This is called market making and is very healthy/quite useful. From what I hear, mature markets all have this type of behavior in very large volumes.
For bitcoin, it allows entities like bitpay, coinbase, etc to operate with limited slippage.
For Bitcoin I agree it's a good thing. I personally prefer volatility, bloodshed, panic, despair, exuberance and then of course exhaustion. I guess the roller coaster has to slow down at some point, at least for awhile.  Just wait... any market makers that have too tight a clamp on the market will get washed out as soon as we break out decisively. |
|
|
|
people buying this amount are thinking longer term.. them expect the price to go up in the future. so it's a bullish indicator ... unless it's lended money(and would be a stupid move to make right now).. then it will come down again if price doesn't move up much  one trader being long term bullish does not mean the market can move through the current resistance in the short term |
|
|
|
https://gist.github.com/yrral86/5551203This code calculates maximum price variation within the time specified. Assumes trades.csv is in the following format timestamp1,price timestamp2,price etc. additional fields will not cause problems, but if the timestamp and price are not in those positions, you can adjust the indices on the line with Trade.new the seconds variable will set the maximum time span to examine (it turns out the library I chose uses the terminology push, pop and next) cool stuff, bro! just ran the thing on 4 million trades (only have data up to 2013-04-18 unfortunately... probs with bitcoincharts api): Maximum spread within 60 seconds: $63.7778 t0=2013-04-10T18:59:50+00:00 t1=2013-04-10T19:00:45+00:00
It took quite some time and about 1.3 GB of ram: real 13m10.698s
user 12m27.654s
sys 0m40.017s
thanks for the code, notme and thanks to all others for enduring our offtopic stuff here. Cool... I didn't have the data to run it on. That's a pretty big range for 55 seconds  |
|
|
|
https://gist.github.com/yrral86/5551203This code calculates maximum price variation within the time specified. Assumes trades.csv is in the following format timestamp1,price timestamp2,price etc. additional fields will not cause problems, but if the timestamp and price are not in those positions, you can adjust the indices on the line with Trade.new the seconds variable will set the maximum time span to examine (it turns out the library I chose uses the terminology push, pop and next)
|
|
|
|
I think that really depends on how useful people find bitcoin. Downloading/uploading movies via bittorent is illegal almost everywhere in some form or another, yet the audience and userbase of bittorent only continues to grow. Of course there isn't any zuckerberg who is the billionaire poster boy for creating it/selling it, but that doesn't stop it from being enormously useful for hundreds of millions of people (I have no idea how many).
It can be the same for bitcoin. Illegal or regulated, but extremely useful anyway. The black market remember is worth trillions and trillions of dollars. Regulation doesn't change that.
So you don't think MAbtc's argument (a few posts up) carries some weight? Bitcoin threatens the very core of governments -- collecting taxes & issuing currency. Of course governments will react if Bitcoin makes any noticeable mark on fiat economy. Forgot who said "Give me control over a nation's money, and I care not who makes its laws," but he summed things up pretty well. There was pretty sound reasoning behind not wanting Bitcoin to hit the limelights so early in the game. Bitcoin is a method of taking back control of our money for ourselves. |
|
|
|
For each time period N in seconds do:
create 2 priority queues, one min, one max, with the following modifications:
modify push to keep track of the last timestamp
modify peek to pop off and throw away that are more N seconds old until it finds a trade within the timeframe or empties itself
set max_spread = 0
then, for each trade:
push the trade to both queues
spread = peek(max_queue) - peek(min_queue)
max_spread = spread if spread > max_spread
Not sure if it is simpler, but at least to me it is easier to prove to myself it works as well as easy to recognize that for any number of seconds N you can calculate the max spread in worst case O(n^2*lg(n)) time, where n is the number of trades.
I don't quite understand... does your modified peek() find the max price? Is that queue sorted by price or time or is it a stack (since you're using push/pop/peek terminology it sounds like a stack to me)? In any case, it seems you'd have to search through the whole set of trades in the queue... either to find the max price or to find trades that have become too old for the time period. Is that why you get the n^2? n^2 is a lot, there's ~ 4 million trades. Maybe it could be n*m where n is number of trades and m average number of trades in time period? I think by using adequate data structures (queue sorted by trade time + another one sorted by price?) one could get it down to n*lg(m). Not sure where your lg(n) is coming from, leads me to believe your queue is indeed sorted by price. Queue is sorted on price. Time is just an attribute of the trades the queue holds. Pop and peek are acceptable terminology for a priority queue according to the wikipedia page, but it seems I should at least use insert for push. It won't be anywhere near n^2 * lg (n)... that's just a lazy upper bound. Insert will be lg(m) and modified peek will somewhere between O(1) in the best case and O(m*lg(m)) in the worst case (pop/dequeue is a lg(m) operation (in the worst case) in most queue implementations, which is where the lg came from). Here m is the number of trades currently in the queue. Whenever the market trends, you will have to throw a lot of old trades out of one of the queues, but in the other queue they will just get buried until the price revisits that level (so if it doesn't we never have to examine them again). |
|
|
|
How can government do anything about Bitcoin? It's ridiculous idea - even if they did build a Great Chinese firewall you can always go through proxy or VPN and there will always be at least some countries which will never censor internet.
Your missing the point. It's all about the perceptions of future adopters. It doesn't matter whether governments can technically take down the bitcoin network/protocol... they can massively inflate the perceived risks of future adopters. When push comes to shove, the layman sees many alternatives to what bitcoin provides (especially since the vast majority only see bitcoin in terms of fiat and little more). If governments want to hurt bitcoin, they can censor, make transactions illegal (or cast them in a legally questionable light such that users will seek safer alternatives), use banks to target exchanges, businesses and even users -- seizing assets and crippling operations along the way. The negative press any such actions would bring would blow out of the water any and all fundamentally bullish indicators. They can stop digital fiat exchange in their country. They can't stop the rest of the world and they can't stop cash transactions. |
|
|
|
question for one and all.
based upon history of btc vs $USD (@gox) ... what is the largest swing in the following periods:
1 minute
5 minutes
15 minutes
30 minutes
60 minutes
120 minutes
180 minutes
anyone?
You can gather this info yourself by looking at the historical charts. Don't be lazy. I think you're underestimating the problem. EDIT: a naive sql query on the trades table runs way too long. I could do it another way though, would take roughly 2 hours. So if the info is important enough for you, Viceroy, you can try to bribe me Just use the CSV and Ruby or Perl to parse the data. Accessing and working with the data is not the problem: Unless he meant "timeframes" instead of "periods" you need to consider every possible pair of trades with times of execution no further than 60 seconds apart (could also be 2 seconds). You can't just use min/max (or even average or last price) values of some "minute bins" and look for the highest delta between 2 consecutive ones. The way I'd implement it would be to have a sliding window cointaining all trades from time t to time t-60s tracking min/max of the trades and then move it through the data (by moving t to the next trade and adding it to the list of the trades in the frame, then checking wether the oldest trade in the frame has time < t-60s and remove it if that's the case. keep trades in the frame in a list ordered by price so "max" can be adjusted in case the removed trade is the one with the highest price). Difference between "max" and "min" is the your swings size. Record the IDs of the 2 trades responsible for the largest swing and the solution is found. If that sounds too complicated to you, please share your simpler solution. For each time period N in seconds do: create 2 priority queues, one min, one max, with the following modifications: modify push to keep track of the last timestamp modify peek to pop off and throw away that are more N seconds old until it finds a trade within the timeframe or empties itself set max_spread = 0 then, for each trade: push the trade to both queues spread = peek(max_queue) - peek(min_queue) max_spread = spread if spread > max_spread Not sure if it is simpler, but at least to me it is easier to prove to myself it works as well as easy to recognize that for any number of seconds N you can calculate the max spread in worst case O(n^2*lg(n)) time, where n is the number of trades. |
|
|
|
A stable sine wave of about 20USD of amplitude and about 15 minutes of wavelength for a few days would be nice...
My market making bot would make bank wallet.dat. |
|
|
|
Does anyone get the feeling that the market is slowing down as we near the apex of the biggest triangle ever seen?
Isn't that what is expected?  Volume: As the symmetrical triangle extends and the trading range contracts, volume should start to diminish. This refers to the quiet before the storm, or the tightening consolidation before the breakout. Yes, it is expected but it something to actually feel it. I now believe that the highest volume weeks of 2013 are behind us. Trading is certainly slowing and the range is narrowing, but you haven't seen anything until you see the volume that is traded when this triangle breaks. |
|
|
|
Gox login:
Attempt to hack ?
Yes. *.mtgox.com has a different cert than mtgox.com. It has always been this way. I do not understand. I think I always use bookmark(but I'm not sure) -> same url When you use www.mtgox.com you get the startcom cert. They use the same cert for data.mtgox.com, classic.mtgox.com and others. When you use mtgox.com you get the verisign cert. This is only used on the main exchange interface. |
|
|
|
Gox login:  Attempt to hack ?  Yes. *.mtgox.com has a different cert than mtgox.com. It has always been this way. |
|
|
|
 *yawns* Go set up a store to sell something for bitcoins. |
|
|
|
This thread is reserved for discussion of the events that will unfold on 17th May 2013.
See you then.
4D0AB25B1509E6CC9CEDC46F16925C6A2832AFD7A7AB53B9F4551E6E754F4F45 |
|
|
|
Damn. You're right. Guess I'll sell now... or maybe I'll just check that ignore button.  Actually you gave me an idea. I shall try to ignore all jr and sr members and most of hero members too. All the donators and VIPs go on ignore for sure and not being unignored under any circumstances, maybe with one or two exceptions. Then maybe unignore a few if they are quoted saying something worthwhile. Who knows, it could make this board at least resemble what it was a few years back. Would it work? Seems to me like an endless blacklisting war. Here's how I look at it. When newbies come in they always bring up the same concerns over and over. They either learn about bitcoin and mature or they leave. [...] In English, "or" can be both inclusive ("Would you like sugar or cream in your coffee? Yes, both please!") and exclusive ("turn left or right"). So i'd agree with you if you left out the word "either."  I meant exclusive or, because I was speaking from the POV of using forum posts as an indicator. If they leave, you have no data, so I don't care what they think about bitcoin if they leave. You are correct that it does make a difference in the general sense, but that is much harder to measure. [sarcasm] Thank you for the English lesson. I've only been speaking the language for 26 years. Also, I appreciate the logic lesson. I've only been programming computers for 14 years so I'm sure there is still more to learn about basic logical operators. [/sarcasm] |
|
|
|
no, I'm saying it's silly that every user critical of anything related to Bitcoin is called a bear who's only purpose in life is to make you sell your bitcoins. I'm mocking at the attempt to pass that off as a logical collective perspective, and then they proceed to line up to ignore such users. what it really seems like is it's the other way around, YOU are the ones looking for "easy money" and are here collectively trolling/bullying anyone who HAS used their brain and come to a reasonable conclusion that can be stated in a few short sentences, because it just so happens to be a simple observation.
Thank you for clarifying. I had not interpreted your previous statement properly. As for you actual point, you are in the speculation subforum. When you post here, people assume you are trying to share your view on price action. Perhaps try bitcoin discussion if you want to actually discuss government regulation. |
|
|
|
|
They are currently paralyzed because we are sitting on both of the averages. Other indicators agree with the stalemate situation. Once we start trending, all these traders will hop on and we'll see some decent movement.
|
|
|
|
The problem isn't newbies floundering around with their questions, it's newbies (and some non-newbs) who simply don't form their arguments but jump to conclusions without consideration. Or they engage in sophistry, grabbing at straws, etc. It is a matter of the caliber of the thinker and how much though they are willing to put in, or if they just want to make some easy money.
Good points. Easy money doesn't exist, so those who chase it will find themselves lost in the wilderness. Edit: Unless you are a government or central bank . But fiat doesn't really fit the definition of money. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
