With this reply, I reach 100 posts, finally becoming a full member. Just wanted this milestone post to be on one of my own threads. Can't believe I didn't join bitcointalk earlier. Also, watch out for the Chaoskampf proxy trading platform, coming to an internet near you: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=221863.0 |
|
|
|
|
Is this a stupid question? I can't find bitcoind 0.8.2 anywhere, just the qt-gui.
|
|
|
|
|
"money laundering" statutes are just another way for the power elites to restrict others from engaging in the types of activities they do on a day to day basis. When I buy a priceless work of art for $120,000,000 cash, I just "laundered" my money into an item that will hold that value in a "legitimate" medium. This is just a simple example of this. The level of sophistication in legitimized money laundering is mind boggling.
|
|
|
|
If TA doesn't work for the major currencies, why do you think it will for crypto ?
And if you think TA works read 'Fooled by randomness' by Taleb
TA is entirely self-consistent and mathematically pure. In this sense, it works 100% of the time. They're just processed and re-processed numbers. The way you use those numbers is where I think you find the weakest link in efficacy. If by "work" you mean making a profit, then that's purely a function of what you do with this information. You could say the same thing about all charts, and all indicators. Why have charts in the first place? Why do we put volume bars underneath the charts? These processed numbers convey information. They don't have any personal prejudices. They are what they are, and deriving meaning from them is solely the responsibility of the humans looking at them. Here's the weakest link - the human. Some of them can derive more meaning from those numbers than others. |
|
|
|
... As far as I can tell, we're quickly spiraling towards a full-on, internationally organized, government assault on the network itself. I think this will take the form of Internet regulation.
I'm afraid I have to concur. I sense that 'the powers that be' are holding back and getting their ducks in a row at this point, but that all large countries, at least, have more to fear from their own populations than they do from one another. I imagine that what happened to Mubarak did not go past most of the world's leaders and they have no plans to allow such a thing to happen to themselves. The media corporations are the main ones chomping at the bit and have jumped the gun slightly to give us a taste of what's in store. It's not pretty, and I'll bet that 'we ain't seen nothin yet.' Just as developers are hard at work designing p2p exchange protocols, they should also be working on truly p2p internets. I know of a few projects that are already in the works (Meshnet, among others). I haven't researched the nitty gritty of these Internet protocols, but knowing that there are skilled developers at work on this issue gives me hope. Maybe we can avoid Orwell's foreboding boot from crushing humanity's face for the rest of history...or maybe not
I'm afraid that I don't have as much hope for Meshnet and the like as I wish I did. It's a huge technical challenge in the best of circumstances, and to get it to work with anything resembling reliability and performance in the face of almost any resistance (like hunting down nodes (which are, after all, beacons)) will be a monumental challenge. I think it likely that in order to enjoy free communications we'll have to go through a period of slipping through various narrow cracks, but eventually we'll win and things will open back up again. It well could be the case that Meshnet and such things will be exceedingly valuable in that phase. That's quite a dystopian future you envision! Ya. I've always been prone to try to anticipate the worst and try to figure out a strategy for it. Most of the time the worst never materializes, and that's fantastic! Sometimes my choices to prepare for the worst end up costing me, but on balance they have not. In this case, my fears for the future are in some sense a memory/study/observation of the past. I remember back to the struggles around availability of 'military grade' cryptography from back when the Internet fist became available to me in the mid 90's. It was not at all clear that 'we' were going to win and there was much talk around escrowed backdoors and such. I think the main reason we won is that there was a recognition that seeing who communicated with who was actually more critical than knowing what they said. And we also won because of people like Hal Finney...and possibly because of Hal Finney. I also think that fucking with anyone's monetary system is on par with an act of war (whether the transgressors fully recognize their transgressions or not...) If distributed crypto-currencies end up having a noticeable impact on mainstream monetary systems, and if they cannot be brought under control, I do expect a pretty significant response. Unfortunately, history has more depressing information to convey than encouraging. I really hope this can be a divergence from this trend, but I don't want to be unrealistic about the state of affairs. This is not a trivial matter we're talking about. |
|
|
|
I think a better question is, what are we going to do to combat/counteract government regulation? We're clearly wading into those waters with each passing day.
That is, to me, what the struggle over the block size and 'off-chain transaction solutions' is all about. I and other 'minimalists' have some theories about how the attacks might go down and how to attempt to thwart them. Other people have other theories. It's hard to know who is right or how much time we have to figure it out. I'm quite confident that in a general sense, 'distributed crypto-currencies' are here to stay and as they evolve they will adapt to whatever environment they find themselves in. I think that there is every likelihood of a pretty bumpy ride though. More people need to understand the issue of block size and off-chain transactions. I'm still surprised by how many people don't understand why governments would want to prohibit cryptocurrencies in the first place. Within this thread there was someone who basically said there's no reason why they would want to, so they won't. This needs to change as fast as possible, or else people are going to blindly subscribe to whatever government sponsored bastardization that is proposed as a "legitimized" version of Bitcoin. As far as I can tell, we're quickly spiraling towards a full-on, internationally organized, government assault on the network itself. I think this will take the form of Internet regulation. Just as developers are hard at work designing p2p exchange protocols, they should also be working on truly p2p internets. I know of a few projects that are already in the works (Meshnet, among others). I haven't researched the nitty gritty of these Internet protocols, but knowing that there are skilled developers at work on this issue gives me hope. Maybe we can avoid Orwell's foreboding boot from crushing humanity's face for the rest of history...or maybe not |
|
|
|
|
I think a better question is, what are we going to do to combat/counteract government regulation? We're clearly wading into those waters with each passing day.
|
|
|
|
I don't want to publicize the entire functional capacity of the service until right before alpha testing, so that I don't provide competing developers (and there are definitely a wide variety of them, including corporate ones) with any undue inspiration. I'm sorry if this comes off as greedy or non-collaborative, but I've spent almost 4 months writing these algorithms and have been sacrificing my sleep and "free"-time to develop this.
It sounds like an awesome project. Should I take it it wil be a paid service (hence the 'competition')? I'm not totally set on the payment plans, but yes. I think I'll only charge fees on the automated trading service, while the rest of the functionality will be provided free of charge (hopefully people will donate). I'm considering a flat rate on all automated trades that end in a positive gain. I'm thinking anywhere from 5-7% of that respective gain. No profits = no fees. You already have to pay trading fees on the exchanges, so I shouldn't be taking any more of your coins. Does this sound reasonable? |
|
|
|
|
I don't see why we can't just deal with the decimal values. Is it that hard to conceptualize what "point Oh Oh five seventy three" means (or whatever it might be)? Did we not all get past the 3rd grade?
This is a purely perceptual problem. People should realize that inflation has warped their minds into thinking this way. A loaf of bread used to be .05 dollars. It wasn't very hard to understand what this meant...
|
|
|
|
|
If there's enough push for shorter timeframe scaling, I'll add 1 and 10 minute frames as well.
|
|
|
|
If governments could make it illegal, they would have many years ago. It's only the above-ground businesses that they can target at the moment, and they are doing so as we type. The only way I can imagine governments outlawing Bitcoin would be to fundamentally seize control of the internet itself. This seizure has been in the works for over a decade now, so I guess it's not too far beyond the realm of possibility...
I'd point out that a cat does not normally make her move as the gazelle approaches the watering hole. She waits until her prey has become comfortable enough to drop it's head for a drink. That is, of course, when the prey is most vulnerable and the attack is most likely to result in a kill. My thinking as well.... |
|
|
|
Current Analytical Functions:
1. Simple Moving Average
2. Exponential Moving Average
3. Moving Average Convergence-Divergence
4. Relative Strength Index
5. Support/Resistance
6. Aroon Oscillator
7. Stochastic Momentum Index
8. Chaikin Volatility
9. Bollinger Bands
10. On-Balance Volume
11. Linear Regression Trend Lines No Volume? There's plenty of on-chart drawing ability. Including trendlines? As is, the charts only scale down to a 30 minute timeframe. I don't think I'll be making them any finer resolution than that. It is a pity. Add at least 1 and 10 minute timeframe. You can draw whatever arbitrary lines you want. In addition, there are linear regression trend lines (as mentioned above) among other computed trend lines. There's obviously basic volume charting (I didn't think I needed to mention that), apart from advanced volume analysis like on-balance volume (as mentioned above). Any information that's available on BTC-e is already included in the program (last price, high, low, volume, order books) |
|
|
|
|
also, follow on twitter for updates:
@Chaoskampf0
|
|
|
|
|
I don't want to publicize the entire functional capacity of the service until right before alpha testing, so that I don't provide competing developers (and there are definitely a wide variety of them, including corporate ones) with any undue inspiration. I'm sorry if this comes off as greedy or non-collaborative, but I've spent almost 4 months writing these algorithms and have been sacrificing my sleep and "free"-time to develop this. Although, I should describe some of the basic functions that are already incorporated into the program, and which any serious competitor will already be familiar with and use. This should give you guys a jumping off point for suggestions.
Current Analytical Functions:
1. Simple Moving Average
2. Exponential Moving Average
3. Moving Average Convergence-Divergence
4. Relative Strength Index
5. Support/Resistance
6. Aroon Oscillator
7. Stochastic Momentum Index
8. Chaikin Volatility
9. Bollinger Bands
10. On-Balance Volume
11. Linear Regression Trend Lines
There's plenty of on-chart drawing ability. As is, the charts only scale down to a 30 minute timeframe. I don't think I'll be making them any finer resolution than that. The upper bound for that scale is all-time data
|
|
|
|
|
It's only a matter of time until major corporations are going to start developing Bitcoin services. If you want to get your foot in the door before that happens, you need to get on the development train asap. I should have started my project a year ago....hopefully it's not too late.
|
|
|
|
Some days before the bitcoin 2013 conference we saw Litecoin stabilize neatly around the $3 mark into a channel with a suppressed trading range, very narrow. And we saw this happen on the way up from the last correction to $2.5 levels where very large buy and sell walls were placed on the orderbook at btc-e which effectively obscured and made the bid/ask ratio metric unuseable unless filtered with a dynamic view. These large, moving buy and sell walls were articulated such that the trading ranges were constricted to channels and moved up to consolidate trading ranges sideways at the $3 levels.
One of the tools I find sorely lacking in trading Crypto is an interface to filter out the largest buy walls, or see only the buys/sells that are for example in an 8LTC to 45LTC range, and to examine other ranges of orders on the book might give one a perspective on a more accurate market depth, and market depths in different channels of the orderbook.
When we attempt to use the "short orderbook" on btc-e itself to gauge market depth, volume and movements, often we find the buy and sell walls heavily peppered with automated, high frequency, bot spam orders, or micro-orders. Filtering this out, and removing the largest buy/sell walls, would provide a much more accurate picture of buy/sell interests on the "long orderbook".
When performing statistical analysis, one of the first steps in finding a mean, or an average of course is to throw out the lows and the highs and average the middle values, and then of course there are many other metrics which can be derived from the orderbook. Of all of the tools in Crypto trading I find to be the least utilized it is the orderbook.
That makes a perfect sense. When we see a 10,000 coin dump then pump on a $0.20 scale, the $0.01 move becomes very hard to monitor. I like the candle charts more as you can see which one is a sell and which one is a buy candle and how much difference is left out between sell/buy, but if we can get something similar to the charts on MCXnow and btc-e integrated together and make one candle colored orders but with the price separate to the volume, I think we'd have a good chart for the 24 hours period. BUT, if we have the option to filter bots/micro orders and be able to scale the chart up to 7 days and down to 1 hour, we'd have a GREAT chart. You both make good points. While implementing this sort of functionality shouldn't be too difficult, figuring out what high/low volume orders are real and which ones are meant purely for manipulation might be a little tricky for the trading bot. Sometimes buy/sell walls are real. Even if they're not, they influence the direction of the market. While I could write a tool that filters down the order-books to a narrow spectrum of volumes, I don't know if I can incorporate it into the trading algorithm. My bots depend on these volume indicators to place their orders (and many different sub-functions within the trading bots use and process that information). If you're not interested in automated trading, then this isn't really an issue. You can just use that tool to filter the order-book and do your own analysis to place your orders by hand. Also, scaling the chart was one of the first features I implemented. I don't understand why that's not a standard feature on all the exchanges (it seems so basic and yet so incredibly useful). Does this address your suggestions or did I miss something? |
|
|
|
also, Why should bitcoin become illegal? There is no reason for it to become illegal to begin with? So, no it wont...
lol. |
|
|
|
|
If governments could make it illegal, they would have many years ago. It's only the above-ground businesses that they can target at the moment, and they are doing so as we type. The only way I can imagine governments outlawing Bitcoin would be to fundamentally seize control of the internet itself. This seizure has been in the works for over a decade now, so I guess it's not too far beyond the realm of possibility...
|
|
|
|
If bitcoin goes mainstream, wouldnt the military begin being funded by bitcoin, or would the militaries around the world disapeer?
Bitcoin going "mainstream" implies the undermining of the US Government's control over systems that it draws power from. This obviously includes the financial systems we have in place today. This includes the IMF, World Bank, and other international operations like private investment banking cartels (Central Banking systems, Goldman Sachs, etc...). You can't have Bitcoin going "mainstream" and the US Government retaining it's position as an international authority through its influences in military and banking at the same time. They are mutually exclusive. The only way this would not be the case, is if Bitcoin was somehow co-opted and bastardized in order to serve the interests of centralized power structures. Changing the blocksize to be more than 1 MB is a simple example of how this could be accomplished. Here's a little explanation of that: http://keepbitcoinfree.org |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
