Re: Test for free our new futures exchange, and get paid bitcoin!
I'm still not sure what I'm doing, for people new to this it's not very obvious what "buy" and "sell" does in relation with the margin and current price.
While trying, I got an error:
When I click "Contact us", it shortly shows a contact form, then jumps back to the error page. I don't think that's supposed to happen.
Bitcointalk uses this 3-of-5 multisig setup to hold (substantial) forum funds.
While trying, I got an error:
When I click "Contact us", it shortly shows a contact form, then jumps back to the error page. I don't think that's supposed to happen.
I might open a new topic eventually to get more feedback on the relative merits of the two solutions. Yes, 2-out-of-3 is the standard solution, but we don't have three trusted people in three geographically different regions.
Hence my question about the encrypted backups: is that really safer?Quote
For instance, I do have a co-founder who lives nearby, but we can't hold one key each because we see each other nearly every day, or else someone might track us down and kidnap both of us at once. Other trusted people living further away are close friends and would not commit to keeping the funds safe in case me or my family is in danger.
So which one do you prefer: losing funds in a $5 wrench attack, or losing your life? Both options aren't desirable.Bitcointalk uses this 3-of-5 multisig setup to hold (substantial) forum funds.
Quote
So this is quite a complicated problem if you think about it. We know it will probably take quite some time before we are entrusted with significant assets, but we take the responsibility of holding other people's money very seriously.
I've never found the perfect solution for my own keys, there's always the trade-off between the risk of losing access by myself, and someone else gaining access.Quote
In the 2-out-of-2 multisig proposal that we are considering, the backup keys can be cross-encrypted. So we have:
P1 holding key A + encryption keys for backup of key B
P2 holding key B + encryption keys for backup of key A
So the person holding the backup key A can't team up with the person holding backup key B to steal the funds.
Did you mean "decryption keys" instead of "encryption keys"? If so: it looks to me like the opposite is true: P1 and the person holding backup key B together have all the information to decrypt the backup key, which gives them all they need to steal the funds.P1 holding key A + encryption keys for backup of key B
P2 holding key B + encryption keys for backup of key A
So the person holding the backup key A can't team up with the person holding backup key B to steal the funds.
Quote
If P1 dies, the person trusted by P1 holding the backup for key A will approach P2 and ask for the encryption key, and vice versa.
Allow me to edit this statement: If P1 doesn't die, the person trusted by P1 can approach P2 and ask for the encryption key. If P2 agrees, they split the money. And you wouldn't even know if it was P1 or his "trusted" person who made the deal with P2, they'd both have plausible deniability! At least with a 2-of-4 multisig where the person trusted by P1 holds a different (encrypted) key, you'd know for sure who signed the transaction stealing funds.Quote
Moreover, kidnapping P1's loved ones is useless because, although P1 and P2 trust each other, neither P2 nor P2's backup holder have personal ties to P1.
(source)
Quote
But yes, we agree this is a nonstandard solution, and we are going to ask the community for feedback on this approach before we make a decision.
Maybe it's worth looking into how exchanges handle this. They've lost many Bitcoins in the past, but seem to have improved their setups nowadays.Quote
You are the second person to report being confused about the frozen funds, so that is something we definitively need to improve. What is happening here is that, while you do not have open orders, you do have open positions
Shouldn't those open positions show up under Open Orders? If not: where can I find back the details to those open positions?Quote
One idea I am considering is having a small information icon next to the frozen balance, so that when the user hovers the mouse over it, a popup baloon appears explaining the breakdown of what is causing the balance to be frozen (how much due to open orders, how much due to open position, how much due to other stuff like pending withdraws).
That would help Quote
Another idea is adding a line for an open position next to the open orders, along with a button for the user to close it, just like Binance and other exchanges have. This may help making it more clear that you do have a position open. Any other ideas?
So that explains my confusion: if "positions" are different from "orders", they should show up in the list under "Open Orders".Quote
Our servers are running in AWS at the Tokyo region, so there may be some network ping for the orders to get there and ping back. Latency will get worse when using Tor, but the website should not get unresponsible because of that. May we reach up to you later to investigate this issue?
Sure, you know where to find me.Quote
Just sent 0.6 mBTC, thanks!
Confirmed, thanks.