[Passed] ALix & RAW.coinerella - Six Month Contract (Proposed 11/2015)

Total sum: 4536.63 NBT

Grant address: BPgXRqBu9GApyXXdPXFz7JsuaMSvkT9ntE

October 29 2015, 2:17 PM | Updated: Today at 10:52 AM




You offer a very valuable service, especially the walls reported by ALix are helpful, because they deal with real orders and don’t rely on the broadcast liquidity information.
I miss https://alix.coinerella.com/walls/?4h, though :wink:

Some might consider the price high, but I suppose it was a lot of effort to create the software and the infrastructure.

Why do you miss it?

It’s not included in the proposal :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Well, it is indirectly included here_

The release day for ALix and RAW.coinerella software will be the day, this proposal is published.

Everything you see right now is included.

1 Like

I’m impressed by the service and the professional setup and as an ALP operator I like to keep an eye on it. I also appreciate Willy’s work. However I have to be realistic and take a Shareholders’ perspective. The cost of this service is relatively high in comparison to other services and the value they provide. The number of users is likely to be limited, but maybe you can provide some insights based on the statistics (views, origin and unique users).

Also wondering whether the software is open source and/or others are able to make improvements within the license provided and update the server within certain terms and conditions.

At this stage I have to admit that I’m not convinced that we can afford this service in the context of the value it provides, but I’m happy to hear more arguments why we need this and why we can’t or shouldn’t do without. Exchange information can also be found on each exchange itself at no fee.

Can you elaborate which services you’re referring to?

It took me about 90 working hours (including research, coding, testing) to come up with those v1.0 products. This results in an hourly rate of < 30 NBT. Given the fact, that I can’t prove my working hours, you would have to trust me on that number. If you do, well, I happen to know, that this < 30 NBT/h rate is actually very competitive to what JordanLee is paying some of his contractors, which are paid from the funds he is gathering.

I can only give you the numbers for the whole .coinerella.com domain at the moment, which would include

and the website (www) for coinerella.com.

Total Unique Visitors
Last Month

Top Traffic Origins
Last Month
United States 212,989
Russian Federation 107,439
Greece 39,864
New Zealand 39,533
Germany 29,254

Total Requests
Last Month

True, but do you use coinmarketcap.com or do you go through a dozen of exchanges to gather the data itself to get the information you need?

No offence, but that is not what I’m saying. You took a risk and I have no doubt you spend a lot of time on it and it might be worth every NBT. What I’m questioning is whether we can afford the service, therefore I’m looking for usage figures and feedback from other stakeholders.[quote=“willy, post:7, topic:3091”]
True, but do you use coinmarketcap.com or do you go through a dozen of exchanges to gather the data itself to get the information you need?
Well I did every now and then, until you provided the service. So it does save me time, no argument. But again, is it worth the cost when I’m one of a few profiting from this service. I think and I hope not, but I like to hear that from others.

1 Like

That is a question I can’t answer on behalf of Nu, but if I look at the revenue Nu made in the last weeks, the financial situation is better than in the recent months and I dare say it should be possible for Nu to afford this.

The FLOT is soon going to start taking over important parts of the liquidity management. I might be ahead of time trying to create terms, a set of rules when to do what.
But I’m really happy to have a service like https://alix.coinerella.com/walls/?4h

Frankly said, I wouldn’t know hot to evaluate the liquidity situation without that average value. The FLOT just can’t react upon each liquidity swing, but must react if the liquidity situation gets dangerous for the peg.

The 4h average might not be the optimum, but it’s better than anything else

  • it’s based on the real orders (and not only the broadcast liquidity)
  • it’s not only a snapshot, but contains “historical” information

I see room for improvement: having variable time frames for the average, seeing a trend, a velocity, etc.
Based on experience, there might be demand and Nu might contract additional development.
But even in the current state it’s very valuable.

I’d be interested in the answer to this question as well.

1 Like

The licensing terms are not very favorable. In a world where decentralization and openness are the most prized, it’s hard to accept terms that can force Nu into a vendor lock-in, especially when contracts are difficult to enforce. I understand why you don’t like to open-source the server-side software, but we also need more guarantees. Try to find a middle ground.

Sharesholders should have in mind that coinerella is more accurate than liquidityinfo for assessing the real liquidity situation…

1 Like

As I already wrote to @willy, I like his draft and I think that the service he is providing , including API access to that information is valuable for present and future application, including automatic liquidity provision and market-aware bots.

I also believe that is affordable and worth the money. In particular I find the 2100 NBT for the licence a fair price considering that I would otherwise probably re-write something like this myself in the future instead of consuming RAW.coinerella.

It offers to the network a good channel to triangulate information from aggregators such CMC and our internal liquidityinfo.

An idea :

If shareholders consider running costs too expensive, we could probably save some few NBTs/month by scaling down the infrastructure for the first months and maybe scale it up in the future. I.e. start without cloudfare and get a cheap VPS for a start, and expand it via grant only when the need becomes evident.

1 Like

If nu is paying for it, Nu should own it. Why not open source if you’re getting paid in full for your work?


Well, that point of view is very simplistic. That hasn’t been the case for external services in the past (Atlassian) and it won’t be in the future (Daology.)

After talking to @woolly_sammoth, I can offer shareholders that sam will audit my code, with special regard to the reliability of the data gathering process.

Side note: The grant address in the draft already received 6.52% of votes. I’m a bit confused by that.

Consider it a trade-off between ownership and renting a service. Either Nu buys the source code or pays monthly fees; if we have to pay for all your efforts up front in full it would not be good when you terminate your work - that’s money wasted.

How about this: We pay for the current version, and you’ll agree to open source the current version when the next major upgrade comes out. We’ll pay for half of it now, and the remainder when you open source it. Does this sound good, to you and to shareholders?

never put addresses in a draft :wink:

And what if you looked at previous 12 months?
It’s a valuable service for sure. The software license per 6 mo does seem stiff considering it is not as polished as commercial s/w should be (e.g. No documentation. What is “ALix7” in the volume page?) The liquidity data are counting in all orders within tolerance including orders not placed by liquidity providers unless I get it wrong. For the price I would expect essential documentation/annotation, simple timeline graphics, and some source code.

That is the problem. I don’t feel comfortable for FLOT to grow depence on data from proprietary sources.

In 6 months, what happens? Do we pay another 3 grand for another 6 months? What guarantee do we have that you won’t string us along?

Did we pay for daology? I don’t remember that grant.

I asked the very same question when I first heard about it . From what I understand we just pay the running costs + maintenance. Maintenance costs is likely to be reduced after 6 months of refinements.

So this is also the reason why I proposed starting with lower infrastructural costs and ramp them up only when needed.

I guess my concerns would be satiated by a statement about the event that a grant doesn’t pass in 6 months. Who will keep copies of the software if it is not open source?