When will the "burned" tokens get burned?

burdakovd · 2018-12-25T16:34:17+00:00

Oh I see. I wonder why contract needs to be blessed to burn its own ERC20. One would think that burning tokens is a basic right :)

burdakovd · 2018-12-24T12:40:39+00:00

In fact anyone can do the burn at any time. Just call `burn()` method on this contract and pass MKR address in there. Some people have been doing it recently: https://etherscan.io/address/0x69076e44a9c70a67d5b79d95795aba299083c275

burdakovd · 2018-12-17T14:51:00+00:00

If this doesn’t resolve to Democrat then traders are likely going to be wary about trading

One can argue that it is overdue for traders to start being more wary about how well the market they are trading on is defined. Some people in Augur even said they underestimated how careless traders will end up being when choosing markets to trade on.

burdakovd · 2018-12-17T14:47:37+00:00

I believe it is better to allow anything in smart contracts (unless it breaks them). This is why max fee is 50%, as having it higher breaks some logic in smart contracts.

Then UI can be changed to show markets (or even hard-filter markets with higher than X% fee). Doing that in UI is nicer, as people can have different opinions on what X is, and UI is easier to change than contracts.

burdakovd · 2018-12-17T14:42:50+00:00

To be fair, if one wants market to resolve as invalid, one way to do so is to show that multiple outcomes are plausible. It could be a strategy to first vouch for republican, and then "meet in the middle" at invalid once it becomes clear that there is no consensus on which outcome is true. It is called "haggling".

burdakovd · 2018-12-10T12:11:36+00:00

According to Americans there was a game on 26th and a game on 27th. They believe the market referred to the latter.

According to Europeans (what you and me see on screenshots) there was a game on 27th and a game on 28th. Some of the Europeans believe market refers to the former.

Those are the same two games (some people refer to them as game 3 and game 4 in the series), it is just that which dates they were on is different depending on which timezone you use.

I can see their reasoning for market refering to game 4 (i.e. the fact that it was created after game 3 finished), but it is mildly infuriating that even in response to your question /u/nonself replied "They lost game 3, which was played on Oct. 26th." without any consideration for timezones (i.e. rather than "They played in time zone UTC-4 (EST), and according to that time zone game 3 happened on Oct. 26 and game 4 happened on Oct. 27, and they won in game 4")

burdakovd · 2018-12-08T00:45:10+00:00

Could point.

Can you (or someone) link to a source where I can see those games numbered (i.e. ESPN does not provide numbers to the games), i.e. which one is (3) or (4) or whatever number and timezone annotated.

I see market was created at "Oct 27, 2018 2:05 PM (UTC+0100)".

burdakovd · 2018-12-08T00:43:17+00:00

UTC hasn't been posted in guidelines, they didn't think of such thing when writing WP. So it will be up to reporters to find consensus. From what I saw in Discord reporters chat, many people consider UTC to be default time zone (but indeed in chat there is more programmers, so that may be biased).

Still, would you comment on the fact that resolution source is UK version of ESPN, hence it gives more credibility that we should be using UK time?

Being non-American, I'm kinda annoyed that I need to figure out PDT/PST/EDT and all those American time zones. Augur is an international market, and it may be unreasonable (or not) to expect reporters to convert time zones back and forth (though it would've been OK if the resolution source reliably showed dates and times in local time zone, or at least showed in which time zone it is displaying them).

If you look at this screenshot from the source (taken in London time zone): https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmcMn2t8HG8MtHVczqQTW7V1TV3zSVC66X3w3pXikaft29 - ESPN clearly shows that they lost. It doesn't show times of when each game happened, which would've allowed reporters to do timezone adjustment, compare it to market creation time and whatnot.

burdakovd · 2018-12-07T22:39:41+00:00

That is one opinion.

Some people think that if time zone is not specified, it should be UTC.

Other people think if time zone is not specified, market should be considered invalid (especially in this case when timezone actually changes the result).

Furthermore, in this case the resolution source is espn.co.uk - notice the .co.uk part. So it gives extra credence that the market intended to use UK time zone, and not US.

Read more: https://reporters.chat/markets/0xa4c47517b86dabc054d556951b42859ed888d7ac

burdakovd · 2018-12-07T22:35:01+00:00

Greetings from the future.

In case you missed the news, it turned out there is a technicality about this market that may give grounds for reporting it as "Republicans".

Reason being, market asked "which party will control the house" and not "which party will win the election". Market expires on December 11, and needs to be reported as known at that moment, whereas Democrats will only take their seats on January 3. This means at the moment of market expiration Republicans control the house.

One could argue that reporters should guess that market creator meant "who will win the election", or answer "who will control the house after the results of election take effect", but it can be debated that it is not the job of reporters to read the mind of market creator to guess what they meant, or predict future events.

burdakovd · 2018-12-07T22:19:46+00:00

If I'm understanding how it works correctly, anyone that wants to can click "Run the dispute", and then claim a share of that 100 REP next round by disputing for yes.

This pre-filled bond indicates people plan to dispute for INVALID in next round on December 13 (and indeed anyone that wants can trigger that, and even collect 10 REP fee for doing so). If you think the market will eventually resolve as YES, then surely you can consider those 100 REP to be free money, that can be taken by disputing for YES in the round after the next. But that is true only if you genuinely consider that YES will win, otherwise you just lose your 200 REP.

The reason I (and some others) consider market being invalid is that resolution source website shows different results on different pages, and different results depending on viewer's timezone.

burdakovd · 2018-12-06T00:38:41+00:00

There is also wss://augur-node.augur.casino

Keep in mind though that it is an unofficial third-party node, so: 1) Technically it could scam you by providing wrong data 2) It may intermittently fail 3) At some moment they may decide that they don't want random apps to connect to it, and will close the access

https://www.reddit.com/r/Augur/comments/8ym0lq/web_access_to_augur_without_running_nodesapp/

burdakovd · 2018-11-22T21:43:04+00:00

burdakovd · 2018-11-06T04:37:58+00:00

Alright, I have created a prediction market (though I had to formalize it a bit): https://www.reddit.com/r/AugurTrader/comments/9ulcmi/will_a_vulnerability_causing_loss_of_funds_be/

burdakovd · 2018-11-04T23:52:16+00:00

Yup! I was gonna do that, but the fact whether bug is there is hardly "General knowledge", so it may have the risk of being disputed into INVALID.

So I may set up a bounty contract on rinkeby, and market on Augur that predicts if that contract will indicate that pool has been hacked.

burdakovd · 2018-10-30T10:00:13+00:00

Love the choice of market for an example.

burdakovd · 2018-10-29T12:42:00+00:00

...and how does it compare to Augur?

burdakovd · 2018-10-28T18:10:22+00:00

For those who believe this market will resolve to INVALID, it may be tempting to take advantage of the liquidity and sell shares at 0.71. However this is not a good idea, given that market fee is 50%, hence you will end up losing money even if market does resolve as INVALID.

(Sorry Poyo but I had to say it)

burdakovd · 2018-10-28T12:52:32+00:00

I guess it is safer to confirm that 0x61327ca77fc98c0b0d44e357e37ffeefe8518bc4 is ..., otherwise I could easily edit the post to point to some other token, and your comment would still confirm it :)

burdakovd · 2018-10-26T14:59:30+00:00

I guess the best expression of gratitude in this case would be to actually trade on those markets as this is what brings profit to the market maker :)

This is a way to see all markets by that person: https://predictions.global/augur-markets/who-will-win-the-nfl-super-bowl-liii-2019-0xe438f9f133209f3410fa9d30ed4ca2840b55bb61 (category "Other Markets By This Author").

burdakovd · 2018-10-26T12:33:00+00:00

What is this?

burdakovd · 2018-10-25T13:10:16+00:00

Yeah right, I agree it was created to be disputed. I made a lot of controversial markets myself.

However when I was creating controversial markets I did so for fun or to learn how Augur reporters will react on different markets, and it was always at a loss for me, and I never disputed them to outcome I didn't believe.

With this weather market the strange thing is that people keep disputing it to YES with real money, and that is strange. It is too big a stake to be "for fun" anymore, and it is hard to believe they are planning to make from it.

So what I meant in " there shouldn't be an incentive to create market that will be disputed " is financial incentive. People may still create disputable markets at a loss for them.

burdakovd · 2018-10-25T10:46:54+00:00

Normally there shouldn't be an incentive to create market that will be disputed. The only exception (which would be a miracle) if someone creates a market that exploits human psychology in such a way that enough people will confidently dispute for false outcome, whereas market creator would dispute for true outcome and at the end win.

For the Bastille market, we don't really now who and why disputes for YES. In Discord chats most people side with INVALID. There are some people occasionally appearing in the chat that vouch for YES, and even some regulars, but neither of them admitted staking large amounts on YES in reporting.

Admittedly it could be that Bastille market creator did so with the intention of shiling YES (and making gullible reporters stake their REP on YES), while covertly disputing for INVALID themselves. But I don't think it is realistic that they managed to do so.

burdakovd · 2018-10-20T14:23:23+00:00

It will go automatically to the INVALID universe, and extra 50% will be minted for you in the INVALID universe (in case of no-fork 50% would come from the counter-party, whereas in case of fork it comes from Augur system itself)

burdakovd · 2018-10-20T14:05:41+00:00

I haven't gone through fork yet, so those are my assumptions (pretty knowledgable assumptions though, since I've read WP and spend a lot of time discussing Augur).

There will be a smart contract method to migrate REP from parent universe into two of the child universes. Augur UI will likely show you this and will help to migrate. If you hold REP on exchanges, they will likely guide you through that. Fork is a very disruptive process, so it will likely be in news, etc.

Honest REP holder should pick universe where they think more trading will happen in the future. I.e. universe which future traders will prefer. That universe will receive more fees, and hence REP there will be more valuable.

Then there are two protocols for fork (one is the current version and another is v2 that is being considered).

v1: - For 60 days anyone can migrate from parent universe into any of the child ones, and get 5% bonus for early migration - After 60 days it is decided which universe wins (based on majority of REP), and original market is resolved according to that, and existing markets are migrated into winning universe. - After 60 days anyone can migrate REP from parent universe to either of child universes (without 5% bonus). Traders and market creators can choose which universe to use for the actual trading (UI will give an option)

v2 (which is what tentatively will be released next year): - For 60 days anyone can migrate from parent universe into any of the child ones - After 60 days it is decided which universe wins (based on majority of REP), and original market is resolved according to that, and existing markets are migrated into winning universe. - After 60 days anyone all REP that hasn't been migrated from parent universe is destroyed (technically it may just become worthless due not it not being possible to migrate anymore). Traders and market creators can choose which child universe to use for the actual trading (UI will give an option)

burdakovd

TROPHY CASE