That's a bit weak to be called "provably fair" though. I can imagine
both a site singling out a user or two to cheat on - and still keeping its good reputation,
and a bunch of colluding users starting to slander a site claiming they were cheated
this way - just to bring the site's shares down, for example.

Actually, I wonder why none of these has happened yet, especially the second scenario.

video is not "provably fair"


and this has nothing to do with the problem described in OP.

here's a possible cheat for a site:
change the game the user played.
If the user bets on "high" ("red") and the result is a win, just pretend he bet on "low" (or "black" or whatever), so the result is a loss.
Or change any other parameters of the game, such as odds.
Keep everything else (hashes, etc.) the same.


The user would know he'd been cheated, but (s)he would have no way of proving it to anyone.


This problem does not exist with on-chain gaming sites, where the bets are made publicly.

I think this can be solved by introducing used-side private keys and randomness, but this complicates
the verification considerably

or am I missing something here?

EDIT: realized that it's even easier to cheat: just change the balance to an arbitrary value.
This problem does not exist in on-chain as well as in real-life casinos

there was a while ago an address with >500k BTC that was linked
to SR: people just put money on SR and they ended at that 500k address.
There was a lot of discussion about that address which was perhaps
the reason that the owner split it into several - but still rather  large - addresses,
one of which is the still notorious 1933ph

so yeah. It's most probably him.

I think many of us would like to have an opportunity to transfer
the shares away from bitfunder (without selling them).

DT, could you please investigate what are the options?

to  people calculating variance ITT:  try to first see the variance
of what you are calculating, and how it is related to the quantity of interest.
If you have to make some simplifying assumptions, try to estimate how  the
simplification affects the result.

Specifically, one point that is missing in all calculations I've seen here is that
bet *sizes* are not independent (the outcomes are independent, the amounts are not independent and are not
independent of the outcomes).
 Ignoring this does affect the results, a lot.

I didn't check the rest of the details

btw, the worst thing - for JD and remaining investors- is that nakowa will lose his money somewhere else.
no way he just stops

so, let's face it: doog was just not able to sit it out.
He just couldn't help stopping it.

Actually he did a similar thing the first time: he stopped the site
briefly when nakowa was winning a lot.

but anyway. Not enough cold blood = bad casion operator.
Too bad, it was a nice site.

for those who like to run simulations, make a play with a player always betting max bet
and starting with 2x the size of the site's bankroll. This is very close to the actual situation.

You'll see that we haven't seen the worst yet, but the player will lose all eventually

forget about the risk. Kelly's for the win. Win in the long run. Just sit and wait.

The only real problem is that there's only one  whale.

I'm talking about this one guy, not in general. From his behaviour I'm quite certain he'll keep playing until he loses, then see the above.

I'm waiting for when nakowa loses 10k.
I think  this is inevitable (that is, he'll keep playing), and I'm also
pretty sure that after that he'll come here claiming the game is rigged. And he'll believe
it sincerely, which is a pity since otherwise he'd keep playing and lose all his coins.

if he's still winning after 15000  of over 100BTC bets, I'd be surprised.
(15000 is about as much as you need on a 1% house edge to be at least 95% sure that the house is winning)

Before it's just "luck". AFAIU for now he hasn't made more than 3000 of those big bets, probably less.

username: tun
peerbet user:   u270799836

I got a 0.001 promo on peerbet though (and lost it:p )

thanks

another coincidence not yet mentioned is that just before the incident some other
player tried to get a refund from dooglus based on the exact same cafe story (I didn't place
those bets, someone else did on my laptop left at a cafe).

This had been extensively discussed at the chat

So at the time  celeste's excuse looked deliberately unconvincing, sort of  "my cat jumped on the laptop."


this "strategy" that you now admit being trivial you tried to sell for hundreds of BTC.

 u270799836

I'd take the freebie.
thanks

received, thanks

hi,
I'd take the freebie

login: rout
address: 1DDZQrGZEu2nicg8VufwPSfAbJjr2v2g8V

thanks

JD cold storage is the 7th fattest bitcoin address in existence.

here comes the day when people can use a computer without knowing that 4096=2^12

This is a sad day.

so 0.00004096 is likely coming from a 12-loss-long streak on a  martingale with 1 sat starting bet, made by a bot.