Okay, my internet is awfully slow and it hurts when it uploads 100KBps. But at least now I know it's not a bug, Thanks for the heads up!
Just throttle Bitmessage with your firewall. |
|
|
|
nimda, it's kind of fun arguing with you  Debate != argument. This is the former. In my high school we had a debate team that had as much fun as the sports teams. One more note about DoubleMyCoins is people seem to forget you can also play 1 game. The real idea behind my site is for people to walk up to the table, plonk down one massive bet, and sweat it out before making a choice. That's really the experience I tried to create. No one can say that's not a 50/50 chance, which is provably fair. Actually, I can. Do you keep statistics or past bet data? If yes, can you quickly check what percentage of bets in the top 1% of value were placed on the left card? If no, can you start? Thanks. Yes, every game is recorded. I could check but I don't need to: I'm going to go out on a limb and say you think there will be a bias toward picking the left card, correct? No. It was the simplest way of asking the question. I think there will be a statistically significant bias, but I only asked it that way because other phrasings would take more letters and words. If I were to run a check would I find that's true? I might, but that wouldn't prove anything. Not enough games have been played. It could be that given the same time into the future the bias shifts to 'right'. It would take a large enough time period to be relatively sure any bias really was there. Read up on "statistical significance" and "statistical power." But all that doesn't get to the core issue -- which is walking up to a table and having a 50/50 chance at winning. I think the "online" aspect is your sticking point, so let me put it this way: Say I'm like those people on the street in New York that shuffle three cards and ask you to find the Queen. Of course, their sleight of hand makes that difficult. But imagine you walk up to MY table and there are only 2 cards there. I tell you one of them is a Red Ace and all you have to do is flip it over to win.
Now, you're honestly going to tell me you don't have a 50/50 chance of winning? Yes. Yes I am. Because, like I said, I think there will be a bias towards one of the cards. If you would just post the stats (do you need help with bash or Python or R?) then we wouldn't need to be having this circular hypothetical discussion. If you do that in Las Vegas at the Roulette wheel, betting on Red or Black, it's not 50/50 because 00 (green) can still beat you. My game is exactly 50/50.
But you don't pay out 2x the bet, right? A 2x bet on 49.5% odds has the same house edge as a 1.98x bet on 50% odds. That's a bit offtopic though. It's not the same. I believe my game favors the bettor more. I pay out 99% of the win (each win is less 1% house fee). Whether your house edge is most conspicuous in the payout or the odds has no bearing on the existence of a house edge. This is actually better than a game playing "edge", if you play only 1 game. If you play Just Dice, for example, which has a 1% edge, on 1 single roll for 10 bitcoins (about 10K) if that roll falls between 49.5 and 50.5 you lose. You would lose 10 BTC (10K) on 1 game no matter what action you take. Whether you would have chosen High or Low makes no difference. That tiny 1 percentage point in the middle of 1-100 can eat your entire bet, regardless what was chosen, no way you could have won. This is a strawman which assumes people only play the 2x multiplier on Just-Dice. Which doesn't even make sense, because your site doesn't have a 2x multiplier option. Assuming Just-Dice and DoubleMyCoins have the same house edge, it is always possible, for any bet on DoubleMyCoins, to reconstruct the same bet scenario on Just-Dice. In fact, I even put the equivalent one in the quote you were responding to: a 1.98x bet (50% odds) on Just-Dice doesn't have the "no way you could have won" scenario. In fact, any win odds over 50% don't have it. |
|
|
|
It's really embarrassing that the paper was coauthored by the Shamir, of differential cryptanalysis and Shamir's Secret Sharing |
|
|
|
Like I said, though, the point is the site can never control what the user will do Like I said, though, the point is the site can predict what the user will do with enough accuracy to effectively increase the house edge. It can? This is something you know? can
/kan/
verb
1. be able to. Like I said, no allegations are being made here. It is possible given the publicly observable information, for any site so constructed to do what I said. Further, I'd be interested in you telling me any computer on earth that can predict what I'm going to do accurately. with enough accuracy to effectively increase the house edge An expected win rate of 5001/10000 instead of 5000/10000 is an effectively increased house edge. We're dealing with abstract probabilities, not individual scenarios. I don't know if stats are available for that rock paper scissors game, but I would bet large amounts of money that the computer won more than 1/3 and less than 100% of the time. I'm talking about the "more than 1/3" and you're talking about "100%." If that was possible why should anyone live life? They could just go to this super smart computer and have it tell them what actions they would take before they need to -- live their life for them in other words. Been reading Dostoyevsky, have we?[...] you think I could build something like that myself? Further, that I would make such a fancy contraption to try increasing the house edge? By how much? At some point the complexity of trying to make such a thing isn't worth it for how much extra money would be gained, especially if users proved such existed and tarnished the site's reputation. It's simply not worth it. The rock paper scissors AI is simpler in concept than your site's HTML. And, like I said, I bet it works, for some value of "works." EDIT: and one more thing, you can see here that the win/loss ratio is almost exactly 50%, just as would be expected. If my site was influencing winning, wouldn't it need to win more than 50%? http://doublemycoins.com/gamesNope. It would need to have a higher than expected profit ratio, which is not the same as winning more than 50% of games. In other words, it could win the large bets and lose the small bets with >50% and <50% frequency, respectively, and still have a win/loss ratio of 50%. That doesn't matter though, because, again, I'm not making any allegations, but rather discussing the "provably fair" concept in abstract.
One more note about DoubleMyCoins is people seem to forget you can also play 1 game. The real idea behind my site is for people to walk up to the table, plonk down one massive bet, and sweat it out before making a choice. That's really the experience I tried to create. No one can say that's not a 50/50 chance, which is provably fair. Actually, I can. Do you keep statistics or past bet data? If yes, can you quickly check what percentage of bets in the top 1% of value were placed on the left card? If no, can you start? Thanks. If you do that in Las Vegas at the Roulette wheel, betting on Red or Black, it's not 50/50 because 00 (green) can still beat you. My game is exactly 50/50.
But you don't pay out 2x the bet, right? A 2x bet on 49.5% odds has the same house edge as a 1.98x bet on 50% odds. That's a bit offtopic though. |
|
|
|
Find a nickel and flip it. If it's heads choose right, tails choose left. Flip that coin over and over to make your choice if you don't trust yourself. You can't tell me my computer could analyze and accurately predict the result of your random coin flip...  No, I can't, and your destruction of that strawman proves nothing. What percentage of your users, would you guess, use coin flips or other reliable sources of random data to base their decisions on? (I have a guess: "low.") Like I said, though, the point is the site can never control what the user will do Like I said, though, the point is the site can predict what the user will do with enough accuracy to effectively increase the house edge. This would be fine, and even fun, but not if the game were doing it under the pretense of being random. (I'm not making any allegations here; it's a hypothetical.) If anyone discovered the tendency of the algorithm they could use that to their advantage, and win reliably which would be costly. I'll bite: Then the site could use a stop-loss and go back to being random. With enough laypersons playing, being dishonest would still be profitable. |
|
|
|
We looked at it a little and think it's OK. It failed a couple of the dieharder tests, but it remains to be seen whether that can be put to practical use (i.e. overcoming the 1% edge). I doubt it.
If it fails some of the "tests" doesn't this mean you are uncovering a potential flaw in SHA that might one day be an attack vector? Nope. An imperfect distribution doesn't imply any advantage in reversibility. |
|
|
|
Yes, you're correct that we could try to pre-guess what the player will do, but you're forgetting any player can imagine we're doing that, just as you're imagining. They can then know with higher probability what the computer will select and alter their choice to win -- in other words "fake out" any prediction algorithm, choose "left" four times in a row to get the computer to select "right" as you say.
As I describe above, there are only 2 choices, and one will win, which is shown. The player always has a 50/50 chance to choose correctly. There is nothing we can do to stop that.
I'm not forgetting anything. Do me a favor and beat this in 30 rounds: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/science/rock-paper-scissors.html |
|
|
|
The issue with that is that there is no user input involved, you're free to always generate a key that results in the right card being the winning one if you check that the new players always pick the left card. The user must always contribute to the process, and it must be done after the server picked whatever seeds it wanted to pick.
No, not for how our game works. You're thinking about games like Dice sites or Lottery sites where the winning answer is generated after a player chooses. For example, if you choose a "high roll" on Just Dice you will take that action before their server knows the answer. You click "high" and the server then makes a calculation based on the seed etc. to see if you win. In our game the winning solution is known by the server before a user picks. So we actually show them the answer at the bottom of the screen. Here is an example of an answer: left:18845f1e40ab0a8a2c0568f51e44b4aa834b6105e1b3d83f152172fcc35ae57d That happens to be exactly what moderate is referring to. With some statistical analysis, you can make educated guesses as to which card the player will pick next. Then you generate a hash of the opposite one. 1. User picks "left" four times in a row 2. Server creates string "right:54fb18c1a..." 3. Server hashes the string ("0dd38ef...") and shows the hash to the player 4. The user loses, and checks the hash With a client seed, this becomes more difficult. With some nice client-side Javascript which suggests a random client seed, this becomes much more difficult. |
|
|
|
One thing I was wondering, is how random is a hash which is generated? Has anyone compared the randomness of a hash to a random number generator?
Just been thinking about this in relation to just dice.
Phil
We looked at it a little and think it's OK. It failed a couple of the dieharder tests, but it remains to be seen whether that can be put to practical use (i.e. overcoming the 1% edge). I doubt it. |
|
|
|
Otherwise I could ask for a passphrase and get a Bitcoin address from it, that would be used to sign/encrypt messages.
Now there's an idea. Check out the source of bitaddress.org for starters. |
|
|
|
Seal, i will be withdrawing from the sig as i've just embarked on a promising business venture. this should allow someone to take my spot. Its been a great run, and i appreciate all you have given to me :-) good luck with btc.sx, i hope that you are doing well.
Understood. Thanks for letting me know r3wt, thanks for your participation. So who's getting the lucky spot?  |
|
|
|
The collateral trend took hold
Indeed. |
|
|
|
No.
Collateral is something that can be sold to a third party, should you default.
A fake ID is not worth that much.
I don't understand what your talking about, fake id? Try selling this car title and report back? That's how much it is worth as collateral. I still don't understand. When you use a car title for collateral, you can put a lien on it and take it if defaulted..... right? Getting liens done over the internet is... tricky. Collateral is only worth anything if it protects the lender from loss: the lender must be able to sell what you give them. If you send a scan of your car title, the lender can't sell it. |
|
|
|
Look carefully, he's already done that. He never said his services weren't subtle. |
|
|
|
Mind you, some people did get caught when they bought from undercover cops.
not sure how does that work, if for example the US police tries to catch junkies they get an order from Brazil and they don't have jurisdiction over there, how do they deal with it? They probably restrict shipping to the US. I do remember an article about a bust in Australia a while back, but now I can't find it. That bust was by the Aussies, but it didn't have much to do with SilkRoad. He was selling drugs offline, and they learned he sold on SR as well. Ah, ok. We do know there were undercover cops on Silkroad, though, because one of them sold DPR hitman services Although, apparently vendor accounts cost a lot of money and were throttled, so it wouldn't be a piece of cake to pose as a legitimate vendor. |
|
|
|
And there go my high ambitions of developing a gambling addiction. Right out the window. |
|
|
|
Mind you, some people did get caught when they bought from undercover cops.
not sure how does that work, if for example the US police tries to catch junkies they get an order from Brazil and they don't have jurisdiction over there, how do they deal with it? They probably restrict shipping to the US. I do remember an article about a bust in Australia a while back, but now I can't find it. |
|
|
|
After 4 hours of trying to get this blue fury miner to work it seems impossible  You're not going to get meaningful help without posting details. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
