For me it all started with Bitcoin. While studying architecture and working as a freelance web designer and developer, Nejc Kodrič contacted me one day and asked me to design him a website. He explained what Bitcoin is and how he believes it will change the world. I thought he was nuts. But after a while it became clear that we could make the world a better place. Bitcoin is amazing but it has limitations when it comes to everyday use. That’s where Ripple steps in.

Working for Bitstamp from the very beginning made me very fortunate to be one of the first people to get to know Ripple.

It was hard to grasp on everything it can do. But after using it for a while I realized that the founders of this protocol are up to something. Money right now is boring. There is no Twitter, Instagram or Facebook for money. You can’t have cool apps to visualize your income or spending. The reason for that is simply because we don’t have a protocol through which these apps could communicate with each other. We don’t have an API for money.

Ripple is that protocol, it is that API which we can use right now.

Knowing all that I decided that the only way to make everybody see the future is to bring the future to them. That’s how the idea of a new gateway was born. Me and my colleagues worked very hard for the last year to create something truly useful.

We hope you’ll love it as much as we do!



Enej Pungerčar, CEO and founder of GateHub Ltd.

Investors:

Investors & Advisors

Greg Kidd, CRO Ripple Labs
Chris Larsen, CEO Ripple Labs
Nejc Kodrič, CEO Bitstamp
George Frost, Lawyer

For me it all started with Bitcoin. While studying architecture and working as a freelance web designer and developer, Nejc Kodrič contacted me one day and asked me to design him a website. He explained what Bitcoin is and how he believes it will change the world. I thought he was nuts. But after a while it became clear that we could make the world a better place. Bitcoin is amazing but it has limitations when it comes to everyday use. That’s where Ripple steps in.

Working for Bitstamp from the very beginning made me very fortunate to be one of the first people to get to know Ripple.

It was hard to grasp on everything it can do. But after using it for a while I realized that the founders of this protocol are up to something. Money right now is boring. There is no Twitter, Instagram or Facebook for money. You can’t have cool apps to visualize your income or spending. The reason for that is simply because we don’t have a protocol through which these apps could communicate with each other. We don’t have an API for money.

Ripple is that protocol, it is that API which we can use right now.

Knowing all that I decided that the only way to make everybody see the future is to bring the future to them. That’s how the idea of a new gateway was born. Me and my colleagues worked very hard for the last year to create something truly useful.

We hope you’ll love it as much as we do!



Enej Pungerčar, CEO and founder of GateHub Ltd.

Investors:

Investors & Advisors

Greg Kidd, CRO Ripple Labs
Chris Larsen, CEO Ripple Labs
Nejc Kodrič, CEO Bitstamp
George Frost, Lawyer

cornering the market is a real danger for something so small as Bitcoin is right now, these 'dumps' are just theatre to shake coins into fewer and fewer hands ... because generally people are basically stupid and influenced emotionally by price expectations (FUD).

That's why the 'satoshi' stash is needed to thwart any future market cornering attempts, before the next wave gets too big and potentially destructive.

There was a tiny blip of positive coverage and that was "fishy"?

Don't worry, we've returned to the norm of totally-not-fishy negative coverage now.

anyway, my explanation: They have to give *some* positive coverage now and then, just so they can hammer down even harder when something does go wrong. It's about the drama! The media generally loves a negative story, but they are not so dumb as to never be positive.

It's like they are story writers for a soap opera. The plot has to have its twists and turns to keep the readers engaged.

try to mine one-you will see how 'easy' it is.

Why? This is merely a consolidation of the speculative pump to $300... It's a micro-bubble popping right now... The resemblance is remarkable! I don't know what would warrant going down now after the sustainable growth to $240/$250 - the pump to $300 wasn't sustainable, I give you that.

I woke up at $270 after the $310 spike so I figured I would sell at ~$285 but it never came.
I think we'll see a short term bottom soon though

I'm 20

explanation: these graphs make sense if you remember what adam guerbuez said: "the roller coaster that makes the current roller coaster nothing" . if you can understand these great words of wisdom then these graphs are suddenly made clear. with just one tweet adam guerbuez gave me the new skill of the ability to read bitcoin graphs in much clear defined vision .

I wish price would of moved to $312 instead of $310 so I could have my sell order filled...

Look at pathetic BTCChina, supposedly the volume leader.. cant even break down a BTC1,400 wall. They're falling behind because the wall is too large to break.

Pathetic. That exchanges real volume is probably <20K a day, not >200k

So glad someone else realizes this. All of 2013 was complete manipulation with attribution to glorified news stories and unethical trading bots. Bitcoin's true value should not be more than $40-50 right now.

If the rumors are true, Mark K literally ruined Bitcoin.

The press only writes about things that sell - that are interesting. And all those incredible turns and events in Bitcoin do sell well, I guess. After the Gox failure, the almost Stamp failure, it is pretty impressive that regulated exchange goes live - in the US.

^ Right. Good point.


average-fast = f(x)
average-fast-sig = f'(x)

average-mid = g(x)
average-mid-sig = g'(x)

average-slow = h(x)
average-slow-sig = h'(x)

sig-1 := if average-mid > average-mid-sig, buy. if average-mid < average-mid-sig, sell.

sig-2 := if average-fast > average-fast-sig, buy. if average-fast < average-fast-sig, sell.

sig-3 := if average-slow < average-slow-sig, sell.

trade-signal := if sig-1 == sig-2 == sig-3 == sell, sell. if sig-1 == sig-2 == buy, buy. o/w, do nothing.


To be clear, the final trades are based on the combined 'trade-signal' condition.

Alright. Initially, when people asked how the algorithm works internally, I refused to specify it any further. Now that nobody cares anymore, here's the basic idea ^_^

Note: I'm not going to fill in the exact numerical parameters of the the technical/indicator signals. No need to encourage frontrunning. But in principle, with the details I'm about to give, you could find your own (and probably very similar) parameters by training the individual parts over the market data that is the same for everyone.

The trade signals of this algorithm are a complex condition based on three technical signals.

Signal #1, the "main" signal, is a medium term momentum signal. Think "daily EMA20+10 crossover", but the average I use is instead a Hull type average (and the parameters are obviously not 20/10).

Important to note here: signal #1 is symmetric wrt 'buy' and 'sell'.

If used alone, signal #1 is profitable over the global bitcoin history (GX, BS, BF), and roughly uniformly profitable as well. However, it yields slightly too many trades, and tends to sell too early during major rallies. So, it is not the desired signal yet that only sells when it really has to.

Signal #2 is a short-term momentum signal. It acts as a filter applied to #1. Think of it as an "optimal entry/exit" filter. It cannot initiate additional trades by itself, it can only delay a trade based on signal #1. It is basically capturing the idea: if the medium term is up, but the short term is drastically down, better wait a bit before you buy (similar for delaying a sell trade). Signal #2 is buy/sell symmetric as well, and I don't really think it is problematic (also, leaving it out doesn't change the results from a pure signal #1 strategy much).

Signal #3 is the tricky one. You could call it the "bubble filter". Just like #2, it doesn't do anything other than (possibly) delay signals coming from #1, i.e. it doesn't add to the total number of trade signals but only *reduces* them under certain conditions.

It defines certain market conditions (think: long term momentum) to be so strongly bullish that a mid-term momentum signal from #1 that says 'sell' should be ignored for the moment, until either the mid term is up again, or the market condition becomes less bullish, in which case the 'sell' goes through.

And here's the tricky bit. Signal #3 is not buy/sell symmetric. It only delays 'sell' trades, but not 'buy' trades, in case the long term momentum is flipped around

I know. That buy/sell asymmetry is a big violation of all that is holy in algorithmic trading. Reeks of overfitting.

Still, given the history of the Bitcoin market so far, I can see some justification for it. It works well for 2011, 2012, 2013. In 2014, it still works well enough for the first half, but from then on, it's not really justified anymore.

I guess it all depends now if Bitcoin will ever go through a significant bull market again, and when. Let's say it does ("Bitcoin is dead" users need not reply ). That still doesn't mean that the exact parameters of the "bubble filter" are optimal, but it's probably not going to be the millstone around the algorithms neck that it is right now, delaying sell signals when it really shouldn't.

In a way, I'm making a human choice for my algorithmic method here: the assumption, that in the long run, it is better to err on the side of buying than on the side of selling - a choice that is justified by the global history of the market, but not by the more local one.

Comments welcome.

Short Squeeze incoming!

Will do later, I have to go out. You were constantly going on about how you met they guys they were to be trusted etc etc.