Topic: [OFFICIAL]Bitfinex.com first Bitcoin P2P lending platform for leverage trading - page 205. (Read 723866 times)

you trying to place orders? python? try

payloadobject = {
         'request':'/v1/order/new',
         'nonce':str(long(time.time() * 100000)),         
         'symbol':'ltcusd',
         'amount':str(amount),
         'price':str(price),   
         'side':'sell',
         'type':'exchange limit',
         'exchange':'bitfinex'
         }

I agree about the rates being too low for my personal risk, but clearly for others it isn't.

I think it is great that bitfinex took the time to do a BTC audit and that is a great start.  What I would like to see now is the cash reserve they have to cover loans in case of a loss.  It is very unlikely that they have enough to cover the full amount, but they have been making roughly 1 million a month in fees (got this number from an early post, haven't worked it out myself)

So let's say they have 8 million sitting in a bank account.  If that was the case then maybe rates do justify a maximum of a 50% loss.  I'm not saying this is the case, but it would be nice to know what the ratio is, because I do think if the market were to dive there is enough liquidity to dodge a 100% loss.  Even a 50% loss should be easy to liquidate out of.

All of my loans are above 0.1%, I do have some cash sitting that hasn't gone out in a couple of days.  It might be time to bring the money home until rates see and uptick.

As for the increase in fees, I can live with it, but I would like a little more transparency, but it is clear the bitfinex team is constantly working and improving.

Hi Bitfinex team. I have a problem with your API ("is_hidden" parameter).

When I send a request to your server (open an order), something like this:


I receive an error:


Okay, "bool" should mean true/false.
I corrected my program and sent this:


And your server sends me the following responce:


WTF?

I tried also: "is_hidden": "false" and "is_hidden": "0" (as a string, with quotes) - not working.

Please tell me how this parameter must look.

Thanks!

I've read the announcement and have to admit that these are potentially very dangerous changes in my opinion. I even start to feel uneasy trusting Bitfinex with the sums I have deposited there.
Let me explain in detail why I feel these changes are not positive at all in my opinion.

1. The fee structure for trading seems fine. It's a popular model although I think offering something like the Vault of Satoshi "flatrate" would have been even more attractive.

2. Previously unannounced percentage fees for fiat withdrawals. Bitfinex, are you kidding me? With this changed you have just stated that our money is basically trapped at Bitfinex. I chose BFX because it had NO percentage withdrawal fees with a reasonable fixed fee which was just doubled as well. What if you suddenly announce tomorrow that the withdrawal fee is one percent? Considering the already obscure international wire transfer system this makes fiat withdrawals extremely unattracitve closely to obsolete.

3. Change in the swap fee structure and insurance: This is by far the biggest and most dangerous change. You have just increased the fees by 50 % for the removal of a feature that was basically never available and not thought out at all. If you had provided completely transparent insurance I would have gladly taken it for 30 % but insurance was always a mirage.

Quote from: oyvinds on March 16, 2014, 04:26:30 PM
"Another reason for removing swap insurance is that we have decided to effectively insure all swaps on the platform."

I take this to mean that all swaps are now ensured by BFX and that the enormous total scandal fee hike for lenders is meant to cover this. I'm not sure why the word "effectively" is there, though. It's really binary, either swaps a) are insured OR b) swaps are not insured.

I can tell you what that means. It means that BFX tries to make lenders believe that their swaps are insured when there are actually no sufficient funds to insure the swaps in case of a serious crash. They just assume they will be able to halt (manipulate) trading fast enough for nobody to be able to close their shorts in time.

This is extremely dangerous as it basically takes the "indifferent for BFX p2p lending" away from the platform making it BFX the liquidityp provider who borrows the money to lend it out. We have seen how BTCe has handled the flash crash and why this change adds serious counterparty risk.

On top of that the illusion of insured loans will lead people to offer more swaps hereby increasing the supply of swaps and mutually decreasing the lending rate. The decreased lending rate will encourage people to more reckless margin trading and actually increase the risk for flash crashes.

"effectively insured" is a really dangerous term and I just can repeate that these changes have made BFX a whole lot more untrustworthy for me.

It seems to get consistently lower the past couple of weeks (at ATLs) almost to levels that I am starting to worry that BFX would not have sufficient insurance funds. IMO, these rates seem too high risk given the market we are dealing with.

Lots of lenders still seem to be offering their USD quite low after the last major rate drop a few weeks ago.  It's pretty easy to post above flash rate and have your loans taken though.

The Flash Return Rate for USD swaps is becoming insanely low these days. What gives?

Shouldn't bitfinex be concerned of this as it reduces fee income for insurance?

What happened with bitstamp routing? Do trades still go through bitstamp or just on BFX's market?

It will show up. Would be unfair if it didn't.

I was just wondering, If someone places a hidden order in the order book, and a trader takes (part of that) order, will the transaction also be hidden or show up in the public trade history, like any other order?

Where to find my own Bitfinex referral code ?

Where to find my own Bitfinex referral code ?