Holy shit, that's hilarious. Best is how Dean replies:


When referring to his email where he literally asks his scam victim for even more money to get access to priority refunds. Which if nothing else shows how extremely unethical Dean is.



I guess between deleting posts and dangling the possibility of reimbursement (with the repeated threat of acting vindictively towards any who "makes it harder" for you) seems to be a good strategy for keeping your thread clear of actual proof. Shame you can't control all communication channels like that, though  

1. When and why did you become interested in cryptocurrencies?

I guess I first started casually following bitcoin in 2011-ish. I was interested in the idea of being able to transact without middle-man, but was turned off by the fact it was an entirely new currency and I've always felt proof-of-work is rather wasteful. At some point I sort of gave up on waiting for the perfect currency, and went all in on bitcoin.

2. How did you get on the forum?

Started on this forum so I could shill my casino(s). Ended up staying to get into feuds with scammers and what not.

3. Many people write good reviews about you as a good developer. If it's not a secret, please tell us what projects are you working on now?

After selling bustabit, I worked on a bunch of projects related to bitcoin privacy for a while. I guess I burnt out, and haven't done any real development for at least the last 6 months. Probably longer, I haven't kept track.

4. Tell a story about your big profit or big loss?

I used to own bustabit, which was (and still is) a pretty big casino (in terms of wager) and when I ran it had a razor thin house edge. And for anyone that doesn't know, casinos (at least honest ones with whales) have massive swings in profit. If I made or lost a million dollars of bitcoin, I wouldn't even think twice. Wouldn't affect my day in the slightest. Yet I'd consider $15 too much to spend on lunch. I guess for my sanity, I compartmentalized "bitcoin" from "real money". Bitcoin have just been magic internet points to me.

5. Is your anonymity a vital necessity or precaution?

I'm really not that anonymous, although if I did it again, I'd probably put more effort into protecting my privacy. I've met several of my customers (and competitors!) in real life. Some even know where I live  

6. The last cryptocurrency book you read?

I've actually never read a cryptocurrency book, and can't imagine I'd ever read one (unless it's some sort of entertaining story...)


7. P.S.

While I'm on my soapbox, this forum should remove self-moderated threads. They're just a tool for scammers. If low-quality content is a problem, maybe the thread author should be able to opt into some soft of increased moderation standard that can be enforced by moderators.

It's been discussed on the chat a few times, but I don't think in the forums. But the logic for queued withdrawals is quite complex, but basically they are only processed when someone does an instant withdrawal. When someone does an instant withdrawal, it appends queued withdrawals that either: a) make the coin selection more efficient or b) are older than 12 hours but doesn't harm coin selection.


It's actually a brilliant system because it confuses most of the bitcoin analysis services because it's able to create so many "changeless" transactions, and allows people to do pretty cheap withdrawals if they're willing to wait.

I assume there's some sort of misunderstanding, if you provided more information (e.g. what was it before, what it is it now, what is the game, etc.) it'd be a lot easier to help you.

Each game is verifiable immediately after it ends, and there is unambiguously only one possible hash chain (that's what the published terminating hash guarantees). So it's simply not possible for the hash chain to change, and especially not parts of it

I actually did just recently divest (and withdraw) some of my investment (but not all).  I guess it wasn't too hard to infer from me being online when the divestment happened. Anyway,  there's absolutely nothing to do with ethercrash (I quite literally don't even have an account there). I mainly just divested to lower my exposure (esp. with bitcoin being worth so much lately) and with Mr. Wang having deleted his account, seemed like a good time to not worry about missing out on a lot of action. *shrug*

Well most gamblers are self-aware enough to realize the house generally wins and they generally bust (otherwise, they'd be day-traders). Also to be fair, the name bustabit is pretty terrible. I think I only spent like 10 minutes searching for available domain names before I found and used that. At the time I just wanted the domain "moneypot" for my other project which I thought would be way more successful (but it turned out to be a PITA, and meanwhile bustabit started really taking off...). So yeah, I guess endless surprises. I think if it was my project still, I'd be looking at making a large cash offer for a serious domain like "crash.com" or something


Indeed. I misspoke. The tokens were locked to the price of USD, but you raised and held bitcoin. So when the price of bitcoin went up (as it initially did), you were at a profit during the scheduled buy-backs. But then when the price of bitcoin fell below the locked price, you would've had to take a loss, so instead just scammed everyone and cancelled the buy backs and kept all the money.


I won't bother addressing the rest of your post, as it's verifiable nonsense and the more I argue the more it seems like "hmm the truth must be somewhere in the middle", when in reality you're just a liar and cheat. But I will admit, this is one point you are correct on, I should've said USD and not bitcoin. Doesn't really take away from the fact you scammed everyone though, rofl.

It's worth mention that prior to him being hacked, things were on a massive downward spiral He made bizarre lies, like he had pirated bustabit's game (he didn't even try to hide it, so even the comments were character for character identical) and wouldn't pay the license fee (which was only 2 btc, iirc). He then had the audacity to blame me, even though I was supposedly his friend. All because I told him "well if no one notices, you can get away with it" (or something close to it). He then took it down for a couple days, and put it back and claimed he had just rewrote the whole thing (even though it was blindly obvious all he did was run it through a js minifier). After that he was kicked out of the Crypto-Gambling-Foundation.  And mean while he had locked the value of his ICO tokens to the price of bitcoin, and the *second* it moved against him, he just totally reneged. He was happy to make hundreds of thousands when it moved in his favor, but not take a dollar of loss the other way. And then as you note, he literally had zero volume after word spread .... and then opened up "bankroll investing" (even though raising money for the bankroll was part of the ICO plan) and then *poof* it got "hacked" lmao.

Hm? Betking name literally is of negative value. I can't imagine why any sane person would ever get involved with Dean, or play at a site he was involved in.

While Dean is quick to play it off as "oh sorry, we got hacked. bad luck". For anyone who digs deeper into the story, you will see Dean systematically scammed anyone who ever trusted or worked with him. And not only that, he did it over the course of months (i.e. first he tried scamming in private and not paying licensing fees, then weeks/days he scammed his ICO investors weeks/months later he scammed bankroll investors and then players.

There is simply no charitable explanation that explains Deans behavior.



Bitsler just said: "We're going to give up to $200 to up 250 people who got scammed on BetKing".

It was kind of a smart plan.

a) Bitsler won by only needing to $50k and got some free publicity/marketing/PR
b) BetKing users won by getting some free money
c) BetKing won because it made it look like Dean is being honest, while spending nothing

Holy. Fuck.

I'm pretty sure Mr. Wang has been around casino-investor since forever, he's just a recently converted degen. I also beat him in rock-paper-scissors for 5 BTC, but chickened out of his rematch offer of 25 BTC  

I wrote a technical reply, but I realize it's probably on the wrong level.


Theoretically. And people love flexing this bit of trivia, but in reality it's not an issue. There's literally tens of billions of dollars of bitcoin with an exposed public key (the problem with having a positive balance after a transaction), and it's never been a real concern.

But the best way to avoid this is is to try not to reuse addresses. Sometimes it's going to be unavoidable (people will unsolicited send you money, normally tiny amounts) but generally with a bit of effort you can create a new address for every time you receive money. There are some nice privacy (and organizational) benefits to doing this.

So yeah, try avoid re-using addresses. But don't worry about your money getting jacked if you don't.

Some wallets (but most won't) will try spend all money from an address when spending from that address. It's done for privacy reasons really, but generally done at the expense of less desirable coin-selection [Although most wallets are literally so bad at coin selection that it's actually hard to do worse]

Mr. Wang beats his record again. This time betting 364 BTC  (4.36 million USD).

https://www.bustabit.com/bet/737791243


I'm trying to figure out if the guy loves or hates money 

Mr. WangTang has done it again:

https://www.bustabit.com/bet/736547732

Another 300 BTC bet. Since I think bitcoin is worth a little more than the last time he did it, so it might qualify for largest-real-value-bet-placed-in-bitcoin  (as opposed to most-bitcoin-bet, which as BAC noted is most likely mechs 7k btc bet)

Just to drop some history, this method was either invented by (or at least: suggested by) Dooglus, as a solution for how to make bustabit provably fair. I was the person to first implement it (and added the seeding event to avoid the possibility of picking a bad hash chain).


On one extreme you can only storing the last games hash. But then it'll take linear [to the amount of how far the game is from the end time to calculate a given game ids hash. The other extreme would be to store every hash but you can lookup any games hash in const time.  As you noted, you could for instance do a hybrid solution and store the hash of every Nth game. This would work fine, but I don't think you could justify the complexity unless you had a MASSIVE hash chain. Most bustabit-clones have a hashchain of ~10M or so. That's nothing to store.  But if you had a much faster paced game, and needed a hash chain of billions .... it probably would make sense to only store every 1000th or so hash, and derive from it.

Well generally they're going to be stored in a database, and generally that database is going to have some sort of physical drive encryption. But fundamentally before (or at least during) each game, the game server needs to know when the game will bust ...


Same way you keep any secret secure, I guess. A good starting point is perhaps to store the secrets on a machine that is physically in your possession. Probably a little harder for it to be compromised than cloud servers, for instance.


I remember the monero (?) guys wrote a paper on how you'd detect someone cheating in dice, which is the same thing. Basically I think their solution was to look at something to do with the amount of variance in their wins.   In practice, it wouldn't be very useful at all against someone smart who knew the busts...   After all, there's a constant stream of people winning millions -- it's pretty easy for someone who knows the busts to blend into the people who are lucky.

Is that a new bitcoin-record for a bet (in real-value)? That's a 3.4M USD dollar bet! 

I'm not sure of any bet in the same league. I remember from Just-Dice, Mechs made an insane 7k BTC bet (which he lost). But that was "only" $800k, and even with generous inflation assumptions, WangTang's bet is still way bigger.   

In the chat type /ping and it'll tell you how long (in milliseconds) it takes to communicate with the server. It can be pretty bad depending on how far you live from the server (and exacerbated by wireless networks).

For more information: https://www.bustabit.com/help/network-latency

I strongly disagree. I no longer run a casino, but when I did I went through the process of two different gambling licenses and spoke to many lawyers. I can't speak about all jurisdictions, but I am not aware of anywhere that says a casino should pocket the funds of people who violate the terms of service.

I think this view has been validated by devans (the owner/operator of bustabit/bustadice):


If a user violates the terms of the service, it's totally reasonable for a casino to say "sorry, but you are no longer welcome to play here". But seizing their account balance seems insane and an obvious conflict of interest (if it's just pocketed) and should not be normalized

I think Pmalek's concern is pretty reasonable. There are several casinos that make it easy to break the ToS so that they can profit off of the seizure of accounts with a veil of legitimacy.  A particularly egregious example of this was bitstarz having betting limits that were only confusingly outlined in the ToS, while the actual casino UI would accept anything -- and then if the person happened to ever win a lot of money (even totally unrelated), they would scan their account for past violations, and if they found any would seize the account for "violations".

But as malevolent pointed out, I don't think any of this applies to bustadice. Bustadice just needs to fulfil the legal obligations of where they operate from, which looks a lot closer to "You can't knowingly allow .... to gamble" rather than "If ... breaks your ToS, jack their money"

It most likely isn't because a VPN per-se, but rather that the IP address has been involved in DoS attacks and thus restricted somehow. Quite frequently people use (poorly managed?) VPNs for the purpose of DoS'ing, so it's hard to do much other than just block those IPs. I remember back when I had a site, I really tried hard to make sure people could use it with tor (after all, I got zero problems with people who want to protect their privacy), but with well over 99.9% of the traffic just being overt abuse/DoS, it's really hard to justify doing anything other than blocking it. And then naturally people then thought I was anti-tor, but the reality is I was just being pragmatic.

Cool, I always enjoy seeing new game concepts. Really looks like you put a solid amount of work into it.  I was a little bit disappointed when I skimmed your terms of service, and realized yours is a blatant plagiarism of bustabits.

Anyway, cool project. I hope you do really well =)