976400+ entries in 0.638s
gribble: BTCUSD
ticker | Best bid: 18.70001, Best ask: 18.74988, Bid-ask spread: 0.04987, Last
trade: 18.70001, 24 hour volume: 51140.36456515, 24 hour low: 17.67720, 24 hour high: 18.75000, 24 hour vwap: 18.22004
mircea_popescu: he has a point, we really ought
to discourage
that sort of shit
jurov: or just match orders on one popular asset and closely watch
the orderbook of others
Ukto: tho
that would be obvious and burnside would prolly ban you for it. at least..
those accounts
dub: someone should rinse/repeat
that and make a
trillion btc wall
mircea_popescu: on btct, I can fill my account with 100btc, put up
to 100btc orders on each asset, and withdraw
the 100btc <<
this is pretty rich
tho
Ukto: I will be letting Deprived know
that it just wont be happening.
Ukto: I just cant bring myself
to knowingly allow lies and inaccuracy on my system.
Ukto: Regardless of 'pumping
the numbers', i
think
traders have a right
to knwo
that a bid is actually backed, and not just a fake number on
the books.
mircea_popescu: dub speaking of which, what's happening
to nefario's comeback
thing ?
Ukto: and
then its a complete, lie
Ukto: on btct, I can fill my account with 100btc, put up
to 100btc orders on each asset, and withdraw
the 100btc
mircea_popescu: Ukto it's been debated in
the forum numerous
times. people who know better figure "it helps liquidity"
Ukto: you mean, Bitfunder does it
the "normal" way
pigeons: they copied
the way bitfunder does it
Ukto: its been over a decade since i dod stock market stuffs.. if i have $10k in an eTrade account or w/e, and and put up a bid for a
total of $10k on something
that sits on
the books, I can't just place another bid p
to $10k for another asset, right?
gribble: BTCUSD
ticker | Best bid: 18.50501, Best ask: 18.60708, Bid-ask spread: 0.10207, Last
trade: 18.50501, 24 hour volume: 47219.24403078, 24 hour low: 17.67720, 24 hour high: 18.63895, 24 hour vwap: 18.16932
jurov: strike/current would be 16/18 ,
that means collateral below 1BTC?
jurov: bugpowder has just complained bout it,
too
jurov: what's
the formula?
jurov: would
the SPLIT on O.BTCUSD.P160T for 2BTC make 1 put option or none?
Bowjob: I mean on
the leaderboards
mircea_popescu: it seems
there can't be someone who gets it and doesn't care.
mircea_popescu: what
the fuck does
that mean and when did
they start doing
the whole university
thing in baltimore.
mircea_popescu: “I
think
the ECB obviously is concerned, and it’s not reputational,” said Steve Hanke, a professor at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore
gribble: There are currently 11455.979 bitcoins offered at or under 19.0 USD, worth 215539.007546 USD in
total.
gribble: There are currently 28609.726 bitcoins offered at or under 20.0 USD, worth 551692.514158 USD in
total.
mircea_popescu: JWU_42 i dunno how
to read
that, is it 4k btc in 194 diff orders ?
gribble: BTCUSD
ticker | Best bid: 18.32401, Best ask: 18.39988, Bid-ask spread: 0.07587, Last
trade: 18.32401, 24 hour volume: 40611.11390206, 24 hour low: 17.67720, 24 hour high: 18.45000, 24 hour vwap: 18.10523
Bugpowder: Starting
to look a lot like last
thursday
mircea_popescu: or else what
the forum says, ie, he's passing
the buck and
then new owner dissapears, a la
tom's azns
Bugpowder: everything about
the bitcoin world suggests
that
the price would rapidly go
to 1000BTC+
mircea_popescu: Bugpowder_ its one of
two
things : either a scam
to sell a worthless site
to some dumbass "investor" (which is what i suspect, he;'s been buying his own gem)
Bugpowder_: seriously, what did
the website owner
THINK was gonna happen with
the gem
jurov: it looks much better... but
the halftoning clashes with my scanner
Bugpowder_: maybe I placed some buy orders after
that
Bugpowder_: well I
tried
to withdraw 100BTC from MPEX on Saturday
to buy
the gem, but never got my withdrawl
jurov: not exactly nice
to read,
they seem
to used anti-OCR background :P
Bugpowder_: I guess I just wish it wouldn't charge me for
the deposit until
the created contracts sold.
mircea_popescu: Bugpowder_ something like
that. you're
thinking "momentarily one is zero"
this is
true, but whiplash could make someone lose on both ends
Bugpowder_: to prevent catastropic loss from a spike
than crash?
Ukto: not sure wtf i was
typing
Ukto: i ment
to say yes earlier
mircea_popescu: Ukto
that sounds like
the very definition of "they allow naked shorting"
Bugpowder_: So I am curious. What is
the rationale for having
the collateral requirements so high for split orders. Since one side is a zero if
the other side goes up, shouldn't a reasonable deposit for 50 calls and ~50 puts be 50BTC instead of 100BTC?
Ukto: i cant post asks for more shares
than I have
Bugpowder_: it was fun exiting each
tranche before it exploded
awkorama: because what I feel strongly in
the bitcoin world is
that it is hard
to
trust anyone, so spreading
the risk is
the next logical step
jurov: it's in Bitcoin and
the Law article, btcmag #6, not signed
mircea_popescu: i don't see
that any of
that pertains
to credit derivatives
tho.
awkorama: mircea_popescu: I already kind of did, is
there anything
that you don't understand from
the conversation
that followed my initial question ?
mircea_popescu: <awkorama> some exchange, where I can
trade credit derivatives << explain.
gribble: BTCUSD
ticker | Best bid: 18.30000, Best ask: 18.42591, Bid-ask spread: 0.12591, Last
trade: 18.30000, 24 hour volume: 39943.63867461, 24 hour low: 17.61001, 24 hour high: 18.45000, 24 hour vwap: 18.09211
jurov: they cite your article "The Reason Why Bitcoin Securities Can't be regulated by
the SEC"
jurov: oh and
there's a mention of Mircea Popescu
jurov: i
think cause btc can go 50% up and
then 50% down in one month
Bugpowder: I always get less puts
then I
think I'm gonna get
Bugpowder: nor is
the puts equation correct in
the faq it seems
Bugpowder: why u don't need Inf colateral for
the puts is not explained
jurov: i mean
the reasoning behind
that isn't
there
Bugpowder: "Each CALL requires 1 BTC of collateral irrespective of strike. Each PUT requires an amount of collateral equal
to strike / spot BTC ."
Bugpowder: the collateral reqs on
the SPLIT order are a bit harsh. I
think you should get 100 of each side for 100BTC, cause if one side goes
to max,
the other side is a zero.
jurov: that is not exactly explained in
the faq
awkorama: how do
these options btw work on MPEx, is
the seller required
to pay collateral (since he has potential unlimited loss) ?
jurov: the mpoe contract is clear and for
the issuer has incentive
to stick
to it
awkorama: meaning, if I lend someone 100BTC
today and
tommorow I don't feel like having such big exposure
to him anymore, I can just insure some part of
that debt