 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »
|
So what's the total damage here, players got some money refunded, investors took their money out. There is that 500-600BTC loss but no one complaining on forum that they got screwed. Did any investor whale complained on the forum about this?
the people that got hit have already complained. They lost approximately 85% of their investment. But because it was lost to a gambler cheater, they don't complain as hard as someone might if they had their bankroll stolen outright. |
|
|
|
mmmkay, if we assume that initial bankroll of casino (u) and of mateonl (v) are both finite, with the above notations and assumptions, the probability we're actually looking for ( what is the probability of winning 600btc or more with betting 60k times 1btc @49.5%?) is P[S>600 | v<X1+..+Xj<u for all j]. There's no non-empirical methods that I know of to compute that, but given the number we're talking about it's clearly of no influence here. The probability of ruin of mateo P[X1+..+Xj<-v for some j] and the probability of ruin of casino P[X1+..+Xj>u for some j] are not directly related to the above quantity... Btw for this type of calculation, due to the nature of normal law, usual tools precision is only about 7-8 decimals. Indeed, when I plugged in the more precise numbers (for stdev etc), Mathematica returns P = 0. (...)  Of course there's a chance ! .. but you have bigger chance of dying on your way to buy an Euromillion ticket (.. than to win the jackpot). Rip to all those bastards who died their way to the shop!.. that's why I feel much "safer" with online gambling ;P LOL.. yea not funny for the victims :// But I am amazed by the accuracy of the calculations ;P What's the probability of completely anonymous developers stealing money that people basically gave to them?
1
|
|
|
|
For the sake of doing "good" math here ;P .. As pointed out by a1choi, Kelly's formula doesn't not apply. And to take into account the probability of ruin of the casino here (like nicolaennio wish), one as to compute the conditional probability P[S > 600 | S< initialBankRoll]... which leaves the probability unchanged if initBR=1100... |
|
|
|
About how impossible mateo's winning were.. I made a few mistakes when computing the prob and corrected it. Sorry ! Since it was discussed here and here, I thought I'd come back. The approximation actually gives a probability of winning +600 btc like mateo did of about 1 in 1 to 10 millions... (for extreme values like here final result is highly influenced by the computers numerical methods and their accuracy). Whatever... mateo cheated. And fuck the scammer. See what a hundred thousand simulations of normal 60k bets looks like (histogram=simulations, curve=model), the max profit was 424. Play with the numbers... |
|
|
|
|
So mateo ran away with 600(or 1000?)btc. And manl is absolutely fully responsible for the lost of late investors as in the best case scenario for him -if he were honest the whole time- he should have denied withdrawal to mateo. And anyone with the lowest mathematical expertise would have seen that it was rigged. I am not even talking about halting the site etc.
So manl (god knows maybe...), we're talking about a few hundred thousands real dollars imaginary coins here:
- if you were honest all the time, is it all you can come up with as an explanation, a few forum posts ? were you physically unable to deny withdrawal to mateo ? are mentally challenged to not realize that mateo cheated ?
- if you're a thief, do you think you feel safer stealing a few $100k instead of $3M ?
|
|
|
|
(...) By the way, for fun can someone explain the math of how monstrously improbable Matteo's run of "luck" (fraud) was?
Let X_i be the random variable modeling the profit of each bet. Assumptions: 1) profits went from 260 to -330, that is manlteo's profit = (+/-) 600btc 2) N=60k bets of 1btc each @ 2x payout 3) math bullshit (iid random variables), q=0.495, P[X=+1] = q, P[X=-1] = 1-q. Let S= X_1+X_2+ ... + X_60000. We should expect E(S)= 60000 x ( 1x0.495 + (-1)x0.505 ) = -600 (a loss). We want to know P[S >= 600]. Central limit theorem states that [S - E(S)] / stdev(X)* \sqrt(N) =: Z is normally can be approximated by a normal distribution N(0,1). var(X) = E(X^2) - E(X)^2 = q+1-q - (2q-1)^2 = 4q(1-q) = 0.9999, so stdev ~ 1 So P[S >= 600] ~= P[Z >= [600 -(-600)] / (1* \sqrt(N)) ] = P[Z>= 1200/244] = 1-P[Z<=4.89922] = 4.8x10^-7. That probability is almost zero. I'd say you are few orders of magnitude more likely to die, along with 1 million people at the same time, before you finish reading this, than to have maeonlgerry's luck. Edit1...Edit2...
Woot my mistakes! See my post here.
|
|
|
|
|
About that get-paid-for-spamming (aka signature-) campaign, I don't get it. How you dare considering yourself eligible for any buttcoin, how can you even show your face here when
1) some gamblers were cheated and lost big butts (yes, not receiving butts you won is a loss)
2) all (remaining) investors were cheated and lost big butts (edit) when mateonlgry came
What did you signature-campaign leeches risk huh ? Nothing. And no, e-reputation doesn't exist. Oh yeah, maybe you're number #237817 on the kill-list of some of the real victims here.
|
|
|
|
Only imaginary golden buttcoins were lost... in an illegal gambling site. So basically no legal action can be taken. Still... Why don't we try to build a social profile for this shithead(s). Put a name on the suspect(s) (notice I didn't say thief/scammer). Collecting all chat history, hints (timezone etc.)... Judging from his below average intelligence, his "good" coding skills, his arrogance, etc.. I'd say it's - a male
- in his early 20s
- not a native US or UK citizen, most probably RU, UA
- ...any idea ?
@dicebitcoin 1) You're guilty. You(they) and his relatives are in immediate danger. You'll hide as long as you can. You take the risk of getting caught and... god know what can happen. 2) You're not (that) guilty. You(they) and his relatives are in immediate danger. You'll hide as long as you can. You take the risk of getting caught and... god know what can happen. 3) You're guilty. You go public (real name, contact info etc) and you confess. So you may get some kind of attention, seek some security. Still, you take the risk of facing someone who wants his buttcoins (or justice) and... only god knows the rest. 4) You're not (that) guilty. You go public (real name, contact info etc) and tell "the thruth" (your side of story). So you may get some kind of attention, seek some security. Still, you take the risk of facing someone who want buttcoins (or justice) and... only god knows what can happen. I have the feeling you want to be believe that 5) You're not (that) guilty. You don't go public. You've already told your side of the story. Still, you take the risk of facing someone who want buttcoins (or justice) and... only god knows what can happen. From my POV basically you're fucked. Feel free come here and confess how (un)safe you feel anytime. Scenario 48484) you've come to an arrangement with the thief because you (or he) threatened him (you) with death. Buh.. I really want to know the only TRUE story. |
|
|
|
|
Not a word about that mateonlger shit ? Wow. He just signed his own death warrant.
|
|
|
|
|
Blood. There will be blood hopefully. Hopefully it will be posted on the ... news channel.
|
|
|
|
|
There's still a faint probability that the alleged rogue new ex employee (mateo) knows the server seed and gerrymanl is/are just too stupid to be insulted because they didn't halt betting/investing/withdrawing.
Or manl is gerry is mateo.
Or ... I don't know much about cryptography but... maybe one doesn't need to know the *exact* server seed, after all rolls are not random, they just have an unknown componant. Any docs about stochastic approaches ?
|
|
|
|
|
Blood blood, we want blood !
|
|
|
|
(...), I think we should be careful about threatening violence against any other person.
This isn't a legal gambling site. Why would one expect "good old sweet western fashioned leniant justice" ? Plus, I agree on the above, it's about (what's left now at least) $100'000. |
|
|
|
|
"ain't no stealing server seed, look it's just a bug ! there's "another" guy fritz profiting from it too !"
|
|
|
|
"Oh wait, let's bring back profit to +250, so it's variance"... 25k btc wagered in about 25k bets, profit's from +250 to -50  The only way mateonl to save his life (and maybe his family's life too) will be to deny withdrawal (to himself?). |
|
|
|
|
I hope that if it does end in a bloodbath, no innocents will be hurt.
|
|
|
|
|
It stopped again.
1) 10k bets at 0.5btc, 5000btc wagered, profit from 160 to 220,
2) 7k bets at 1btc, 9000btc wagered, profit from 220 to 150.
Still 1% house edge ? .. 10%? -10%? .. 110% ?
Stupid me, stupid us. manl (mateo or whoever it may be) is right on one thing : he never underestimates people's stupidity.
edit: hard to keep track but overall... I'd say "mateo" wagered 15k btc in about 17k bets. profit from 150 to 50. Yea! more or less -1% house edge ^^ Let's gamble like him.
Manteol is laughing out loud right now
|
|
|
|
|
Step1: "Mateo" knows server seed. Simulates 1M bets. Bets only a certain sequence of Hi with positive profit.
Step2: "Mateo" knows his life is in danger. He "looses" (=gives back) some.
edit: as far as I can see... more then 4k btc wagered in 0.5btc 49.5% Hi bets . (8k bets...)
edit2: it stopped briefly at 5k btc wagered, 10k bets at 20bets/s. site's profit from 160 to 230. Now he's doing 1btc bets...
|
|
|
|
How can one check nonces of +60k bets ?  edit1:  |
|
|
|
|
