|
Fireball (OP)
|
 |
March 26, 2013, 07:32:46 PM |
|
A minor update was just deployed. It improves format of the "user_balance" API message.
Changes:
1. Now the "amount" field and "qty" field got merged together into unified "qty" field used to denote quantity of futures and amount of currency.
2. Name represents the long name of the security (currency or futures) now, instead of representing long name for the currency and short name for the futures.
3. Ticker field is added, which contains the symbol name of the security (e.g. BTC for bitcoins, and BUJ3 for the respective futures contract)
Trading bot owners, please update accordingly!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xeverse
|
|
March 28, 2013, 08:45:03 AM |
|
When r u goin' to fix that qiwi funding anyway? It has been broken for at least a week.. Or is it just me? Yeah bitcoin brings totally new paradigm, a decentralized one. What's the point in having an old fashioned centralized exchange then? Ultimately we need a p2p exchange instead of all this hell.. >> The Dark Exchange.. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fireball (OP)
|
|
March 28, 2013, 03:26:59 PM |
|
When r u goin' to fix that qiwi funding anyway?
It has been broken for at least a week.. Or is it just me?
Yeah bitcoin brings totally new paradigm, a decentralized one.
What's the point in having an old fashioned centralized exchange then?
Ultimately we need a p2p exchange instead of all this hell..
Qiwi... there are many technical difficulties, sorry. We are looking for ways to properly fix that. As for dark exchange - yeah, but when it comes to ICBIT, it's not just for exchange, it's for trading (which are two different terms). |
|
|
|
|
xeverse
|
|
March 28, 2013, 06:07:33 PM |
|
it's not just for exchange, it's for trading (which are two different terms).
But the basic concepts of the dark exch should also be applied to trading/hedging.. Good luck.. |
|
|
|
|
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
|
|
March 28, 2013, 09:57:47 PM |
|
Incidentally: It looks like an extra clearing is needed to move back the trading ranges for futures #bitcoin - https://twitter.com/icbit_se/status/317392723709673472That was the fastest time between clearings that I've seen. The 20:00 clearing and then the special one at 21:52. |
|
|
|
|
Fireball (OP)
|
|
March 28, 2013, 10:36:53 PM
Last edit: March 28, 2013, 10:59:22 PM by Fireball |
|
Incidentally: It looks like an extra clearing is needed to move back the trading ranges for futures #bitcoin - https://twitter.com/icbit_se/status/317392723709673472That was the fastest time between clearings that I've seen. The 20:00 clearing and then the special one at 21:52. This is part of a risk management strategy. It's very important to avoid defaults. My condolences to those affected by margin calls. Please don't buy to full leverage, keep enough money for sudden moves. Remember, if it rises 10% a day, it can fall 10% a day too. Especially if you bought 20% above the spot price, consider even just contango reduction may lead to margin calls. |
|
|
|
|
davidoski
|
|
March 28, 2013, 10:59:14 PM |
|
What is the reason for additional clearing? Just to "move back trading ranges"? Looks more like pretext than reason.
Trading range is supposed to be established to avoid harsh moves - if you make additional clearings to "move back trading ranges" you just saying that there's no trading ranges, because you change it everytime there's big move by doing additional clearing.
|
Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
|
|
|
|
Fireball (OP)
|
|
March 28, 2013, 11:00:16 PM |
|
What is the reason for additional clearing? Just to "move back trading ranges"? Looks more like pretext than reason.
Please have a look at the spot market chart (Mt.Gox). The reason was a sharp decline in the trading price during 2 (two) hours in a row. |
|
|
|
|
davidoski
|
|
March 28, 2013, 11:02:35 PM |
|
So why is trading range established in the first place?
|
Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
|
|
|
|
Fireball (OP)
|
|
March 28, 2013, 11:15:20 PM |
|
So why is trading range established in the first place?
Trading range: 1. Allows some sort of control over market manipulation and forcing traders out by moving the futures market (e.g. spot price stays at the same level, but bulls are increasing contango from 10% to 20% to 30% effectively forcing out those who are in a short position) 2. Allows the exchange to perform risk management and guarantee payment to all traders. As you all could see, we did not hurry to enhance trading range when the underlying asset does not exhibit sharp moves. When it doesn, an additional clearing was done in a timely manner. If there are any proposals - please let me know. Just keep in mind, that exchange must be neutral and does not favor "long" or "short" traders. It must provide stable trading conditions for both parties for their benefit. |
|
|
|
|
davidoski
|
|
March 28, 2013, 11:23:35 PM |
|
My proposition is
1. remove trading range at all or
2. provide clear rules for "additional clearings" which change the trading range so users can calculate the risk
If you do additional clearings arbitrarily you effectively change the trading range at will. Many people have margin calls that they wouldn't have if additional clearing was not done because spot price dip was short lasting. In effect they feel that arbitrarily done clearing "margin called" their accounts. No clear rules for additional clearings justifies their feelings.
|
Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
|
|
|
|
Fireball (OP)
|
|
March 28, 2013, 11:27:40 PM |
|
My proposition is
1. remove trading range at all or
2. provide clear rules for "additional clearings" which change the trading range so users can calculate the risk
If you do additional clearings arbitrarily you effectively change the trading range at will. Many people have margin calls that they wouldn't have if additional clearing was not done. In effect they feel that arbitrarily done clearing "margin called" their accounts. No clear rules for additional clearings justifies their feelings.
Allright, proposal nr.2 accepted. I will outline the draft of the rules soon. |
|
|
|
|
davidoski
|
|
March 28, 2013, 11:32:17 PM |
|
Thank you.
|
Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
|
|
|
|
Fireball (OP)
|
|
March 29, 2013, 08:27:13 PM |
|
I'm applying some updates to the system atm, please excuse short downtime.
|
|
|
|
|
guruvan
|
|
March 29, 2013, 08:27:56 PM |
|
My proposition is
1. remove trading range at all or
2. provide clear rules for "additional clearings" which change the trading range so users can calculate the risk
If you do additional clearings arbitrarily you effectively change the trading range at will. Many people have margin calls that they wouldn't have if additional clearing was not done. In effect they feel that arbitrarily done clearing "margin called" their accounts. No clear rules for additional clearings justifies their feelings.
Allright, proposal nr.2 accepted. I will outline the draft of the rules soon. currently, the additional clearings are a scam. I have lost all of my financial confidence in icbit - this is no less than the second major round of huge price "manipulation" this time fueled by the apparently new automated margin call execution - This is definitely resulting in losses to smaller investors. this coupled with the "additional clearings put investors at far more risk than intended - this is theft. The nonchalant attitude of icbit suggests they have something to gain from this. I believe that I can no longer trade at icbit. The lack of concern for investors' money is flagrant and alarming. |
|
|
|
|
Ichthyo
|
|
March 29, 2013, 08:37:32 PM |
|
What is the reason for additional clearing? Just to "move back trading ranges"? Looks more like pretext than reason.
Please have a look at the spot market chart (Mt.Gox). The reason was a sharp decline in the trading price during 2 (two) hours in a row.
This does not justify any manipulation of the trading ranges on the futures. This is a feature. Even if the spot price collapses, the future trading span will walk down in a moderate pace. The trading ranges must not react hastily to such flash crashes as yesterday. I welcome that you'll set up clear rules for such additional clearings. Moreover, I'd urge to build in a strong damping factor. For example, if there is a decline of more than the current trading range span, and if this decline lasts more than 8 hours, then an additonal clearing would be adequate IMHO. (This would allow 2 additional clearings per day) |
|
|
|
|
|
Fireball (OP)
|
|
March 29, 2013, 08:54:40 PM |
|
I welcome that you'll set up clear rules for such additional clearings. Moreover, I'd urge to build in a strong damping factor.
For example, if there is a decline of more than the current trading range span, and if this decline lasts more than 8 hours, then an additonal clearing would be adequate IMHO. (This would allow 2 additional clearings per day)
Ichtyo - 8 hours is a huge risk. Margin requirements should be significantly increased to allow waiting for such long time. We are doing really strict risk management now, it's the only way to remain honest and pay everyone what they earned. Bytheway, by popular demand I added a line there at https://icbit.se/futures saying Please note, the ICBIT exchanges reserves the right to perform additional clearings to enhance trading range in rare occasions (mostly, when there is a strong, more than 10% move on the spot market). |
|
|
|
|
Fireball (OP)
|
|
March 29, 2013, 09:22:50 PM |
|
After long discussion in the ICBIT chat, a proposal is made to change the risk management of the exchange. To get a broader overview, I'm posting it here.
It is proposed to get rid of "additional clearings are possible" definition at all, and instead perform clearing twice a day, at uniform time intervals (e.g. 20:00 UTC and 08:00 UTC). This should make risk more predictable for traders and for the exchange too.
|
|
|
|
random_cat
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 30
Merit: 0
|
|
March 29, 2013, 09:26:25 PM |
|
I certainly welcome a more defined clearing process and avoidance of ad hoc clearing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Super T
|
|
March 29, 2013, 11:27:59 PM |
|
I would also like to see the avoidance of ad-hoc clearing, I see a few options:
1. Do nothing.
2. Guarantee no unscheduled clearing, with no other changes.
3. Guarantee no unscheduled clearing AND increase the frequency of scheduled clearing (e.g. to twice per day).
4. Allow unscheduled clearing, but with additional controls, for example requiring a minimum spot price time above/below threshold price range before clearing is triggered, with plenty of notifications in advance etc.
5. Others... let's hear em
|
|
|
|
|
|
