I still don't understand the point of the 0.01BTC trade spamming. Somebody help me out. Why would I want to do this?
its costing my dumb bot a lot of money, lol.
I guess that settles the argument concerning motives 
. 
Topic: Who's bot? made mtgoxlive price line very thick, darn! (Read 2894 times)
.
It will be a few months yet before you hear anything about it, but when we're ready, you'll be able to spend bitcoins to do something that millions of dollars are spent on every week in the US. Of course, our site will be translation ready and we will have an affiliate program to help us grow outside this country.
It sucks, but it's what we have so far. I use it every time I'm adjusting my positions, I just know it could be improved upon. I'd write something myself, but I am busy working on a startup that will accept bitcoin as one of the payment methods. Developing the merchant side of the bitcoin economy is the most fruitful endeavor right now IMHO.
Well, good luck with that! I hope to see something come from it. We ALL need it!
It sucks, but it's what we have so far. I use it every time I'm adjusting my positions, I just know it could be improved upon. I'd write something myself, but I am busy working on a startup that will accept bitcoin as one of the payment methods. Developing the merchant side of the bitcoin economy is the most fruitful endeavor right now IMHO.
Mtgoxlive is crap. 1 trade every second should be cake, let alone the 1 trade per 5 seconds we were seein when the bot was most active. I have not noticed such long delays with orders, but then again I usually have my orders in place before large movements. What price would it have to jump/fall to for you to trade? Put an order in for that price and adjust further from the price if the price moves too close without spiking.
I DO *usually* have my orders in, sometimes for days ahead of time. But, occasionally, there's still that time when you want to get that quick buy/sell in.
Agreed too that goxlive can suck, but it is a helpful visual representation of the current market conditions, and much easier to just glance across then the sea of orders in the book.
I still don't understand the point of the 0.01BTC trade spamming. Somebody help me out. Why would I want to do this?
I don't really care if someone wants to waste money doing this. But I it drives me crazy because it really bogs down my browser, and especially goxlive. It also seems to take 2 minutes+ to get an order to change from "in queue" to "active", and that can make a huge difference on large movements.Mtgoxlive is crap. 1 trade every second should be cake, let alone the 1 trade per 5 seconds we were seein when the bot was most active. I have not noticed such long delays with orders, but then again I usually have my orders in place before large movements. What price would it have to jump/fall to for you to trade? Put an order in for that price and adjust further from the price if the price moves too close without spiking.
I still don't understand the point of the 0.01BTC trade spamming. Somebody help me out. Why would I want to do this?
I don't really care if someone wants to waste money doing this. But I it drives me crazy because it really bogs down my browser, and especially goxlive. It also seems to take 2 minutes+ to get an order to change from "in queue" to "active", and that can make a huge difference on large movements. 
I still don't understand the point of the 0.01BTC trade spamming. Somebody help me out. Why would I want to do this?
The great thing about high frequency bitcoin trading is that MtGox offers an ideal playground for ideas to be tried and trading strategies tested. See how the market reacts without losing significant amount of money in a market where there are very few rules and no enforcement. It's great, for the person playing with their micro trading bit.
Ummm how come no one has noticed that this coincided with Mt Gox announcing discounting trade fees for Christmas
It just looks like whoever it is didn't notice that the discount doesn't come into effect until the 25th
It just looks like whoever it is didn't notice that the discount doesn't come into effect until the 25th
its costing my dumb bot a lot of money, lol.
the ticker data is affected by this as the small amounts test where the spread is. When im working off the ticker data and making trades to be in positions, im screwed. my bad programming + my dumb bot + those stupid small trades = 24% loss today... needless to say, i turned my idiot bot off.
the ticker data is affected by this as the small amounts test where the spread is. When im working off the ticker data and making trades to be in positions, im screwed. my bad programming + my dumb bot + those stupid small trades = 24% loss today... needless to say, i turned my idiot bot off.
Why not just make your bot ignore trades under 0.01 BTC?
The fact so many people are upset by this makes me want it to continue. Especially if it's eating other bots' lunch like the above poster indicates.
its costing my dumb bot a lot of money, lol.
the ticker data is affected by this as the small amounts test where the spread is. When im working off the ticker data and making trades to be in positions, im screwed. my bad programming + my dumb bot + those stupid small trades = 24% loss today... needless to say, i turned my idiot bot off.
the ticker data is affected by this as the small amounts test where the spread is. When im working off the ticker data and making trades to be in positions, im screwed. my bad programming + my dumb bot + those stupid small trades = 24% loss today... needless to say, i turned my idiot bot off.
So what's the assessment? Is it just spamming? Or an attempt to fool bots? Ie. is the motive profit or vandalism?
Using some simple Python code, I get the following information regarding the volume of these trades (below 0.00005 BTC) in the last 24 hours:
largest trade volume: 0.000036 BTC
smallest trade volume: 0.000002 BTC
average trade volume : 0.000030 BTC
number of trades: 5515
Ie. 5515 trades were made in the last 24 hours that were below 50 µBTC. The largest of which was 36 µBTC, the smallest 2 µBTC and the average volume of all these trades were 30 µBTC. Here's the code if anyone's interesting in playing with it.
Using some simple Python code, I get the following information regarding the volume of these trades (below 0.00005 BTC) in the last 24 hours:
largest trade volume: 0.000036 BTC
smallest trade volume: 0.000002 BTC
average trade volume : 0.000030 BTC
number of trades: 5515
Ie. 5515 trades were made in the last 24 hours that were below 50 µBTC. The largest of which was 36 µBTC, the smallest 2 µBTC and the average volume of all these trades were 30 µBTC. Here's the code if anyone's interesting in playing with it.
Code:
import urllib2, datetime
from time import time
URL = "http://bitcoincharts.com/t/trades.csv?symbol=mtgoxUSD&start=" + str(int(time() - 24*3600))
LIMIT = 0.00005
data = urllib2.urlopen(URL).read()
newvar = data.split('\n')
numbers = []
for a in newvar:
tmp = []
tmp.append(int(a.split(',')[0]))
tmp.append(float(a.split(',')[1]))
tmp.append(float(a.split(',')[2]))
numbers.append(tmp)
trades = []
count = 0
largest = 0
smallest = 0.00005
total = 0
for a in numbers:
if a[2] <= LIMIT:
print "%s %f %f" % (datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(a[0]).strftime('%H:%M:%S'), a[1], a[2])
if (a[2] < smallest):
smallest = a[2]
if (a[2] > largest):
largest = a[2]
total += a[2]
count += 1
print "largest: %f\nsmallest: %f\naverage: %f\ncount: %d" % (largest, smallest, total/count, count)
from time import time
URL = "http://bitcoincharts.com/t/trades.csv?symbol=mtgoxUSD&start=" + str(int(time() - 24*3600))
LIMIT = 0.00005
data = urllib2.urlopen(URL).read()
newvar = data.split('\n')
numbers = []
for a in newvar:
tmp = []
tmp.append(int(a.split(',')[0]))
tmp.append(float(a.split(',')[1]))
tmp.append(float(a.split(',')[2]))
numbers.append(tmp)
trades = []
count = 0
largest = 0
smallest = 0.00005
total = 0
for a in numbers:
if a[2] <= LIMIT:
print "%s %f %f" % (datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(a[0]).strftime('%H:%M:%S'), a[1], a[2])
if (a[2] < smallest):
smallest = a[2]
if (a[2] > largest):
largest = a[2]
total += a[2]
count += 1
print "largest: %f\nsmallest: %f\naverage: %f\ncount: %d" % (largest, smallest, total/count, count)
Someone has to be losing money on this. It buys high and sells low, + fees.
Sure they may be losing money but even if the spread is 10% the volume is so tiny it is a token amount.
If you could spend <10 BTC a year and fuck up the charts so bad your opponents (and yes currency trading is a zero sum game) make mistakes that might net you 10,000 BTC in trading profits is it really losing money?
lol ok!
On clark moody, these register as .0001. Whereas I can only place an order of .01 minimum.
It's spam, and it bogs down the system. My browser has *almost* as much CPU utilization as the miners core.
On clark moody, these register as .0001. Whereas I can only place an order of .01 minimum.
It's spam, and it bogs down the system. My browser has *almost* as much CPU utilization as the miners core.
It just ate a piece of my bid... that piece was 0.00003, so my calculation (assuming every 10 seconds, 2% spread, 0.5% fee, and consistent order size)
0.00003*6*60*24*365*0.025 = 2.3652 BTC per year
0.00003*6*60*24*365*0.025 = 2.3652 BTC per year
Someone has to be losing money on this. It buys high and sells low, + fees.
Jump to: