104200+ entries in 6.631s
copumpkin: pretty good. You? I hear you had
a falling out with -assets
mircea_popescu: still there for collectors, ie, people just like you, who might want
a screenshot\
copumpkin: I did have to give you my key again
a couple of years ago
phf: he's
a witch, burn him
ben_vulpes: shat out an otp, successful decryption of which set
a session on the user's browser.
ben_vulpes: abortive tmsr~ ad network i build once upon
a time
trinque: I just dumped cliki2 on there; needs
a better stylesheet
shinohai: I'll set up
a gofundme for research. If the cryptoid horseshit can get funds so can I.
mod6: <+shinohai> mod6 they sell "crumbs" too so I wonder if
a trail of those leads bimbos to your door? << inquiring minds want to know!
danielpbarron: they keep for
a few months and then they better be in the ground already
danielpbarron: it's prolly harder to do such
a thing with bulbs. there already exist plenty of companies doing this, it's
a very large market, it's
a perishable product, very very heavy, need good connections, etc..
BingoBoingo: Seriously. It's
a commodity, that gets traded, and covert delivery is easy.
trinque: he got
a few timeouts when trying to reconnect to chat.freenode.net
a111: Logged on 2016-04-20 18:27 punkman: phf: meanwhile couple of months ago mp explicitly said that he's starting
a process of divesting from bitcoin, that was before bitbet, before ~anybody~ had voiced any kind of objections to anything << "divesting" came after "
A miner problem"
mircea_popescu: so basically you're looking for
a skilled market maker to market make your new exchange ?
wywialm: i could offer my candidature, but of course this may be unsuitable for you. in that case, i could present the details to
a person of your choice
wywialm: the exchange has not yet launched and CDS mentioned above are to be implemented yet, but i asked about f.mpif knowing that in case of your slightest interest, any preparations will take
a lot of time.
mircea_popescu: shinohai i don't get it, what the fuck difference does it make that guy's dad used to be
a chiropractor ?!
wywialm: generally, it will look as follows: the CDSs have
a specific maturity (possibly matching futures expirations). The person buys the CDS with
a discount from the notional value, the proceeds from the sale of the CDS is locked until maturity. If no credit event occurs, full notional value is paid out. if it does, first the insurance fund from the exchange is used, and CDS holders are
a last resort
mircea_popescu: but finance, much like cryptography, is altogether
a crapshoot in the dark.
mircea_popescu: these are the canonical objections to this sort of "web exchange, mutually-insured on user funds" things : that on one hand they're an algorithmic noise amplification machine with no dampener available other than the power of prayer ; and that the yessentially implement
a lemon market,
a sort of competition in deadbeat-ism among the users. which is why they're so popular on reddit, and nowhere else.
wywialm: at present stage, the mechanisms i tried to describe are only capable of making the "short hairy jewish girl" scenario as unlikely as possible. what could make it really impossible, is to issue
a CDS on the general liabilities of the exchange. The proceedings from the sale would increase the insurance fund in return for
a compensation. If total amount of insurance fund and CDS issued is greater than potential losses, no haircut on profits would
mircea_popescu: i am not open to receiving
a short hairy jewish girl for my money, even if oksluts.com imagines "it was just an intermediary between parties"
mircea_popescu: wywialm the fundamental problem with this view is that i do not wish to engage in
a financial relationship with deadbeat B, where "your site was only an intermediary". i wish to engage in specified, modellable deals.
wywialm: let me refer to your example. first
A owns his contracts in the same way B owns them. if
A has short positions, these contracts are not fully collateralized. if B's losses exceed his margin (here: 50%), and exchange's insurance fund, in that situation
A's profit, but not his initial deposit will be diminished accordingly. in that way, the exchange acts only as
a intermediate between the counterparties
wywialm: i didn't certainly revolutionize the electronic derivatives trading industry (nor claimed to), just trying to make
a robust bitcoin-based market
PeterL: perhaps it would be better to write up
a full description instead of trying to string it out bit by bit?
mircea_popescu: and the "how i picked 10%" is
a testament to the whole "copying big boys" thing. there's
a reason they use the magic numbers they do.
mircea_popescu: not that you ever explained in your design description what "maintenance margins" are, but this is
a magic trick without substance : if you need to move 5% to break you'll move 5% and if you need to move 15% you'll move 15%.
wywialm: large here means 'large relative to maintenance margin percents', so our size doesn't matter much in this case. if the maintenance margin is 10% then this means that
a 10% price jump won't hurt us regardless of our reserves.
mircea_popescu: what happens if
A is leveraged 1:1 and owns 100 contracts and B is leveraged 2:1 and "owns" 400 contracts, if that " the auction is triggered" undocumented bug springs into auction ? can
A's wholly-owned contracts be touched by B's insanity ?
wywialm: if price moves far enough, the auction serves as
a circuit-breaker. Essentially, the only risk lies not in
a noisy market or irrational, but in
a large, certain but unforseen, and fundamental jump in the price
mircea_popescu: we're not discussing here the ideal case where "the liquidated position is small enough". we're discussing here interesting cases, when you have
a noisy market and
a bunch of agents that act irrationally.
wywialm: if the liquidated position is small enough, then liquidating on the market is seamless; if it's large, here comes the auction. the orders are gathered during
a certain period of time, which may be extended, without time priority
wywialm: returning for
a while to the 'market's no good' argument
mircea_popescu: essentially, you see what the big boys are doing, and figure you'll just do it yourself. except - the big boys can do things BECAUSE they are the big boys, ie, there's bernanke there to "save the economy". you aren't, and i can lean on you. moreover, the big boys don't ever do this 2:1 thing. they do
a little margin, and as private financing, which is exactly how you should be doing it also.
mircea_popescu: and no, you can't fucking liquidate on the market, think about it for
a moment. the very reason you are liquidating in the first place is that the market's no good.
wywialm: ok, let me take it directly c) no, in no case the actual deposits are used as
a coverage. The risk management has following steps:
wywialm:
a) i'll try to proceed to explain everything i know about; b) if that's the case, then indeed i'll try to speak more clearly
wywialm: beggining from the last, c-1) yes, and as far as i remember, you removed
a 'scam' warning from them
shinohai: mod6 they sell "crumbs" too so I wonder if
a trail of those leads bimbos to your door?
mircea_popescu: wywialm
a) you're sure about something you've not explained ; b) you are forcing me to read between the lines which is the opposite of competence ; c) if what you mean is that you steal everyone's deposited cash to do mutually-financed margin, what happens when
a position split 50/50 (allowing you, possibly, somewhere close to 2x margin) suddenly moves in choppy trading to 85/15 split
mod6: <+mircea_popescu> shinohai you ever had bimbo bread ? << first time I saw this in
a supermarcado i was like "ha! they don't even know..."
mircea_popescu: pretty shitty wonderbread, but always good for
a lulz, make teh galz have it.
shinohai: I have
a loaf in my fridge lol
wywialm: for all practical purposes, i represent both the exchange and the market making, and it's more than
a half year since my announcement. none of this, of course, is meant to imply that you should support anything i have to offer, i just try to clarify
mircea_popescu: the notion that i'd support such
a thing is plainly outrageous.
wywialm: i did not say that i need this money. also, it is not an offer for investing right now, just
a check whether you will find anything interesting in it for you. if yes, i could go into greater detail how this is tested, how is going to be tested, etc.
PeterL: is there any benefit from splitting
a transaction into multiple parts? seems like it would be most efficient to just do it all at once?
punkman: phf: meanwhile couple of months ago mp explicitly said that he's starting
a process of divesting from bitcoin, that was before bitbet, before ~anybody~ had voiced any kind of objections to anything << "divesting" came after "
A miner problem"
☟︎ mircea_popescu: this is
a pretty miserable offer. capitalism is about who gets what, not about who needs what.
a111: Logged on 2016-04-20 16:27 solrodar: but when I first came across it
a year or so ago, I got the impression that 2012 was the what bliss in that dawn to be alive
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-04-20#1454047 << no. 2012 was the year every dog with
a flea in his beard could pretend to humanity. then 2013 brought the requirement to actually not be poor, and 2016 brought the requirement to not be stupid, and common folk are all butthurt over being left behind
☝︎ mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-04-20#1454044 << the principle is sound and very close to home. the unforeseen obstacle is, of course, people. specifically it turns out it's
a lot harder than expected to distinguish the people who'd like to be involved from the people who have any busienss being involved. the sad realisation is that the world changed
A LOT over the past few decades, and not for the better.
☝︎ wywialm: if you perhaps remember, i once announced work on
a derivatives exchange
mircea_popescu: wywialm well it's
a sad time for f.mpif, what with bitbet going. but i guess maybe ? what've you got ?
a111: Logged on 2016-04-20 15:45 solrodar: yeah, so I'm not saying it was
a ponzi, or any other kind of scam, just that he wasn't being entirely up-front about what was going on
PeterL: or is it only
a ponzi once it gets bigger than the operator?
PeterL: I suppose
a ponzi could be closed cleanly if done while it is still very small? If the operator kiscks in enough money to close it before it grows bigger than his pockets?
mircea_popescu: if it weren't for this, it wouldn't even be
a bad thing, everyone'd do it.
mircea_popescu: it can not. that's the only important attribute of
a ponzi - that it can not be closed down cleanly.
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-04-20#1454022 << you are also using words you do not master the meaning of. successful closure is sufficient and definitive proof something WAS NOT
a pyramid scheme. the reason should be obvious, if you're not lazy and retarded. you however are, no matter what your mommy may have mendaciously told you, both lazy and retarded, so let's explain :
☝︎ mircea_popescu: it's
a sad property of EVERYONE IN BITCOIN that mp is in the classical position of zeus, where if the whole mt olympus picks up the other side of the ring, he can still throw them all over the fucking sky.
mircea_popescu:
http://btcbase.org/log/2016-04-20#1454005 <<< it was explained originally and has to be explained periodically [because the flies have infinite hitpoints only in aggregate, as the fly swarm, otherwise live for half
a year as individuals] that the principal point of the fee is specifically to keep fees away.
☝︎ mircea_popescu: trinque incidentally, i received confirmation from
a rather unlikely quarter that your "SQL is the DEF" idea is spot on : apparently people in games [modders, people who do the auction websites, etc etc,] have long ago and unviersally agreed THAT is how to DE. pic :
http://logs.minigame.bz/2016-04-20.log.html#t07:32:45 solrodar: but when I first came across it
a year or so ago, I got the impression that 2012 was the what bliss in that dawn to be alive
☟︎ phf: from that perspective 50btc is just that, if there's
a return on it 5 years from now, and continued return after that, you get +ev. more companies get listed today or in
a year, list own company, etc.
phf: mpex value hinges on long term viability of bitcoin as
a way to store and accumulate wealth
solrodar: yeah, so I'm not saying it was
a ponzi, or any other kind of scam, just that he wasn't being entirely up-front about what was going on
☟︎ phf: heh that's actually
a good idea
solrodar: it would have been
a ponzi scheme if it was closed
mats: only
a poor and unimaginative fella would say the things you did this morning
phf: solrodar: aren't you also implying mpex is
a ponzi scheme?
solrodar: only
a USG agent would assume that was
a bad thing :P
mats: because you can't possibly conceive of
a reason why ~you~ would do it, the activity must be fraudulent?
mats: you think folks wouldn't pay to trade in the stock of
a single company?
mats: there is nothing unbelievable about
a fee like that being tenable when it is 1) an exchange that has never been hacked 2) operated by someone with
a serious presence in the wot
phf: mats: it's the muckraking from b-
a spilling over to here
mats: it got
a little harder when mpex stopped offering options, but s.mpoe had
a lot of volume for
a long time precisely because it was valuable and served as
a symbol for the exchange
phf: so whether or not mp is
a scammer, the greater framing of this conversation, makes certain allegations not only irrelevant, but also inane
phf: i actually did some maths and was ready to drop 50btc on an mpex account, but held off for the main reason that i don't see
a solution (and there wasn't one found) to minor collusion problem. that conversation happened ~last october~ (or whereabouts), it was framed as
a hypothetical, but it was
a long precursor to chinese miner conferences (that in turn was serious grounds to suspect potential cartel) and all that other stuff.
phf: i'm sure
a person who's ready to drop 50btc on
a trading account will do ~minimal~ amount of due diligence to confirm that mpex is
a viable trading platform ~at the moment~
phf: meanwhile couple of months ago mp explicitly said that he's starting
a process of divesting from bitcoin, that was before bitbet, before ~anybody~ had voiced any kind of objections to anything
phf: mats: the "mp is
a scammer" crowd is riding on an 18btc bitbet incident, and will continue to do so no matter what happens. remember how everyone was losing their shit, "all bitbet money is gone!!1"
mats: i assure you, i am
a real person, and have received many withdrawals from mpex over the last two years. that are on the blockchain.
solrodar: and then
a few weeks after someone notices these alleged payments aren't on the blockchain
solrodar: my guess is the whole thing's now just
a cover for money laundering
punkman: also makes me think about what would happen in "underhanded bash install script contest". change
a couple chars, pwn target?
mircea_popescu: "gee i wonder why
a fresh install of X takes 2gb when the package is 200mb ?"