Subject:
|
Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.auction
|
Date:
|
Tue, 20 Apr 1999 17:59:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
725 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.auction, simon.robinson@sdxplc.com (Simon Robinson) writes:
> Apart from a few replies that have indicated AUCZilla and possibly
> others don't work, [...]
Any indications that AucZILLA doesn't work correctly have been incorrect.
> this way, I'd be surprised if any bidding software
> actually used that sort of algorithm to calculate the new bid, simply
> because it's such a computationally inefficient way of doing it.
What do you mean by "this way" and by "that sort of algorithm"?
By "computationally inefficient" do you mean 1/1000 second versus 1/10000
second to process a bid? :)
--Todd
> A quick search
> through the current bids to see who has the highest maximum - and if
> there's a tie, which one bid first, would be much quicker.
> (Although I guess that wouldn't work if you actually
> to display all the intermediate steps to the bidders - I don't use
> the main bidding systems enough to know if that's the case for them)
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
| (...) Sorry - I actually meant to say that some replies had indicated that AucZILLA doesn't work _in the way Larry had described_, not that it doesn't work (full stop). Reading through my last posting, there was a comma after 'work' which shouldn't (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
|
Message is in Reply To:
96 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
