Is there a link to the rest of that series?
Actually... I never wrote any more.Probably should edit that post...
No, go write more!
Topic: [ANN] LocalBitcoins.com - a location-based bitcoin to cash marketplace - page 18. (Read 126108 times)
November 08, 2013, 05:42:14 PM
Probably should edit that post...
No, go write more!
November 08, 2013, 05:36:59 PM
Is there a link to the rest of that series?
Actually... I never wrote any more.Probably should edit that post...
November 08, 2013, 05:31:29 PM
Now that I started using wire trades, I ran into the problem that buyers are supposed to instantly get my bitcoins into escrow so using a simple formula doesn't cut it anymore if I want to protect myself against some wild swings.
http://localbitcoins.blogspot.com/2013/06/this-is-first-in-series-of-posts.htmlIs there a link to the rest of that series?
November 08, 2013, 02:16:40 PM
Now that I started using wire trades, I ran into the problem that buyers are supposed to instantly get my bitcoins into escrow so using a simple formula doesn't cut it anymore if I want to protect myself against some wild swings.
http://localbitcoins.blogspot.com/2013/06/this-is-first-in-series-of-posts.html 
November 08, 2013, 02:13:33 PM
Now that I started using wire trades, I ran into the problem that buyers are supposed to instantly get my bitcoins into escrow so using a simple formula doesn't cut it anymore if I want to protect myself against some wild swings.
I studied math but still don't feel too comfortable using the powerful formula input not knowing what could possible go wrong, so I wonder how less savvy users are supposed to use this.
I would suggest to come up with some rather tight wild swing protections.
For my online sell I currently use:
It means: take the current most accurate estimate of a fair price (bitstampusd), apply my 10% fee and display it in Chilean Pesos. In case of a falling/crashing price, never show a price lower than 95% of 24h high (bitstampusd_high).
I would feel much more comfortable if this was all wrapped in some form like this:
rate to use: dropdown(average, mtgox, bitstamp, ...)
fee in %: __5__
maximum price drop per day in %: __10__
maximum price drop per week in %: __20__
I studied math but still don't feel too comfortable using the powerful formula input not knowing what could possible go wrong, so I wonder how less savvy users are supposed to use this.
I would suggest to come up with some rather tight wild swing protections.
For my online sell I currently use:
Quote
max(bitstampusd * 1.1, bitstampusd_high * 0.95 ) * USD_in_CLP
It means: take the current most accurate estimate of a fair price (bitstampusd), apply my 10% fee and display it in Chilean Pesos. In case of a falling/crashing price, never show a price lower than 95% of 24h high (bitstampusd_high).
I would feel much more comfortable if this was all wrapped in some form like this:
rate to use: dropdown(average, mtgox, bitstamp, ...)
fee in %: __5__
maximum price drop per day in %: __10__
maximum price drop per week in %: __20__
October 26, 2013, 07:43:20 AM
Introducing the LocalBitcoins app for Hive.
Please note: as with Hive itself, this should be handled with great care and at the moment we do not recommend it for any kind of day-to-day use.
The latest releases will be made available here:
https://github.com/grabhive/hiveapp-localbitcoins/releases
Issues can be tracked here:
https://github.com/grabhive/hiveapp-localbitcoins/issues
October 15, 2013, 12:06:39 PM
Would love to see the results within a certain radius (the same city? the same state?) sorted by PRICE, or even better, the ability to sort by PRICE AND FEEDBACK.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
Please don't discriminate against individuals who don't have a perfect 100% feedback. Not having 100% feedback is not a big deal. All it takes is one malicious individual to initiate a trade, cancel and leave negative feedback to ruin a perfect 100%. Once this happens, it takes a LOT of transactions to get back to 100%. What makes it even worse is that not everyone will leave you feedback.
I should know because this is exactly what happened to me.
A good price and a good rating make a trade more likely. Both have no-go-thresholds and beyond that, they should be weighted in a way.
Example:
Thresholds:
* 100km (if it has to be in person)
* 10% bad ratings
* 15% fees compared to bitstamp price
distance score = (100km - distance) / x1 km
rating score = (1 - bad_ratings / ratings) * x2
activity score = ratins * x3
fee score = price / bitstamp price * x4 [ distinguish between sell and buy]
Sort by distance score + rating score + activity score + fee score.
I would not waste one second on an offer by somebody who has 100% negative or who offers BTC at price the price of somebody with a comparable volume.
Somebody with a good price would deserve to have the negative feedback read and somebody with a good rating deserves to have slightly worse prices to be considered. Maybe he's otherwise worth it.
Setting thresholds would be an advanced option. Setting x1-4 would most likely be subject to optimization. Tolerance for different aspects might highly depend on the region and density of the bitcoin economy.
That's all so very specific...
Just have the colums sortable [asc/desc]: Price / Distance / Rating
With the option [ ] hide users with 0 feedback.
easy as pie! the rest is up to the user.
For the user it should be easy as pie but sorting by these columns individually with the option to even reverse the sorting is also too much. Having these options would be the poor man's solution, giving the geeks more control without much work for LB's devs.
If this was my service though I would love to apply machine learning to it. Take above parameters as the dimensions and the positively rated trades that happen as the outcome. Messages going back and forth would be yet another hidden dimension. LB should have a large training set and they can even sort by what they are more interested in, their profit, which wouldn't be too badly aligned with the customers needs, neither (with my trades though it would interfere as I don't generate profits).
Machine learning is actually quite accessible through a vast array of libraries that don't require you to actually understand much of the field but the outcome would be customer satisfaction based on past customer satisfaction.
Localbitcoins is currently searching for a backend programmer. This could be just one such thing this guy could work on
October 15, 2013, 01:31:43 AM
Would love to see the results within a certain radius (the same city? the same state?) sorted by PRICE, or even better, the ability to sort by PRICE AND FEEDBACK.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
Please don't discriminate against individuals who don't have a perfect 100% feedback. Not having 100% feedback is not a big deal. All it takes is one malicious individual to initiate a trade, cancel and leave negative feedback to ruin a perfect 100%. Once this happens, it takes a LOT of transactions to get back to 100%. What makes it even worse is that not everyone will leave you feedback.
I should know because this is exactly what happened to me.
A good price and a good rating make a trade more likely. Both have no-go-thresholds and beyond that, they should be weighted in a way.
Example:
Thresholds:
* 100km (if it has to be in person)
* 10% bad ratings
* 15% fees compared to bitstamp price
distance score = (100km - distance) / x1 km
rating score = (1 - bad_ratings / ratings) * x2
activity score = ratins * x3
fee score = price / bitstamp price * x4 [ distinguish between sell and buy]
Sort by distance score + rating score + activity score + fee score.
I would not waste one second on an offer by somebody who has 100% negative or who offers BTC at price the price of somebody with a comparable volume.
Somebody with a good price would deserve to have the negative feedback read and somebody with a good rating deserves to have slightly worse prices to be considered. Maybe he's otherwise worth it.
Setting thresholds would be an advanced option. Setting x1-4 would most likely be subject to optimization. Tolerance for different aspects might highly depend on the region and density of the bitcoin economy.
That's all so very specific...
Just have the colums sortable [asc/desc]: Price / Distance / Rating
With the option [ ] hide users with 0 feedback.
easy as pie! the rest is up to the user.
October 14, 2013, 06:27:43 PM
Would love to see the results within a certain radius (the same city? the same state?) sorted by PRICE, or even better, the ability to sort by PRICE AND FEEDBACK.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
Please don't discriminate against individuals who don't have a perfect 100% feedback. Not having 100% feedback is not a big deal. All it takes is one malicious individual to initiate a trade, cancel and leave negative feedback to ruin a perfect 100%. Once this happens, it takes a LOT of transactions to get back to 100%. What makes it even worse is that not everyone will leave you feedback.
I should know because this is exactly what happened to me.
A good price and a good rating make a trade more likely. Both have no-go-thresholds and beyond that, they should be weighted in a way.
Example:
Thresholds:
* 100km (if it has to be in person)
* 10% bad ratings
* 15% fees compared to bitstamp price
distance score = (100km - distance) / x1 km
rating score = (1 - bad_ratings / ratings) * x2
activity score = ratins * x3
fee score = price / bitstamp price * x4 [ distinguish between sell and buy]
Sort by distance score + rating score + activity score + fee score.
I would not waste one second on an offer by somebody who has 100% negative or who offers BTC at price the price of somebody with a comparable volume.
Somebody with a good price would deserve to have the negative feedback read and somebody with a good rating deserves to have slightly worse prices to be considered. Maybe he's otherwise worth it.
Setting thresholds would be an advanced option. Setting x1-4 would most likely be subject to optimization. Tolerance for different aspects might highly depend on the region and density of the bitcoin economy.
October 14, 2013, 05:28:48 PM
Would love to see the results within a certain radius (the same city? the same state?) sorted by PRICE, or even better, the ability to sort by PRICE AND FEEDBACK.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
Please don't discriminate against individuals who don't have a perfect 100% feedback. Not having 100% feedback is not a big deal. All it takes is one malicious individual to initiate a trade, cancel and leave negative feedback to ruin a perfect 100%. Once this happens, it takes a LOT of transactions to get back to 100%. What makes it even worse is that not everyone will leave you feedback.
I should know because this is exactly what happened to me.
October 14, 2013, 08:38:48 AM
We've added LocalBitcoins and ZipZap locations to CoinMap. The code is here:
https://github.com/grabhive/coinmap
Both services have an API for searching so right now we have to query each of them. LocalBitcoins provides a list of country codes based on their user location, we use this list to get the codes. Than we convert them to the country name and query the API for each country (you can't use the country code for geolocation with Google e.g. DE == Delaware, but this is the country code for Germany - Deutschland). For ZipZap we use a list of the 50 largest cities in the USA. We are not sure if all data is mapped correctly, but the points are there.
https://github.com/grabhive/coinmap
Both services have an API for searching so right now we have to query each of them. LocalBitcoins provides a list of country codes based on their user location, we use this list to get the codes. Than we convert them to the country name and query the API for each country (you can't use the country code for geolocation with Google e.g. DE == Delaware, but this is the country code for Germany - Deutschland). For ZipZap we use a list of the 50 largest cities in the USA. We are not sure if all data is mapped correctly, but the points are there.
September 13, 2013, 12:01:20 PM
Would love to see the results within a certain radius (the same city? the same state?) sorted by PRICE, or even better, the ability to sort by PRICE AND FEEDBACK.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
I second sorting options!
September 13, 2013, 06:04:33 AM
Would love to see the results within a certain radius (the same city? the same state?) sorted by PRICE, or even better, the ability to sort by PRICE AND FEEDBACK.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
So I can weed out those w/o 100% positive rep and THEN decide on the right price.
The way it currently is, I dunno WHAT the criteria are.
September 13, 2013, 04:42:54 AM
old forum software is old, can't grok those new hipster #! hashbang urls 
anyway, staff is already over it by now.
anyway, staff is already over it by now.
September 12, 2013, 08:25:54 PM
ALERT! Fresh exploit! Do not open any attachments!
https://localbitcoins.com/forums/#!/general-discussion#regarding-the-passport-imag
https://localbitcoins.com/forums/#!/general-discussion#regarding-the-passport-imag
Your link appears to be broken.
Here's a link that works:
localbitcoins.com/forums/#!/general-discussion#regarding-the-passport-imag
September 12, 2013, 06:48:19 PM
ALERT! Fresh exploit! Do not open any attachments!
https://localbitcoins.com/forums/#!/general-discussion#regarding-the-passport-imag
https://localbitcoins.com/forums/#!/general-discussion#regarding-the-passport-imag
September 06, 2013, 01:57:49 AM
Any way to see someone's OTC ID, even when that person doesn't have any OTC ratings yet?
It's hard to give someone the first rating that way ;-)
(Or did I really not find a *single* person with OTC and no rating yet? Come on, nerd community!)
Ente
It's hard to give someone the first rating that way ;-)
(Or did I really not find a *single* person with OTC and no rating yet? Come on, nerd community!)
Ente
If I understand you correctly and since many users use the same nick at both, you could Ctrl+f on this site:http://bitcoin-otc.com/viewratings.php
September 03, 2013, 03:49:49 AM
They should start by doing a deal over OTC while authed, get rated on OTC, then link OTC to LB. I guess you can ask the person on OTC to sign a message with their OTC key and message it to you over LB, verify it yourself, then you rate them on OTC...
I fully agree, this would be the normal and right way.
An easy shortcut would be to simply list their linked OTC handle, or a tiny "OTC" icon which links to it. ;-)
This probably saves some time for people, and costs just little time to implement.
If not, no big deal. I'll just wait for what Jeremias thinks of this :-)
Ente
September 03, 2013, 03:43:51 AM
They should start by doing a deal over OTC while authed, get rated on OTC, then link OTC to LB. I guess you can ask the person on OTC to sign a message with their OTC key and message it to you over LB, verify it yourself, then you rate them on OTC...
September 03, 2013, 03:27:56 AM
People who have OTC IDs like me ( https://localbitcoins.com/accounts/profile/TheButterZone/ ) have to link them to LB via signing a one time pass with their OTC BTC address. There are some scammer bastards pretending to be in OTC like randomcat (fake) is to random_cat (real).
Yep!
But even when they linked their existing OTC handle to their LB profile, I believe it's not displayed until the OTC has a rating. Then you see the OTC handle and, well, the rating..
Maybe I'm doing it wrong and simply never stumbled upon a LB profile with OTC, but no OTC rating yet?
I dunno here.. Does anyone have such an account?
Ente
Cart before the horse. Why link your account before you have anything to show?
Because is want to give them a rating!
..and to receive a rating back, of course ;-)
The normal web-of-trust-thingie.
Ente
Jump to: