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 - biophil

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 57
76
General Discussion / Re: [ANN] Questions for TODAY @ 4:00pm EST
« on: June 08, 2015, 07:57:14 pm »
A possibly-naive question from someone who hasn't looked too closely at either voting system yet:

Have you studied NuShares's voting model when creating the voting model for approving code changes? I know there will be some major structural differences (perhaps the foremost of which is that in BitShares, you can't directly buy a delegate position), but there may be some lessons to learn. 

77
Technical Support / Re: Announcing BitShares 2.0
« on: June 08, 2015, 07:05:33 pm »
mmmm, transferable accounts. You people are beautiful. :)

78
It would be neat if this license-if-sharedropped  worked, but how would you ever enforce it? The old PTS social consensus wasn't exactly overwhelmingly adopted...

79
Sparkle was originally intended to be PoW, not DPOS. That was the whole point: bitshares functionality on a PoW chain.

80
General Discussion / The market engine is not matching shorts properly
« on: April 10, 2015, 10:35:01 pm »
Right now, there are bids for BitUSD above the feed price. The feed price is about 211, the highest bid is 225. To test the market, I shorted BitUSD with 1000 BTS of collateral, and was able to borrow 2.3637 BitUSD. Now in my margin order it says I have about 1500 BTS, which means the proceeds of my short order were about 500 BTS. THAT IS THE WRONG AMOUNT!! I should have been matched with the highest bid and gotten the 225 price, but as you can calculate (500/2.3637), I only got the 211 price. I'm guessing I matched one of the many expired shorts.

I know the devs aren't allowed to talk to us anymore or some such insane bullshit, but is there anybody out there who knows how to get a fix for this in the pipeline? Thanks.

81
Muse / NOTE Price discussion
« on: March 26, 2015, 03:17:59 pm »
Has anybody done any ROI calculations for NOTEs from the pre-sale? I can't recall my ballpark figures exactly, but it seems like the pre-sale was implying a market cap around $2MM, which isn't far from where NOTEs are trading now. Anybody care to give actual numbers?

82
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BitSuperLab please fix your feeds
« on: March 17, 2015, 01:31:43 am »
I guess I should just go design a feed-prediction attack and make money myself, since people seem so hard to convince.

At the very least, feed scripts should randomize update times. I'll leave it at that until I can give a better argument.

83
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BitSuperLab please fix your feeds
« on: March 16, 2015, 03:03:27 pm »
@Gentso- do you believe there is any such thing as a perfectly accurate price? What's the spread at btc38? 1%? 0.5%? Which price is the price you think is "correct?" The bid or ask? The price of the last trade? I think you'll agree with me that none of those are quite right; you'd almost always be more interested in something between the bid and ask. So what do you pick? The average? A recent moving average of market prices? Those sound better, but they're still only estimates. Maybe I'm being long-winded, but I'm trying to make the point that there isn't ever 1 price and the best you can ever do is estimate it. So adding in 0.2% noise will still give an accurate price feed, especially if everybody is doing it and all the noise averages out.

@Xeroc, I haven't actually designed a manipulation algorithm to exploit feed price prediction, but isn't it obvious that a noisy feed would be better than a predictable one? I'm working from this principle: if I can execute trades on btc38 and predict exactly what that will do to the price feed, then I can make money moving the price feed around. Probably a fraction of a percent per trade, but the fact is I'll be taking money from the system without providing any benefit. Doesn't that sound like something we should try to prevent?

maybe we can find a compromise and have a randomness in-line with the lowest spread of your exchanges .. if btc38 says 1% you may add randomness with a spread of less than 1% with confidence >90% or so ..
Yeah, that's more or less what I had in mind.

Another way to do it halfway is to randomize update times. Update every 20 minutes plus or minus 5.

Also there should be no hard triggers that push a new price with 100% certainty, because those could be pretty easily exploitable. Again, based on the principle that a deterministic price feed is exploitable.

84
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BitSuperLab please fix your feeds
« on: March 16, 2015, 02:21:32 pm »
@Gentso- do you believe there is any such thing as a perfectly accurate price? What's the spread at btc38? 1%? 0.5%? Which price is the price you think is "correct?" The bid or ask? The price of the last trade? I think you'll agree with me that none of those are quite right; you'd almost always be more interested in something between the bid and ask. So what do you pick? The average? A recent moving average of market prices? Those sound better, but they're still only estimates. Maybe I'm being long-winded, but I'm trying to make the point that there isn't ever 1 price and the best you can ever do is estimate it. So adding in 0.2% noise will still give an accurate price feed, especially if everybody is doing it and all the noise averages out.

@Xeroc, I haven't actually designed a manipulation algorithm to exploit feed price prediction, but isn't it obvious that a noisy feed would be better than a predictable one? I'm working from this principle: if I can execute trades on btc38 and predict exactly what that will do to the price feed, then I can make money moving the price feed around. Probably a fraction of a percent per trade, but the fact is I'll be taking money from the system without providing any benefit. Doesn't that sound like something we should try to prevent?

85
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BitSuperLab please fix your feeds
« on: March 16, 2015, 03:15:00 am »
One more fairly obvious item you should add to the list is:

Always multiply your published price by a random number that is close to 1; maybe within a quarter percent of one. It's an easy step that makes the price feed that much less predictable and improves security against precision market manipulation.

86
General Discussion / Re: An attack on DevShares
« on: February 09, 2015, 07:21:13 pm »
I like this. Gonna go get some popcorn.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


87
Technical Support / Re: Comming from NXT and confused.
« on: February 08, 2015, 04:48:53 pm »
...
So now onto the main question. I need delegates that (upon receiving my stake), will reward me with part of their profits.

There aren't any I think.

That's somewhat amazing and incredibly beautiful. Not a single case of myopic vote-buying. :)

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


88
BTS: zebulon

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


89
They did what xeroc said and found the deposit. Thanks!

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


90
Last week I'm quite sure I sent a deposit of 13,396 to Bter. I have screenshots of my client with all the "btercom" transactions filtered out, and my deposit shows up in that list.

However, Bter tech support tells me it's not showing up in the Bter wallet! Does anybody have any idea what this could mean? The txid prefix is 142a3e31, and you can see it's a transaction in this block: http://bitsharesblocks.com/blocks/block?id=1575565

Is there anywhere my deposit could have gone except to Bter? Does Bter need to re-scan? This happened around the time 0.5.0 came out; maybe the deposit came in while they were updating and somehow didn't get scanned properly by their wallet?

Is there a way they could scan my transaction in particular to verify that it's to them?
Please verify from your transaction history that the receiver is indeed "btercom"

I am confident that bter.com already knows how to handle theses issues.
They have two options:

- rescan 1575565 .. which contains the transaction
- wallet_verify_titan_deposit 142a3e31

the first one should make the transaction appear while the second one would tell them if the transactions is redeemable by them (read: you indeed sent to btercom).

From the observerspoint of view there is no way to figure out where the tx went to and who can redeem the funds. but btercom should be able to check if THEY can ..

Ok, will suggest those to tech support.

I *think* I'm sure I sent it to btercom. Is there any possible way I could have literally typed the letters "btercom" but then the transaction went somewhere else? Lol.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

why don't you click on your account name and check your  "Recent Transactions" on the gui ?

I've done that; I filter by account name btercom and get a nice complete list of my dealings with Bter. I'm positive I sent it to them. Because of TITAN, the only way I can prove it is by sending them my wallet and password, haha.

For the future, how do public accounts work? If a public acct sends to a TITAN account, how public is the transaction? In this situation, I'm cursing TITAN a little for protecting my privacy so well.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 57