Topic: Mtgox hit $2.99 (Read 9046 times)

Since the Mt.Gox engine seems to not have been validated, has anyone tried anything like putting a negative number in the sell price?  Or a negative number of coins to sell?

I wonder what kind of havoc that would cause if it isn't cleaned up.

Another thing they need to test for is very large integers.  If they mixed signed and unsigned numbers in any stage of their process, a very large integer will be interpereted as a negative number, even though it wasn't negative in the input box.

Maybe Mark should look into this...

I can verify that cavirtex.com works exactly as reported by other forum users in the earlier http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=13668.0 thread regarding this exchange. I'm registered with TD Bank in Toronto and I had no issues depositing or withdrawing funds in CDN as they seem to be affiliated. It arrives in under an hour electronically. Transferring 50 BTC takes about an hour, as they required 6 verifications. The exchange is out of open beta, I believe there is now a 1% cost for selling/buying. Definitely sets the standard for a Bitcoin Exchange in Canada!

whats it called?
[/quote]

It's Virtex (www.cavirtex.com), and I can attest that to fund your account it usually takes under an hour. You just do an e-transfer from any Canadian bank account. Not sure how it works going the other way around, but as soon as I start to panic and sell my BTC I'll be sure to let you know 

Look at the market depth on Mt. Gox and Tradehill on the "bid" side. A few days ago, Mt. Gox had 6x the market depth of Tradehill. Today, it only has 3x. That number reflects how much real cash people have in the exchange. Buyers are bailing out of Mt. Gox. Sellers of Bitcoins, not so much.

Mt. Gox is more volatile than Tradehill, which, as I pointed out before, is backwards.  The bigger market should be less volatile. Some of the volatility on Mt. Gox may simply be because the exchange system is buggy and is mismatching orders.  Their "queuing delays" don't help, either. They're either inept or manipulating the market. Not sure which.

(I'm not recommending Tradehill; we still don't know if, long term, they can be trusted not to lose or steal deposits. But they seem to have the mechanics of their market working better.)

Canada already has a GREAT secure, working, cheap (you can withdraw cash to almost any bank with your email address in just 7 hours for $6.50, or $3 directly to a bank account).

They just re-opened their doors today after finalizing all the legal stuff there was to take care of.

I just deposited a bunch a few BTC and everything is going great.

I do still encourage XRcode to build his own exchange however. We can always use another!
[/quote]

whats it called?

Just a few minutes ago, over $100k of asks were skipped for this trade:

Jul02 13:08:51 mtgox        1.5324 @    15.701      USD
Jul02 13:08:51 mtgox        1.4364 @    15.70099    USD
Jul02 13:08:51 mtgox        1.5235 @    15.70099    USD
Jul02 13:08:53 mtgox        1.4281 @    15.70099    USD
Jul02 13:08:53 mtgox        1.5146 @    15.70099    USD
Jul02 13:08:57 mtgox        1.4198 @    16.70       USD
Jul02 13:09:16 mtgox        5.0650 @    15.70099    USD
Jul02 13:09:16 mtgox        1.0000 @    15.71999    USD
Jul02 13:09:16 mtgox        0.5700 @    15.72       USD
Jul02 13:09:16 mtgox        3.1777 @    15.798      USD
Jul02 13:09:16 mtgox        0.2638 @    15.798      USD

The 16.7 appeared on mtgoxlive.com as a spike.  I pointed this out in #mtgox IRC, and MagicalTux happened to be there and a minute later the trade disappeared from the graph.  He is also working on fixing this bug right now.

1) And if you don't get it right, some (or most) of us will continue to support and/or accept you until you do
2)
3) profit!

This whole order-matching incident doesn't instill confidence in me, at all. It makes me question how the trade engine was validated, to begin with. Just off the top of my head, the one thing you don't want happening is your code not catching input problems. This is a basic concern for anything with any serious responsibilities.

I'm not a QA expert, but you'd better believe I would stress-test my algorithm by giving it a specially crafted 'junk' pile of inputs, to see if it could fail gracefully at worst, at best - ignore the false inputs and continue flawlessly. As I'm sure MagicalTux is aware, any continued problems will contribute to declining volume at his exchange.

Please get it right, for your sake and ours.

It was initially brought to tcatm's attention by Keefe with him stating "tcatm: would you consider removing the bad mtgox trades from the charts?"

I believe the general community consensus is to encourage and help MtGox (and all other affiliated data traces including popular bitcoincharts.com) cover such mistakes/bugs from being historically public from original data sources.

This is a common recurring trend that is for example heavily integrated into educational and informational (e.g. wikipedia) systems where many such educational and informational contents are manipulated or controlled/censored/restricted.

The people at reddit have been on this http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/ieqli/mtgoxed_again_captcha_behaxq/

Canada already has a GREAT secure, working, cheap (you can withdraw cash to almost any bank with your email address in just 7 hours for $6.50, or $3 directly to a bank account).

They just re-opened their doors today after finalizing all the legal stuff there was to take care of.

I just deposited a bunch a few BTC and everything is going great.

I do still encourage XRcode to build his own exchange however. We can always use another!

IMHO the algorithm that makes sense, outlined by Jered should be this:
1. If the newest order has overlapping offers in the book, than those should be matched, best first
2. If not, it's added to the order book
(the book, by definition, has no overlap; if it somehow shows overlap, orders should be matched at the single price that eliminates overlap)

So the decision should always favor the newest order, on the principle that the current order book is a fair representation of the market state; whoever is bidding against the market is either making a mistake or acting on erroneous information, so he should be protected against his folly.

A bellow-market order means 'give me the best price, now' and the exchange should interpret it in this manner since it's generating volume and business (standing orders don't). Also, a match close to the 'real' market value maximizes the fee earned from both the seller and the buyer.

I won't take your word for it, sorry!

I am greatful that Mark Karpeles erased the trade errors from his charts so quickly and that Nils Schneider at Bitcoin Charts (also a bitcoin developer) did the same.

I had a order for 8$ and dit not get 1 BTC?

They better not roll'em back this time...

Hi TraderTimm,

Yep!

Here is an example of how most exchanges work:

When you enter a limit order, we will attempt to settle you with the most aggressive outstanding order on the other side. If that order is not sufficient to fill your order, we will look at the next most aggressive order. The price you settle at will be the price of the already outstanding order.

Here's a simple example.

There are already the following limit orders in the system:
BUY 1 BTC @ 17 USD
BUY 2 BTC @ 18 USD
BUY 1 BTC @ 19 USD
SELL 1 BTC @ 20 USD
SELL 2 BTC @ 21 USD
SELL 1 BTC @ 22 USD

You submit a limit order to BUY 3.5 BTC @ 22.5 USD.

Here is what happens:
1) You buy 1 BTC at 20 USD each
2) You buy 2 BTC at 21 USD each
3) You buy 0.5 BTC at 22 USD each
4) Your order is now completely filled.

What if, instead, you'd submitted a limit order to SELL 3.5 BTC @ 16.5...?

Here is what would have happened:
1) You sell 1 BTC at 19 USD each
2) You sell 2 BTC at 18 USD each
3) You sell 0.5 BTC at 17 each
4) Your order is now completely filled

Under a different method ( potentially what happened here ), users who'd submitted orders earlier received a slightly higher priority in the matching process. Unfortunately under some circumstances this would result in non-optimal prices being chosen for new incoming orders. Such things as filling an order way below the market price simply because this bid is entered.

Looks like most of the entire order book got wiped.  Here's what it looked like at 1309577584 (2011-07-02 03:33:04 GMT).

No asks at all, and max bid was $4.93.

bid    1       24225.55191
bid    1.001   1105.16283716
bid    1.003   60
bid    1.01    1115.57255445
bid    1.0101  0.0096624
bid    1.011   10020
bid    1.0111  13.38
bid    1.01111 495.01043408
bid    1.01234 100
bid    1.0124  1.24887396
bid    1.013   200
bid    1.017   55
bid    1.02001 100
bid    1.021   702.93730656
bid    1.03    10
bid    1.05    200
bid    1.06    99.26725471
bid    1.071   50
bid    1.1     1295.4373
bid    1.102   47.03119782
bid    1.11    208.9
bid    1.112   68.01303956
bid    1.12    869.9703125
bid    1.15152 1
bid    1.17    100
bid    1.18    40
bid    1.193   3
bid    1.2     164.01
bid    1.22    0.37213114
bid    1.2222  8356.36
bid    1.23    395
bid    1.23457 50
bid    1.2401  30.95
bid    1.25    100
bid    1.271   19.45003933
bid    1.3     152.08
bid    1.32    150
bid    1.345   8000
bid    1.36    10
bid    1.37051 10
bid    1.42    210.66
bid    1.5     45.13684666
bid    1.50198 72.99697732
bid    1.51    1000
bid    1.55    40
bid    1.58001 3
bid    1.6     30.475
bid    1.62    2
bid    1.7     437.77953529
bid    1.70001 0.00411762
bid    1.701   0.31788947
bid    1.74    28.85
bid    1.78    1.25
bid    1.8     62.51
bid    1.9     0.88680526
bid    1.9999  100
bid    2       530.068715
bid    2.01    483.07860696
bid    2.02    56
bid    2.05    7
bid    2.1     128.761
bid    2.11    7
bid    2.1122  40
bid    2.15152 1
bid    2.24    10
bid    2.3     123
bid    2.32    90
bid    2.33    50
bid    2.3447  4691.51
bid    2.39    134
bid    2.4     0.1
bid    2.42    50
bid    2.5     355
bid    2.51    5.75697211
bid    2.55    34
bid    2.571   20
bid    2.6     18.0769
bid    2.602   29.89
bid    2.73    11.83
bid    2.87    1
bid    2.91    25
bid    2.99    702.67103008
bid    3       853.31725998
bid    3.0001  211
bid    3.01    84.64
bid    3.011   5
bid    3.03    34.05
bid    3.05    10
bid    3.09    0.26960194
bid    3.1     25.1613
bid    3.11    100.66
bid    3.15152 1
bid    3.2     61
bid    3.24    8.7
bid    3.27    8000
bid    3.32    60
bid    3.33    11.82
bid    3.3999  24
bid    3.418   23
bid    3.5     185
bid    3.55    30
bid    3.6     17.4756
bid    3.7     1000
bid    3.71    8.82
bid    3.89    55.7110694
bid    4       1114.6007125
bid    4.01    20
bid    4.04    13.07
bid    4.09    20
bid    4.1     28.75583902
bid    4.1401  12
bid    4.15152 1
bid    4.32    50
bid    4.4354  1578.21
bid    4.44    1
bid    4.5     10
bid    4.51    10
bid    4.54    5300
bid    4.55    20
bid    4.6     10.2174
bid    4.61    18.44
bid    4.8     1000
bid    4.801   10.01
bid    4.9     6
bid    4.93    21

im switching all over to trade hill.. lets get some money in that exchange!! Put some volume there and get the wheels moving!

Im tired of this buggy trade matching, shitty excuses, and security issues...

mtgox has been moving like a snail due to their Ask/Bid prices being cluster-F**** all the time...

Tradehills trade engine has been great and solid.. their layout sucks but whatever, it will come in due time

As I posted just prior to you, MagicalTux acknowledged that they were executed.