|
Sorry, i won't travel upstate. Only in person meeting, cash only.
|
|
|
|
|
In person, in a cafe in Manhattan or Brooklyn. Market price.
|
|
|
|
|
Move to lock/delete this thread based on the fact that it's basically begging for money.
|
|
|
|
|
Can't you just maintain USD balances at both, and execute the trades simultaneously? Don't they have free methods of withdrawal (that take a few days). If you have a buffer of BTC and USD at both you should be able to execute your arbitrage and even the balances out periodically right? Am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
I agree with you that they should be able to do it with a reasonably powerful computer -- one that could be purchased for under $20K. This is why I think their system is just inefficient. as I said in the above post, you can easily write an inefficient algorithm that just process orders really slowly, and gets exponentially slower as the order book grows. I don't know for sure that this is what their problem was though. Just speculating. If you are interested in how to implement a high performance one, look here, these guys are talking about creating an open source high performance engine that should be able to process thousands to millions of orders per second: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1c7v6z/buttercoin_open_source_highperformance_bitcoin/ |
|
|
|
|
It's possible that they use an inefficient algo to process orders. Then, even if the queue is only a few megs, if the algo run time takes longer and longer depending on how many orders are in the queue, that could explain why the lag takes place. They upgraded to a server with SSD's, so they might have been bottlenecked by IO. If a part of their order processing algo relies on disk IO (obviously it does, since it needs to transactional and talk to a database), it could be that things were backing up.
The other exchanges aren't getting the same amount of traffic, and I'm not sure if they are also getting the same amount of fake micro-transactions that were allegedly bogging down MtGox.
Either way, I'm curious about this too, but I think the only people who can answer these Q's are at MtGox, and they would not divulge this info.
|
|
|
|
prepare for the great MtGox sell off once they go back online. expect shitty trading engine to lag out to infinity from all the sell @ $49 orders
Are people able to send BTC out of gox right now? If so, wouldn't they transmit to a wallet at another exchange and sell right now? This leads one to think that when gox opens there won't be a lot of mass selling. |
|
|
|
|
Which exchanges are the most reliable, fastest, most convenient (in terms of getting USD in and out), trustworthy, etc?
|
|
|
|
Mt. Gox is a commercial firm run by individuals. They can set any policy they like, and we can use other services like Bitfloor.
I'd like to see more pools of arbitrageurs who hold balances of cash and Bitcoin on each of the major exchanges and simultaneously buy where the price is relatively low and sell where the price is relatively high.
In faaact... once the JOBS Act rules are published, I wonder if we could crowdfund this.
There are already people doing this. Isn't that why the prices are within $5 USD of each other on all the exchanges (at least for the ones that are up and executing trades anyway)? |
|
|
|
So, a few sentences about this issue.
* A drop from 266 to 105 will make headlines all over! Result: Bitcoin publicity
* Knowing that the issue was cause by a huge amount of new accounts Result: BULL
* Crashing the market. Result: MtGox making a shit ton of money
It's a Win-Win for everyone except the weak hands!
The drop and the publicity about it could also dampen the public interest. |
|
|
|
As I said in another thread, they need to get 10 times more servers than they think they need. Gox never seems to be up to par, its like they are ALWAYS playing catch up.
They did. In fact, they had much more than that. As they said, in just the last day the number of trades tripled! It's truly amazing that they scaled as well as they did. Seems like they may have a bottleneck somewhere that adding servers won't fix. High probability that it's in the database, which is pretty hard to scale by just adding servers. But i don't see how the amount of traffic they get should be this much of a problem for them. They should be able buy a powerful enough database server with one or two day's worth of the profits they make (assuming the $100K+ per day profit I saw posted in another thread is true). I've worked on websites that got 1M+ hits per day in traffic spikes, not quite the same type of app as an online exchange, but I know a little bit about performance and scaling. For the amount of money they make, and the amount of traffic they do, there is simply no excuse. Their public statements don't instill confidence. First they said "you guys have no idea what it's like, come work with us for a day, we can handle DoS attacks, where withstood two at the same time without any lag", then the next day they are down after the maintenance because of a DoS attack. |
|
|
|
|
It's quite hard to undersatnd what mobile4ever is suggesting. But from what I can tell, he/she is proposing that someone write the code for an exchange, and open source it. Then anyone can host that code on their servers, plug in to fiat gateways using their account #'s, and boom they have an exchange running.
I don't see how this is different from just the idea of open sourcing the code for an exchange. I wouldn't want just any random PHP developer writing the code for an exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
market rate at time of transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
gweedo, I read your other posts. That one in particular had wrong information though. Regardless if you made factually correct statements in the other posts, that one was just so wrong that I really wanted to reply and make corrections, despite it being old.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
