anyway good work thanks. i like this 'mouse-only' trading  I've just added a 'price' box on the 'trade' page. [ https://www.worldbitcoinexchange.com/?page=trade ] Please have a play with it and tell me what you think. Editing either 'have' or 'want' sets the other one, and editing 'price' sets 'want'. It works well for me on google chrome. I don't have easy access to Internet Explorer but I would hope that it will work there too. If you use the 'trade' link on the right, it'll use the best available buy/sell price, switching between the two as you switch between having BTC and AUD, but as soon as you edit the price box, it'll stay fixed until you edit it again. No 'buy-it-now' (tm) links yet. That'll wait 'til tomorrow. |
|
|
|
this is 99% of the way there, thanks!
I can add a one-click link if that really would be useful. Maybe the first time you click it, you're asked for confirmation, and warned that in future it's a true one-click thing. Also, the way things currently stand, order matching is only done once per minute, on a first-come first-served basis. So just because you see an order in the orderbook doesn't mean that it's available for you to match with. Real-time matching should be coming soon, though. the other 1% would be if it were truly a ONE-CLICK option, but I understand why you would want people to also click a confirmation.
It's not just to get a confirmation. The other aspect is that maybe I want the price of the 2nd best offer in the market, but not the whole amount. I want to be able to click the price, then edit the "I have" down to the amount I want to spend at that price. I've been playing with the code, trying to get a better way of specifying the order you want to place. It's kind of awkward having 3 variables ('i have', 'i want', 'price') where changing any one can change either of the other two. Sometimes maybe I want to buy 5 BTC at a given price, and want the site to calculate how much it costs. Other times maybe I want to spent $50 at a certain price and have the site calculate how many BTC that gets me. Probably I never have a fixed amount to spend and a fixed amount I need - which is what the current interface expects me to have. So we'll have 3 boxes: "have", "want", "price", and: * editing "have" changes "want" based on "price" * editing "want" changes "have", based on "price" * editing "price" changes "want", based on "have" That's what I'll work on next. Open to suggestions, as always... |
|
|
|
imagine if you could just click a [TRADE] button next to one of the buy or sell orders to instantly agree to that trade, instead of having to go to the trade page and input all the specifics in detail just to take the other side of someone's offer.
I've added this. There's no "trade" button - you just click anywhere on the order in the orderbook and it takes you to the trade page with the details from that order already filled in. For my next trick I'll look into redesigning the trade page a bit so you can type the price you want. |
|
|
|
i just thought of a feature that would be really awesome that so far I've never seen done before..
imagine if you could just click a [TRADE] button next to one of the buy or sell orders to instantly agree to that trade, instead of having to go to the trade page and input all the specifics in detail just to take the other side of someone's offer.
That would be pretty easy to add to the site. Did you see how the 'buy' and 'sell' prices in the header of the site are links? If you click them, it takes you to the trade page with the 'I have' and 'I want' fields filled in with the values you need to grab the best available buy or sell offer on the site. I can extend this so that you can click any trade in the marketplace and have it take you to the trade page with the boxes filled in to match that trade plus any better trades. For instance, if there's 1 BTC for sale at $9 and another 9 BTC for sale at $10 each and you click on the "9 BTC at $10 each" offer, it's unlikely you're clicking it because you would prefer to pay $10 per BTC than $9 per BTC. You're clicking it because there's not enough volume available at $9. So it will fill in "have $90, want 9 BTC", but what will end up matching is 1 BTC for $9 and 8.1 BTC for $81 - a combined trade of 9.1 BTC for $90. Before clicking the 'buy' button, you'll be able to adjust the "have" box and it will recalculate the "want" value using the price you clicked ($10 per BTC) rather than the best available (but lower volume) $9 per BTC. I think that sounds like a reasonable way to do it, but comments are appreciated. An alternative would be for clicking the "9 BTC at $10 each" to fill in values that would buy up the 9 BTC at $10 each and all cheaper offers too. So in this case it would say "have $99, want 9.9 BTC, which will end up with you buying 1 BTC for $9, and 9 BTC for $90, a combined trade of 10 BTC for $99. Sorry for the verbal diarrhea. I hope that makes some kind of sense... I'll report back when the site is updated. I'll probably end up having both options available via a setting on the 'profile' page. |
|
|
|
If anyone has any problems with the exchange, [...]
People were commenting yesterday that the site was a little slow, so we've upgraded things to make it faster. Is it better now? |
|
|
|
If anyone has any problems with the exchange, or suggestions for how it can be improved, please let us know. You can post about it here, or there's an issue tracker where we can keep track of individual problems, here: https://github.com/dooglus/intersango/issues (click 'Pricing and Signup' at the top, then 'Create a free account') |
|
|
|
|
Typically, you:
1) 'clone repository' on the gitorious site
2) 'git clone git://gitorious.org/~yourname/intersango/yourname-intersango.git' in a terminal
3) make the branch in your local repository, work on it, commit your changes
4) 'git push' to send your local changes back to your gitorious clone
5) 'request merge' on the gitorious site, to ask the bitcoinconsultancy guys to merge your changes back to their repository
That's the way things generally go with git - you work in your own repository and send merge requests.
Your clone doesn't have to be on gitorious. I find github.com works a lot faster for me and has an issues tracker. You don't have to use a website to host your repository at all, but it's nice to have an offsite backup.
|
|
|
|
Hihi, so now you can easily calculate how long it takes for me to switch from one browser to the other :-p
Thanks for the information!
No, I can't tell exactly how slow you are. What I'm saying is that the error message is generated by the server when it can't connect to the server's bitcoind process and has nothing to do with your choice of web browser. |
|
|
|
Hint: I get this error messagte, too, from time to time. Only in Firefox though. In Internet Explorer, everything is fine. If you get this error message, maybe try to change your browser.
I'm pretty sure you'll see the same message whichever browser you use. It's a server-side error, which fixes itself each time it happens. It takes up to 30 seconds for the site to notice bitcoind is down, and another few minutes to start a new one. |
|
|
|
Did you ever get this resolved? I'm having the same problem. Reading this thread was frustrating, but I think it will help me solve the problem. The problem seems to be the following: I started with 10 BTC and started spending them one at a time. Each time I spend one, I get a new coin back with the change - so after the first 1 BTC spend I'm left with a new 9 BTC coin in my wallet. The transactions when I had 8 BTC and tried to spend 1 BTC 'got lost'. My wallet now thinks that has a 7 BTC coin, but when I try to spend any of it, the network hasn't heard of the 7 BTC coin. It knows about the 8 BTC coin, and don't think it has been spent, buy my wallet only thinks I have a 7 BTC coin. It's a separate address, a separate private key, etc. So now, when I try to spend any of the remaining 7 BTC, the network tells me: received: tx (258 bytes)
ERROR: ConnectInputs() : f11... mapTransactions prev not found 52a...
ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed f11...
storing orphan tx f11...
ie. one of the inputs to the new transaction isn't found in the blockchain (the 7 BTC coin). This transaction will wait until the network sees the 8 BTC coin being spent. In the mean time, my wallet now thinks it has a 6 BTC coin, but that isn't spendable either, since it won't be in the blockchain until the 7 BTC coin is, and that won't be until the lost transaction gets 'found'. The solution, I guess, is to export all the private keys from my wallet to a text file, then make a new wallet and import them into that, and then get the bitcoin client to rescan the blockchain to get only the transactions that are in the blockchain. Then I'll have 8 BTC again, I presume. Unfortunately the standard client doesn't let you export or import wallet keys yet, but it will in the next release. -- I just use 'dumpwallet' and 'importwallet' as described here: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8091.0 and it worked for me. I don't see any of the 0/unconfirmed transactions now, and have transferred my whole balance to a new address in case any of the 'lost' transactions ever get found again. |
|
|
|
I know the acronym. I don't know what you were trying to say. You replaced the word 'you' (I was referring to britcoin in the 2nd person) to 'britcoin'. How is that fixing anything? |
|
|
|
ftfy
I don't understand. What are you saying? |
|
|
|
I'm glad to see the 'absurd' prices have stopped happening since you started using my patch on the 19th...   |
|
|
|
you can estimate the FLOPs potential of the Bitcoin network based on the approximate hardware making up the hashing power.
That would be good if there was some way of getting a rough idea of the hardware making up the hashing power. Do we have anything better than guessing at the moment? I don't think any peer on the network even reports that it is hashing unless it solves a block, let alone having to identify the hardware it is using. I think the only way we can estimate the total hashrate of the network as a whole is to look at the rate that blocks are solved relative to the current difficulty. Is that right? Do we have any idea what percentage of the network's hashing power is made up of ASICs which have no floating point capability at all? |
|
|
|
So in the worst case someone might have 0.002% of their order rounded off.
Someone recently had 0.00000002 of their order rounded off didn't they? If their total order was 0.0005 (the minimum), that's 0.004%. That's twice as bad as your stated worst case. Is it possible to have 0.00000003 or more rounded off? What's the real worst case? And can this be fixed? |
|
|
|
If I can sell 0.00000000 BTC for 0.00000001 GBP, I could do that 100 million times and make a whole British Pound! I wonder how you get around the limits. The code is doing: order_worthwhile_check($amount, $amount_disp, '0.0005');
order_worthwhile_check($want_amount, $want_amount_disp, '0.0005');
|
|
|
|
The zero trades I saw were on Britcoin, by the way.
Curiouser and curiouser. |
|
|
|
The limits on britcoin are artificial. The actual precisions is 8 places after the decimal, or 0.00000001.
Of course, but since britcoin is using the intersango code I'd have thought the same artificial limits would be in place for the USD exchange too. The artificial limits were put in place for a reason (it helps prevent these zero trades and code errors, for one thing), so it seems odd that they're not on all the intersango exchanges. |
|
|
|
|
What happened to the limits of 0.005 or so? On britcoin there's a minimum size for both BTC and GBP, and it's something of that order.
Isn't this USD exchange using the same code?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
