I have a feeling the internet would be a pretty broken concept if such events ensued...
But, up, I guess?
|
|
|
Was pleasantly surprised by the first few replies. Was expecting a bunch of negative comments along the lines of "Cya at 1 figure" etc.
I have a feeling the fall of Mt. Gox could be a good thing for BTC.. We'll see though.
|
|
|
I'm a massive optimistic, so I voted yes
|
|
|
I'm either missing something or you're all brute stupid.
Why are you bidding on something that even TradeFortress (The one who is supposed to honor the IOU) implied that he wasn't going to be doing so?
I don't know much about Ripple, so feel free to tear this post to bits.
|
|
|
With the amount of people getting scammed recently, this is a great principal to re consolidate.
It's simple logic, yet people still fail to notice.
|
|
|
Calling shenanigans
|
|
|
On a little of a tangent.. But I'm fascinated by all these random replies your making..
Do they mean something? Is it like a secret code for all the people who are subscribed to your service?
|
|
|
Can't seem to find any problems. Great job
|
|
|
This one is! Free is better than .com for me right now as the site is growing. Thanks for commenting.
I'd say you were right, but we'd both be wrong.
|
|
|
Well good luck to both parties.. I'd probably recommend using an escrow to be honest.
|
|
|
It can't.
In theory, this won't stop USA players from betting on it if they already know about it.
It will however severely affect SD in terms of marketing. They can't simply get new US players by having a link to their website on Bitcointalk or through google etc. Mainly USA people who knew about SD prior will end up betting from now on I assume. Obviously, SD could have a trick up their sleeve to get around this though. We'll see.
|
|
|
The difference is that "quitting while we're ahead" means the first time you're ahead, which will probably happen early on with only a small amount bet gained.
"Quitting while you're behind" in this case means you've lost all you can afford to lose, which won't necessarily be a small amount.
The other difference is that the "ahead" is a state that may never happen for some players, if they lose their first few bets and never recover those losses. On the other hand, given the 1.9% house edge, the "behind" state will happen for all players if they just keep playing long enough. In fact so will the "lost it all" state if they play enough times. For the purposes of analysis, imagine there's an endless line of players who take on SatoshiDice one at a time, like in a kung-fu movie. Each one starts with 100 BTC and plays until he has lost it all, then quits forever. We can say that after the Nth player has finished playing, the house profits will be 100*N BTC. And we can also say that on average each player bets a total of 100 / (1.9/100) = 5263.16 BTC. I think I've satisfied myself (though probably nobody else) that people's tendencies to quit only when they've lost their bankroll doesn't affect the house's percentage profits, and that the current better-than-expected profits are merely the result of some good house luck earlier this year. Even if that whale was always intending to keep playing until he lost it all, that process could have taken him 10 times longer than it did. The house profits would be the same as they are now, but they would then be less than expected instead of being more than expected as they currently are. Relevant analogy : If there is a country where every husband and wife decides to have children until they have a boy, what is the distribution of boys vs. girls in the country? Exactly the same still. Probability is a continuum regardless of how you go about it.
|
|
|
With that much money, you would not need build anything. Just buy all the Bitcoins that people are willing to sell, that alone would be enough to control it because there is a limited number that will ever be produced. The market values you read about have quite a bit of fluff to them since people having to be willing to purchase it for that amount, let alone sell it.
That won't change much lol. Simple money supply tbh. Bitcoin would just be boosted through that one would think.
|
|
|
There's ponzi schemes... Then there's this I liked the music to say the least
|
|
|
I have a feeling this will only make it less likely for someone to buy! If you're having troubles selling at .7 BTC, obviously no one will try their luck at 1.5 or whatever the markup is. Take the loss on the chin & stay away from chain games. If you're looking to gamble, at least bet on something where you know your odd's & thus expected return.
|
|
|
To all the Bitcoin gambling website owners out there:
Have you seen a higher level of bets throughout the last 24 hours? Has this update truly affected the market?
|
|
|
If you are holding a currency that can not be seized, why would you sell it for a currency that can be seized after the government starts seizing currency?
So perfect. So so perfect.
|
|
|
Amazing news. Let's hope the follow up doesn't let us down
|
|
|
Same position as always my friend, all in
|
|
|
I'd just like to stop in here and say congrats to the dice team on their recent publicity.
It looks like you and exante hired the same marketing firm?
The only question is, why have you not yet hired dooglus?
So true on the dooglus part lol. He'd be perfect for SD
|
|
|
|