 am
anyway, the ratio is NOT the price .. you need to incorporate the ratio of precisions of both assets aswell .. BTSX is 10e5 and FREE is 10^0 .. which leads to a price of ratio*10^5/10^0 .. so 0.1 would be 10000 Larimers per FREE ...

Ok, thanks- I didn't realise there was a ratio of precisions as well.

Your calculation above puts the price in BTSX * 10000 (i.e. larimers), but the market is BTSX/FREE (base/quote), so the quote price ought to be denominated in FREE, shouldn't it?

I still feel I'm not understanding something fundamental here.

1844
Technical Support / Re: http_start_server brings client to a halt
« on: October 10, 2014, 08:49:53 am »
Quote from: xeroc on October 10, 2014, 06:40:08 am
the GUI itself is a web wallet displayed in a built-in browser ... however there are TWO different RPC interfaces ... you should take a look at the config.json file in %APPDATA%\BitShares X .. there you can "enable" the RPC interface by default .. but you have to SET a port for it .. I recommend setting a port for the "http_rpc...." variable

TBH I wasted a lot of time trying to get my app to connect to the authenticated RPC port - so I'm just using the HTTP port. The problem is, you can't connect to the HTTP port without running that command, which causes the client to lock up. :/

1845
General Discussion / Re: Is it possible for a DAC to be 100% decentralised?
« on: October 10, 2014, 08:16:25 am »
Quote from: toast on October 09, 2014, 09:52:49 pm
How do you own shares without getting the client? On the exchanges? The exchanges run clients

I think there is a confusion of clients here. Obviously you need to run the bitshares client in order to own any asset. But, and this is the important part for me: you don't need to run any DAC client in order to own the asset which represents that DAC.

That asset will pay dividends without you ever installing and running the DAC client associated with it.

Now, AFAICT, if you were to install and run the DAC client AND you were voted as a delegate, you would receive 50% more dividends? (ref: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1121.msg12464#msg12464) But doesn't this mean there is little incentive to run the DAC client if you are not a delegate?

Cheers, Paul.

Pages: 1 ... 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 [123] 124 125

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 17 queries.