Hello,

I am trying to restore a wallet via the command: "--restore-deterministic-wallet" as described here: https://monerotalk.org/t/bounty-create-a-useful-tutorial-on-how-to-setup-monero-closed/13/4

I am opening a cmd dialog in windows, changing to the monero folder, and then typing: "simplewallet.exe --restore-deterministic-wallet *words*".

However, nothing seems to happen, I get to the same opening text as if I had just started simplewallet, e.g. "Specify wallet name... if the wallet doesn't exist..."

Any tips?

In the US, companies can select whatever fiscal year they want for accounting purposes (i.e. for audited financials and SEC filings), but the IRS taxes everyone on a calendar year basis.

That said, deadline for filing tax returns, if you got an extension, is Oct 15.  But that is for personal tax returns.  Corporate tax return extension deadline was Sep 15. [Edit - to clarify, this could cause some selling pressure, but not much.  When you elect an extension in April, you have to pay estimated taxes at that time.  So the only people dumping bitcoin for US tax purposes now would be people who were smart enough to  realized they would owe taxes on bitcoin and file an extension, but not smart enough to pay their estimated taxes at that time and thus face penalties.]

In the stock market, there is a "window dressing" effect where funds may play games at the end of a quarter - piling into hot stocks, dumping weak ones.  That way, they can say they owned those companies in their quarterly filings.

sent : 100 xmr
id     : 0918858bb126b255b7443f86fe9f481da05392c42ea5881dc5cfa51bf2846ba1
irc    :  Bobabouey

Tim Draper on fox business news talking bitcoin.

I actually made that mistake the first time, second time, I set it at $.10.  It stayed as "pending evaluation" for about 2 hours, and then strangely showed as "instance terminated by user."  Which is strange, since the one I terminated since the fee was too low was marked as "canceled before fulfillment."

Trying it again, will let you know if anything different happens.

I tried this, and it has been saying "pending evaluation for over an hour.  Maybe because this is my first time setting up an EC2 instance?

Welcome to the 4th dan monero superheros with bars of Platinum club!

Gotta love Risto's nomenclature.

Added another 50 donation, bringing my total to 250.  Wished I could do a little more, but all markets are brutal lately!

In the US, crypto to crypto would still fall afoul of money laundering laws.

Without delving into the detailed reasons, take the reason Mike Caldwell stopped selling pre-funded Casascius coins.  Casascius coins were always sold for bitcoin.  So essentially, he was selling bitcoin for bitcoin.  But after talking to lawyers, he remained concerned that the model had risk.  His explanation:

"A lot of the discussion I had with my legal counsel is that part of what makes it money transmitting is there is no way for me to know whether the person ordering is the person receiving. In other words it is money transmitting because each order "could" be a money transmission with no way to know. Restricted delivery changes that aspect of the story."  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=243341.msg6789094#msg6789094

I think Smoothie ultimately took the same approach and only sells buyer funded coins now.

In Risto's approach, you don't even get to that level of theory.  You are transmitting one currency to another party.  AML / KYC would most likely apply.

But then again, you are not in the US.  I hope Finland or Estonia laws are more practical!

Good luck with the project.

I put them into tables and graphs so its a little easier to compare.

Further on the Poloniex "ICO", this link has a good analysis of why Bitcoin has not been considered a security by the SEC, and why a ponzi scheme that invested in bitcoin, like the Bitcoin Savings and Trust ("BST"), is:  http://www.compliancebuilding.com/2013/08/09/is-bitcoin-a-security/

I think the logic is directly applicable to the ICO.  Look at the discussion on the elements of "Common Enterprise" and "Expectation of profits from efforts of others".  I think those are the same ones that could cause problems for the ICO.

Yep, the same thing Voorhees got in trouble for with Satoshidice: http://www.sec.gov/News/PressRelease/Detail/PressRelease/1370541972520#.VAekb_ldWSo

One of the problems with longer-term options is that the volatility on a cryptocurrency is so high, longer term options become absurdly expensive.

Take Risto's .01 call which has implied volatility of 300.   Plug that into an option calculator with a year term, and you get a Black Scholes price of .0034, versus the current price of .0043.  See below. 

Would you be willing to pay .0034 for the option, versus just buying the coin itself for .0043, and knowing that you won't be out your whole investment if XMR is at .0099 in a year?

Basically, cryptocurrencies are as volatile (or more volatile) than many OPTIONS in the equity market.

Great project, and impressive you got it going in a few days.  I'm tempted to buy some just to say I participated, but I do my own taxes, and am lazy, so I may just hold on to my existing stake...

I think volatility for BS is standard deviation of daily change * sqrt of number of days.  See this link, which also has a model you can use.  http://adamhgrimes.com/blog/how-do-you-calculate-volatility-in-excel/

Incidentally, I compared your calculation against that calculation, and yours came out much lower.  So it may be that your 400% is entirely justified by history, let alone potential future moves for a microcap beta cryptocurrency.

I understand your logic, and to avoid any doubt, I wasn't trying to criticize your pricing as unsound, I was just curious to see what the implied volatility was.  I trade equity options frequently, and it is one of the first things I look at to get a sense of option prices.

And as for Black Scholes on an American option, I think for calls it is generally considered to be applicable if there are no dividends.  And, in practice, since few options are exercised early, using it to approximate the implied volatility of an American put or call is common.

I may be dense today, but I can not find the batch download function for all trading prices, just for my trades...

I ran a quick check of the implied volatilities.  It is pasted as an image, I can try and upload the excel file later.  However, you can test any of the assumptions at an online calculator, like here:  http://www.math.columbia.edu/~smirnov/options13.html

Edit: Everything with a dollar sign is actually monero in thousands.

It appears based on this analysis that these options are priced using something other than black scholes.  The far out of the money options have higher lower implied volatility than the nearer or in-the-money options.  And the puts have much lower implied volatility than the calls.  From a Black Scholes perspective, this would indicate the better trades are the more out-of-the-money calls, or the puts.

The reason for the row titled "Differ (observed - model) is the way I threw this together was from an excel template that requires a "what-if" analysis on each option calculation to get an implied price that is very close to the listed price.

I'm aware that Black Scholes is not perfect, but I think the information is interesting.

Risto, are you able to calculate actual historical volatility from your dataset of historical trading prices of poloniex, or could someone point me to a source?  Poloniex only seemed to provide more recent trade data, and I don't know how to convert the graph information into data.

Corrected graph per rpietila catch.

Excellent data,  and because I like histograms: