Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 72 results by xybersurfer
Re: [ANN] [PRE-ICO] Aion Network - Enabling federated blockchain networks ⚡️
I'm kinda bummed out by this new miner lol, it has been a good run past 2 months, but the days of big profits are soon over Still going to keep mining though, because $100 AION is not unimaginable That's only same marketcap as Ripple has right now
Re: [ANN][CND] Cindicator - Hybrid Intelligence for Financial Markets - September 12
is CND going to send out a revised signal regarding cboe question And does anyone know how cnd defines real min/max values for volatility?
Re: [ANN] Bancor | Protocol for Smart-tokens, solving the liquidity problem
I am trying to login to my bancor wallet via telegram bot as i used to do. Its saying in order to start a conversation i shud check the website. What website?
Re: [ANN]Qlink- World's First Decentralized Mobile Network-Official Thread
Bear market unfortunately. Launch main net when crypto is up again and it would result in huuge increase in price. Which is why I think big news need to be reserved for the best time if possible
Guys something suspicious in my laptop its running slow and i open the task manager my cpu usage is full and i think my laptop is infected by trojan what should i doo guys can you help me.. even i scan or full scan using kaspersky never detected any virus on my pc.. guys help i strong believe this is an trojan stealer that i got i think in altcoin wallet.. looks like some altcoin has backdoor script...
which process is using all the cpu? (look in taskmanager)
There are only 3 hard rules, all else are guidelines, it is up to one who is counting, what guidelines one wants to follow.
Rule 1: Wave 2 cannot retrace more than 100% of Wave 1.
Rule 2: Wave 3 can never be the shortest of the three impulse waves.
Rule 3: Wave 4 can never overlap Wave 1.
http://stockcharts.com/school/doku.php?id=chart_school:market_analysis:elliott_wave_theory#three_rules
Corrections don't have any hard rules, just guidelines.
Here is a good site for guidelines:
http://www.tradingfives.com/articles/elliott-wave-guide.htm
Rule 1: Wave 2 cannot retrace more than 100% of Wave 1.
Rule 2: Wave 3 can never be the shortest of the three impulse waves.
Rule 3: Wave 4 can never overlap Wave 1.
http://stockcharts.com/school/doku.php?id=chart_school:market_analysis:elliott_wave_theory#three_rules
Corrections don't have any hard rules, just guidelines.
Here is a good site for guidelines:
http://www.tradingfives.com/articles/elliott-wave-guide.htm
the page you linked to and this thread describes how to recognize Elliot Waves. but how do you use them to predict moves?
i'm probably missing something
first of all. good job getting the site backup and running (didn't realize that Nejc Kodric runs Bitstamp)
i've noticed an issues with the Transactions API call (https://www.bitstamp.net/api/transactions/?time=hour)
sometimes a call returns transactions that are older than those in a previous call.
today with this call, i first received:
[{"date": "1420896736", "tid": 7102104, "price": "274.11", "amount": "2.00000000"}, ...]
and in a next call, i received:
[{"date": "1420896324", "tid": 7101926, "price": "276.06", "amount": "4.49916597"}, ...]
i left out irrelevant parts of the lists (with "...").
but clearly date 1420896324 is supposed to come before 1420896736
(i'm not sure whether this is the right place to report this issue)
i've noticed an issues with the Transactions API call (https://www.bitstamp.net/api/transactions/?time=hour)
sometimes a call returns transactions that are older than those in a previous call.
today with this call, i first received:
[{"date": "1420896736", "tid": 7102104, "price": "274.11", "amount": "2.00000000"}, ...]
and in a next call, i received:
[{"date": "1420896324", "tid": 7101926, "price": "276.06", "amount": "4.49916597"}, ...]
i left out irrelevant parts of the lists (with "...").
but clearly date 1420896324 is supposed to come before 1420896736
(i'm not sure whether this is the right place to report this issue)
There seems to be some real issues with transactions at the moment. We are seeing subsequent pulls give us different versions of history. For example, I pull the history once and get a large set of trades, then I pull again and I'm missing just two trades from somewhere in the middle of the set. A third pull and the trades are back again. I'm opening a ticket but I think Bitstamp should look at this ASAP.
Actually, this might be my mistake. Will update here as soon as I know.
Yeah, this was a mistake in our code. From what I can tell, bitstamp transaction data is OK, though there have been a few subtle changes in the ordering of records returned.
it hasn't happened again since i posted here. but i'm pretty sure it's not a problem in my code. because when it happens, i log the data that i already have and the data returned from the API call. and it's really easy to see that the data i already have is newer (which should never be the case).
i also noticed an issue of missing trades between the list of trades for the last hour and the list for the last minute. here the hour list lags behind the minute list. and at times a trade is no longer in the minute list but also not in the hour list yet. so i just use the hour list now. so i use a little more bandwidth (but i consider this a minor issue).
first of all. good job getting the site backup and running (didn't realize that Nejc Kodric runs Bitstamp)
i've noticed an issues with the Transactions API call (https://www.bitstamp.net/api/transactions/?time=hour)
sometimes a call returns transactions that are older than those in a previous call.
today with this call, i first received:
[{"date": "1420896736", "tid": 7102104, "price": "274.11", "amount": "2.00000000"}, ...]
and in a next call, i received:
[{"date": "1420896324", "tid": 7101926, "price": "276.06", "amount": "4.49916597"}, ...]
i left out irrelevant parts of the lists (with "...").
but clearly date 1420896324 is supposed to come before 1420896736
(i'm not sure whether this is the right place to report this issue)
i've noticed an issues with the Transactions API call (https://www.bitstamp.net/api/transactions/?time=hour)
sometimes a call returns transactions that are older than those in a previous call.
today with this call, i first received:
[{"date": "1420896736", "tid": 7102104, "price": "274.11", "amount": "2.00000000"}, ...]
and in a next call, i received:
[{"date": "1420896324", "tid": 7101926, "price": "276.06", "amount": "4.49916597"}, ...]
i left out irrelevant parts of the lists (with "...").
but clearly date 1420896324 is supposed to come before 1420896736
(i'm not sure whether this is the right place to report this issue)
They are protecting their own interests at the expenses of yours.
that's also true. but i like Bitstamp, so i would prefer if it wasn't deserted immediatelyHi, any reply to several depth/trade api questions previously asked in this thread earlier?
Apologies for not addressing this sooner. Certain requests on our API were restricted due to abuse, currently GET https://www.bitstamp.net/api/transactions/ syntax is as follows:
Transactions
GET https://www.bitstamp.net/api/transactions/
Params:
time - time frame for transaction export ("minute" - 1 minute, "hour" - 1 hour, "day" - 1 day). Default: hour.
Returns descending JSON list of transactions. Every transaction (dictionary) contains:
date - unix timestamp date and time
tid - transaction id
price - BTC price
amount - BTC amount
The available transaction history is thereby limited to the last 24hours. We are working to make a file available for download for the rest of transaction history.
where can i find the file with the Bitstamp transaction history?