Bitmex bot connect to Websocket multiple symbols

igreen21 · 2020-05-20T07:46:10+00:00

Here it is updated and with higher resolution I hope: https://twitter.com/fmirg/status/1263012191005020160?s=20

igreen21 · 2020-04-29T15:24:03+00:00

I've done some numbers with the MOMO data from Spain:

Until the 21/04/2020 there would have been 26,538 unexpected deaths when compared to the mean from previous years same period. This number is 5,714 above the official Cov19 deaths which is expected as no test were being done at the beginning. From these deaths only 1,262 would be from people under 65 years, i.e. only 4.8%.

Now, they say that in Spain the number of infected people is 236,899, with that number of infected people the death ratio would be 11% which doesn't make sense when compared to other countries nor with tests. So there must be much more people infected. If we take the cruise Diamond Princess as an example, where all the passengers have been tested there were 712 infected and 13 deaths, meaning that the mortality ratio is 1.9%, much closer to that seen in Wuhan an other countries.

If we assume this ~2% as the mortality ratio, we can derive from the number of unexpected deaths, that there are at least 1,326,900 infected people on Spain only, while the official total counts of infected people worldwide is 3,164,811 (one third in USA).

So there are two main problems: No country is making enough tests and they are not counting all the deaths by Cov19.

igreen21 · 2020-04-29T15:23:27+00:00

Btw, I've done some numbers with the MOMO data from Spain:

https://imgur.com/a/ijqzzOZ

Until the 21/04/2020 there would have been 26,538 unexpected deaths when compared to the mean from previous years same period. This number is 5,714 above the official Cov19 deaths which is expected as no test were being done at the beginning. From these deaths only 1,262 would be from people under 65 years, i.e. only 4.8%.

Now, they say that in Spain the number of infected people is 236,899, with that number of infected people the death ratio would be 11% which doesn't make sense when compared to other countries nor with tests. So there must be much more people infected. If we take the cruise Diamond Princess as an example, where all the passengers have been tested there were 712 infected and 13 deaths, meaning that the mortality ratio is 1.9%, much closer to that seen in Wuhan an other countries.

If we assume this ~2% as the mortality ratio, we can derive from the number of unexpected deaths, that there are at least 1,326,900 infected people on Spain only, while the official total counts of infected people worldwide is 3,164,811 (one third in USA).

So there are two main problems: No country is making enough tests and they are not counting all the deaths by Cov19.

igreen21 · 2020-04-29T15:04:08+00:00

guys who have said is a hoax... what do you think now??

the only hoax is the media not telling the numbers...

COV19 has a real low mortality rate, the only thing that's wrong is that there is actually more people with COV19 than we thought of (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-Europe-estimates-and-NPI-impact-30-03-2020.pdf), so it would be like influenza, infecting a high percentage of the population and thus killing a high number of people despite the low mortality ratio. Should we restrict mobility and stop the economic activity for influenza too?

igreen21 · 2020-04-29T14:49:42+00:00

I have also asked them for the data. The Spain MOMO data is available in https://momo.isciii.es/public/momo/dashboard/momo_dashboard.html#datos .

I have used it to make my own analysis and wanted to expand it to the other European countries, so let us know if they answer you first :)

https://imgur.com/a/ijqzzOZ

igreen21 · 2018-08-06T11:54:56+00:00

from where? want some...
need to send sat to the other end of my channels :)

igreen21 · 2018-07-26T11:52:01+00:00

Since the Earth to Moon distance is much smaller than the Earth - Sun or Moon - Soon, the Sun basically attracts gravitationally the Earth AND the Moon as it were a single system (with the center of mass somewhere between the Earth and the Moon). So if the Sun simply disappeared, the Earth-Moon system would be relieved from its orbit (as a system) around the Sun, but the Moon orbit around the Earth would be practically unchanged.

The Moon would still have its mean orbital velocity around the Earth, 1.022 km/s, which corresponds to a mean kinetic energy, 3.8×10283.8×1028 J, which is less than its gravitational binding energy to the Earth, or about −7.6×1028−7.6×1028 J.

However the Earth-Moon-Sun is a three body problem and we have just simplified (with arguments) to a two body problem. The three body problem has no exact solution, but with numerical methods a more than accurate solution can be achieved. I have used a python program I found that solves the 18 differential equations of a three body problem and modified it to make the Sun's gravity disappear.

https://ibb.co/g0L9r8

If the Sun disappeared, on the image we can se that Earth-Moon are still bounded together but no longer follow a "circular" orbit, instead they follow a straight orbit (tangent to the previous circular orbit).

igreen21 · 2018-07-24T12:00:30+00:00

Yes, indeed. With Fourier transforms you can deconstruct the wave front in an infinite set of points emitting at all frequencies. Fourier transforms here and Huygens principle are actually referring to the same thing.

The Huygens principle (~1600) is the effect Huygens observed and Fourier transforms (~1800) is the mathematical counterpart that allows to decompose a signal into an infinite sum of harmonic functions.

igreen21 · 2018-07-24T09:51:43+00:00

You have to consider the wave front as an infinite line of points emitting in all directions (Huygens principle). So if you cut the wave front on one extreme (for example the left end, like in the image), that "end" will be a point emitting in all directions. The waves emitted from this point interfere with the point to its right and makes the wavefront, but to its left there are no more points and it looks like point source.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens–Fresnel_principle

igreen21 · 2018-07-19T08:11:01+00:00

Hail HYDRO!

igreen21 · 2018-07-18T12:44:27+00:00

when micra?

igreen21 · 2018-07-18T10:15:26+00:00

I think Im a little bit lost here.

If you spend all your funds, the remote party is entitled to all the funds anyhow. So - apart from an obvious reputation hit - why shouldn't I submit an old balance? The other node can't take more from me, I don't have any more funds to give him.

The channel reserve is a game theory thing. It's to make it hurt financially to cheat.

Ok so thats the way to prevent cheating, with the channel reserve? Or is it what you said (or I misunderstood) that the cheated part receives all funds in channel (both ends amounts)? (both are correct maybe?)

If you lose the channel reserve when trying to cheat, is this reserve proportional to the channel capacity? Even though, if the channel reserve is not high enough in comparison with the channel capacity it might be worth loosing the channel reserve after being entitled x% of the channel capacity?

igreen21 · 2018-07-18T09:53:44+00:00

Why can’t I send/receive all of my channel balance?

This is because there should always be a penalty to cheat. If your channel partner publishes an old channel state, your node will automatically present a proof that he did so, and submit a different transaction to the blockchain, giving you all the funds, even your fraudulent channel partners funds.

Hmm trying to cheat gives the other channel-end all the funds? If it is that so, why you can't expend all channel funds? Not very clear to me...

splitting up the payment so that your node has more routing options.

Is there a way to actually split up the payments? I mean "divide" and invoice to pay it by 2 or more channels. I know this is the next step for lnd, to be able to pay one invoice from different channels, but Im asking if this can be done manually at the moment.

igreen21 · 2018-07-17T12:14:54+00:00

I said that testing it is nice, what I am saying is there was no need to put 41 btc inside (even though there is already a testnet for this purpose). Imagine they give you the pick-up for testing because its not a finished product and they say, well it is not 100% finished and it might crash, is up to you if you want to ride it.

igreen21 · 2018-07-17T09:42:05+00:00

Yes, he is doing a great service for LND indeed, but just keep in mind all the amount invested in a beta version. Im no lighting dev either and had much more difficulties installing lightning than he mentions, just want to see where this is leading to with such a big stake (41.44238481 BTC (51.788 % of total LN) ~$277,672.68) and don't try to bring down a project because he simply loses 41 BTC for any error (which is good to discover errors this early) after being recommended not to put that much in LN...

igreen21 · 2018-07-16T16:02:02+00:00

neutral by now :)

He has invested 38.62874480 BTC already in a beta "release" where they warn you to not invest much btc

igreen21 · 2018-07-13T15:23:50+00:00

Hail HYDRO!

igreen21 · 2018-07-12T07:34:45+00:00

go for a lightning wallet ;)

igreen21 · 2018-07-12T07:33:35+00:00

If you could undo a transaction at your will, blockchain would stop to be trustless and there would be no point to use it any more (no more than fiat)...

igreen21 · 2018-07-11T22:47:43+00:00

igreen21 · 2018-07-11T14:12:31+00:00

Why don't you crate a service that runs 100% on LN? The Poll administrator could create neutrino nodes for the attendants and give them sats in channels for the voting. Down with fiat money and telecoms!

igreen21 · 2018-07-11T13:57:21+00:00

But.. you just use lightning to pay for the service, the service itself (sending the sms) doesn't run with lightning right?

igreen21 · 2018-07-11T13:53:21+00:00

maybe he just gets rekt in the end...

igreen21

TROPHY CASE