PolymarketHoly ****, maybe this contributes to my bad results over the last months
Holy ****, maybe this contributes to my bad results over the last months
egolo参与话题 8消息总数 73
该用户的聊天记录定位。
聊天记录
共 73 条，显示第 1-50 条Please report this as theft to police if you have the time. There is probably 0 chance of anything coming from it though
Please report this as theft to police if you have the time. There is probably 0 chance of anything coming from it though
What maker rebate change?
What maker rebate change?
Probably not, it may just have been a concurrency issue where the fill happened on their side but the trade notification wasn't read by my bot as it was busy posting the order at the same time
Probably not, it may just have been a concurrency issue where the fill happened on their side but the trade notification wasn't read by my bot as it was busy posting the order at the same time
Thank you, I asked the question there too now, but I think in my case the error may be reasonable and not just a bug, depending on the intended semantics.. If the "balance: 9200000" is the number of shares/collatoral I have from confirmed transactions, the "sum of matched orders: 4920000" is the number of shares/collatoral being part of an unconfirmed trade, and "order amount (inc. fees): 4400000" being the size of the order I'm trying to place, then those numbers actually add up to warrant a "not enough balance" error. Is my interpretation of those numbers reasonable/correct?
Thank you, I asked the question there too now, but I think in my case the error may be reasonable and not just a bug, depending on the intended semantics.. If the "balance: 9200000" is the number of shares/collatoral I have from confirmed transactions, the "sum of matched orders: 4920000" is the number of shares/collatoral being part of an unconfirmed trade, and "order amount (inc. fees): 4400000" being the size of the order I'm trying to place, then those numbers actually add up to warrant a "not enough balance" error. Is my interpretation of those numbers reasonable/correct?
What's "sum of matched orders" in this error message? > not enough balance / allowance: the balance is not enough -> balance: 9200000, sum of matched orders: 4920000, order amount (inc. fees): 4400000 Is that the order amounts that are matched, but not yet mined/confirmed?
What's "sum of matched orders" in this error message? > not enough balance / allowance: the balance is not enough -> balance: 9200000, sum of matched orders: 4920000, order amount (inc. fees): 4400000 Is that the order amounts that are matched, but not yet mined/confirmed?
Where did you get a picture of my wife?
Where did you get a picture of my wife?
Huh, isn't self-referral against ToS?
Huh, isn't self-referral against ToS?
> $2.42 in unpaid rebates My man is printing
> $2.42 in unpaid rebates My man is printing
Nahh, I'm just hovering around silver/bronze, definitely not a vip 😂
Nahh, I'm just hovering around silver/bronze, definitely not a vip 😂
> We've also begun rolling out 0.25¢ ticks to tighten spreads **and bring down what it actually costs you to trade.**
> We've also begun rolling out 0.25¢ ticks to tighten spreads **and bring down what it actually costs you to trade.**
Damn, my bot will just go "huch, a share price of 50.25c, guess the tick size is 0.01c"
Damn, my bot will just go "huch, a share price of 50.25c, guess the tick size is 0.01c"
So at least after the 0.25c tick size update we can just use 6 decimals for maker and taker amounts for GTC and FAK buy and sell orders?
So at least after the 0.25c tick size update we can just use 6 decimals for maker and taker amounts for GTC and FAK buy and sell orders?
When was this changed?
When was this changed?
Arrrrgh, I wonder how they'll communicate the impact of the 0.25c tick size on the taker and maker decimals. Currently it goes, vastly simplified, (1,0.1,0.001,0.0001,0.00001) -> (2,3,4,5,6) decimals. Looking forward to how 0.25c tick size impacts the maker and taker decimals Plot twist: They'll communicate through error messages
Arrrrgh, I wonder how they'll communicate the impact of the 0.25c tick size on the taker and maker decimals. Currently it goes, vastly simplified, (1,0.1,0.001,0.0001,0.00001) -> (2,3,4,5,6) decimals. Looking forward to how 0.25c tick size impacts the maker and taker decimals Plot twist: They'll communicate through error messages
Plot twist: they just hire mustafa to give bad news and be a sacrificial lamb
Plot twist: they just hire mustafa to give bad news and be a sacrificial lamb
Ahhh god damn it. That seems like a nasty change to implement .. Do we still need to worry about maker and taker amount decimals, or have those restrictions been removed?
Ahhh god damn it. That seems like a nasty change to implement .. Do we still need to worry about maker and taker amount decimals, or have those restrictions been removed?
Is that tick size change already implemented, on the roadmap or is it just a ghost?
Is that tick size change already implemented, on the roadmap or is it just a ghost?
What did I miss there? Tick size going to things other than 10e-n?
What did I miss there? Tick size going to things other than 10e-n?
Well, to be fair, the color is quite fitting
Well, to be fair, the color is quite fitting
Ahhh why is the eggplant guy purple?
Ahhh why is the eggplant guy purple?
You can probably check the umaResolutionStatus and the token prices. Usually the umaResolutionStatus goes to `resolved` once you can redeem your shares for cash, not sure what happens in the event of a cancellation though
You can probably check the umaResolutionStatus and the token prices. Usually the umaResolutionStatus goes to `resolved` once you can redeem your shares for cash, not sure what happens in the event of a cancellation though
There's quite a big spread actually. It's either some super competent dude who worked at a top finance form, like cutnpaste, or some vibecoding beginner downloading a malicious bot from github and getting their private key along with their funds stolen. We're quite a colorful bunch I guess
There's quite a big spread actually. It's either some super competent dude who worked at a top finance form, like cutnpaste, or some vibecoding beginner downloading a malicious bot from github and getting their private key along with their funds stolen. We're quite a colorful bunch I guess
Ahh yes, of course they added a field to an endpoint where I did strict parsing. That one's on me
Ahh yes, of course they added a field to an endpoint where I did strict parsing. That one's on me
Huh my bot isn't trading for 6h now Were there any API changes?
Huh my bot isn't trading for 6h now Were there any API changes?
I don't really rely on rebates for my trading, they're just a nice bonus I get on top of my trades.. That being said, this may lead to my evaluations being unnecessarily pessimistic, making me miss out on trades
I don't really rely on rebates for my trading, they're just a nice bonus I get on top of my trades.. That being said, this may lead to my evaluations being unnecessarily pessimistic, making me miss out on trades
Yess definitely I'm competent enough for that
Yess definitely I'm competent enough for that
Also made back all those losses from the last few months, so I guess it wasn't that bad either
Also made back all those losses from the last few months, so I guess it wasn't that bad either
If I don't believe in it, who else will?
If I don't believe in it, who else will?
No, probably a few thousands Idk, don't really look at it since my heart is not strong enough to handle the excitement
No, probably a few thousands Idk, don't really look at it since my heart is not strong enough to handle the excitement
First time I'm in the green after months of doing nothing to improve my bot 🥲
First time I'm in the green after months of doing nothing to improve my bot 🥲
Hey guys, I just wanted to thank all of the new players here for the donations over the last week
Hey guys, I just wanted to thank all of the new players here for the donations over the last week
Wow you're probably earning more on polymarket than your dayjob by now. Not bad for having a reputation as the 🍆 guy
Wow you're probably earning more on polymarket than your dayjob by now. Not bad for having a reputation as the 🍆 guy
There is a dedicated polymarket discord server for polymarket us, maybe ask over there
There is a dedicated polymarket discord server for polymarket us, maybe ask over there
That's quite some confidence in polymarket
That's quite some confidence in polymarket
Can't help you if you mix two issues all the time
Can't help you if you mix two issues all the time
No, I'm just trying to get over our language barrier. Can't fix a problem I don't understand. Since you don't seem to appreciate my effort though, kindly wait for someone else to respond
No, I'm just trying to get over our language barrier. Can't fix a problem I don't understand. Since you don't seem to appreciate my effort though, kindly wait for someone else to respond
You're saying contradicting things. You just said the pUSD is still in your wallet, now you said you deposited 1000? Which is it?
You're saying contradicting things. You just said the pUSD is still in your wallet, now you said you deposited 1000? Which is it?
1. So how exactly is polymarket responsible for the 0.4% uniswap fee? 2. You tried to deposit *what* with the website ui? The 1000 USDT?
1. So how exactly is polymarket responsible for the 0.4% uniswap fee? 2. You tried to deposit *what* with the website ui? The 1000 USDT?
I don't understand ... The fees came from converting USDT to pUSD. And now you want to transfer pUSD to your deposit wallet? Where did you pUSD land, if not at your deposit wallet address?
I don't understand ... The fees came from converting USDT to pUSD. And now you want to transfer pUSD to your deposit wallet? Where did you pUSD land, if not at your deposit wallet address?
Ok, now you're asking 2 different questions. 1. how to deposit pUSD directly 2. How to deposit using USDT without deposit fees Which one is actually relevant to you?
Ok, now you're asking 2 different questions. 1. how to deposit pUSD directly 2. How to deposit using USDT without deposit fees Which one is actually relevant to you?
Does sending pUSD to your deposit wallet address directly not work? USDC is actually exchanged 1:1 on the UI, not sure about the API flows though
Does sending pUSD to your deposit wallet address directly not work? USDC is actually exchanged 1:1 on the UI, not sure about the API flows though
Does profit chart include fees, rewards and rebates?
Does profit chart include fees, rewards and rebates?
Yeah, just derive the deposit wallet address from the signer address to check whether it matches the funder, and then do the signature verification locally
Yeah, just derive the deposit wallet address from the signer address to check whether it matches the funder, and then do the signature verification locally
I just told you how https://docs.polymarket.com/api-reference/wss/market
I just told you how https://docs.polymarket.com/api-reference/wss/market
Like in any other market using the markets websocket
Like in any other market using the markets websocket
<@880242004720771104> As the customer experience representative, market makers are having a bad experience with ghost fills executed by deposit wallets. Is the team aware of the issue? Exploit: https://discord.com/channels/710897173927297116/782024576275447848/1512128055290761266
<@880242004720771104> As the customer experience representative, market makers are having a bad experience with ghost fills executed by deposit wallets. Is the team aware of the issue? Exploit: https://discord.com/channels/710897173927297116/782024576275447848/1512128055290761266
<@707597210845446214> Has PM even acknowledged the deposit wallet ghost fill exploit ?
<@707597210845446214> Has PM even acknowledged the deposit wallet ghost fill exploit ?
Interesting. Well, I'm curious how polymarket tackles the upcoming issue
Interesting. Well, I'm curious how polymarket tackles the upcoming issue
Ahh ok, so the deposit wallet infrastructure should already be sufficient to roll out fixes for those ghost fills?
Ahh ok, so the deposit wallet infrastructure should already be sufficient to roll out fixes for those ghost fills?
第 1 / 2 页
下一页 →