Reading Kate's email she seems to think that she is more obliged to honour the bonds than the Ciphertrade shares. Depending on how this all pans out, IF anybody sees money from the Cipher* scam then it's the bond holders and with ot the DMS holders. |
|
|
|
This is cool! Will you add this to the single exchanges graphs, too? |
|
|
|
|
What's your strategy when you add new currencies? On the one hand not having enough pairs will keep people away, on the other hand having too many pairs with too low volume is equally repelling.
I like the systems you have in place with coin-voting, referrals and reduced fees for a price, yet volume is stagnant or even declining. So what's your plan?
|
|
|
|
|
Do you have numbers on what and how much your expenses are? This isn't explained anywhere.
|
|
|
|
Actually, if there was a buy-back, the NAV/U would increase, as buybacks are done at 98% of the last published NAV/U.
The only time that NAV/U decreases is when SELL or MINE dividends are issued. Does that help?
If the calculation is implicitly correct otherwise then yes, thanks  |
|
|
|
If you go to TETRA on Cryptostocks, click on Verification and it shows his last known ip address, copy and paste it in to google and thats how I got the information
Good to know! I haven't found that yet. |
|
|
|
|
I just noticed that the NAV/U I calculate automatically doesn't match the reported value. Now I want to be sure: The NAV/U from the API-available data is:
B.EXCH = 0.02172270
NAV/U = 0.02172270 / 1.03 = .021090 (day zero)
DIV(MINE) = 0.00010545
-> NAV/U today = NAV/U - 3*DIV(MINE) = .021090 - .00031635 = .02077365
The difference to the reported NAV/U of 0.02078206 is caused by the new buys of B.EXCH. If there was a buyback, then NAV/U would go down further than the calculated-as-above NAV/U. Is this correct?
|
|
|
|
|
Right now the BTC from voting for new altcoins goes to promotion and similar.
It would be a good move to give a portion of the voting to shareholders. That way a part can be used to pay for first setup and some promotion but at the same time benefit shareholders (who made it possible to earn from any voting in the first place) a little.
I propose 10% of the BTC that the winning votes paid.
|
|
|
|
Is there some way to tell which coins are valid as currency2 in the pair then? Also some pairs seem to work in both directions. For example ltc_doge and doge_ltc both return data. Kind of hard to write a program to return the data if you can't give the user valid feedback on what is and isn't acceptable as input.
Yes that's because both of these pairs actually exist. I don't know of any exchanges that offer any to any trades. Vircurex did that once but I think the money was spread around on too many markets, so that the single markets weren't traded enough. If they were arbitrage bots would be running hot for sure The big markets are - besides Fiat and btc - ltc, ppc, doge, xmr and a few others. To find out which ones exist you could get all coins from here http://www.cryptocoincharts.info/v2/api/listCoins and then check for btc_XXX via http://www.cryptocoincharts.info/v2/api/tradingPairs . If this doesn't exist then probably XXX isn't valid. |
|
|
|
{"id":"ltc\/btc","price":"0.00914000","price_before_24h":"0.01000000","volume_first":"394184.358786482","volume_second":"3685.43083999207","volume_btc":"3685.43","best_market":"btc-e","latest_trade":"2014-08-14 03:19:06"} but if I do: http://www.cryptocoincharts.info/v2/api/tradingPair/[btc_ltc] I get: {"id":null,"price":null,"price_before_24h":null,"volume_first":null,"volume_second":null,"volume_btc":null,"best_market":null,"latest_trade":null} The pairs are always in the xxx_btc format that most of the exchanges have (except poloniex, maybe others). @xchrix An API call for showing the overlap of trading pairs would be cool! Possibly a POST request that takes one or many exchanges and returns the lowest common denominator (for many exchanges) and all pairs (for one exchange). This could make for some great graphs, too. |
|
|
|
|
Cool that you quote this exact post. This one honestly hit me like a truck back then. I thought I had DMS figured through and through but those were several paragraphs of news to me!
|
|
|
|
Hasn't it been established that the major mining operators are colluding now to create a shortage in the supply? Ghash has been producing significantly less blocks over the past weeks - at one point they fell below Discus Fish in the 24 hour numbers.
Huh? Where can I read up on this? |
|
|
|
|
crypto-trade volume isn't updated for quite some time now. The new API is online and working.
|
|
|
|
No this forum is not built upon semi-anonymous non-secured loans. Bitcoin is pseudo-anonymous. This forum is not built on loans. Let's get that straight as I do not take out loans from my customers, for example. Obviously you are in a position where you think you know what you are talking about but it appears you are clueless.  Loans can be secure in several ways via having the other party consent to giving you their personal information in case you need recourse or using some sort of collateral or escrow to keep the borrowing party accountable. All I said was it baffles me how many people send money to people they haven't got any information on over the internet. UNSECURED-LOANS. Nowhere did I say it surprised me of the nature of Bitcoin and loans denominated in it. I don't know how this could work in reality. The personal information is worth nothing i you can't take the counterparty to court. Let's say I live in France and want to take a russian guy of who I have the credentials to court over 2000 $ at the time of lending and 4000 $ at the time I wanna start sueing. Really, what are the chances this will lead anywhere? I think other forms of LIMITING the needed trust - like the system 2070 has in place with BDD - are much more fitting to BTC ecosystem. A system of pawning can maybe work, too like this one lending page (forgot the name) had with btct.co shares. Had btct.co not collapsed, I doubt Deprived would have just taken the money and run. Also there was this strange deal with Ukyo, what happened to that one? |
|
|
|
What baffles me is how people can send so many coins to a supposedly anonymous person. Do you give out unsecured loans to random strangers who you meet for the first time?
Are you new to this subforum? +1 funny. Especially from you, 2070. |
|
|
|
|
Great! Good job as always!
|
|
|
|
|
The crypto-trade API is up again. Could you re-enable it?
|
|
|
|
|
Same here. 500 on cancel. Didn't notice it was successful.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
