No, it's a new post.

I saw you saying I was fantasizing in a fantasy world, and wanted to prove that I wasn't, and that this +EV casino was real!

Sorry it took me 3 years to reply to your post. I can see how that might be confusing.

The house edge on casino games is typically much higher than at bitdice.

Driving to a casino to play with worse odds just so you get free food and a room for the night seems like a big inconvenience to me.

Why not play from the comfort of your own home, with higher limits, better odds, and less chance of getting robbed in the parking lot?


I don't know where you live, but in most places royalty is something you are either born into or marry into. Maybe you can become king if you wipe out the existing royal family in some kind of a coup, but I've never heard of a case of anyone winning their kinghood in a casino.

Yeah - if it's only once per day then it will be at a time when some people can't use it. Half as much twice as often is better. You could even make it every 12.5 hours (like the tide) so that it shifts back by an hour every day. Then everyone will be able to use it some of the time.

In pre-compiled Windows binary format, especially. Where's the source code?

txti pages seem to be strangely cached.

Try adding ?wgjwlvj to the end of the URL, for any random word wgjwlvj:

  http://txti.es/clamour?wgjwlvj

That tricks whatever is caching it into giving you the live version.

I just tried, and only got 1000 satoshis from the faucet at:

12:04 AM
Monday, December 7, 2015
Greenwich Mean Time (GMT)

Also, I don't see the 90k you said I would see - so I guess this is me reminding you.

Also, is "1 any half" an easter egg?

Also, I complained a while ago that there was no way to set the client seed. I just checked, and now I *can* set the client seed, but doing so causes you to change the server seed too. The whole point of the client seed is that it changes the rolled numbers *in a way that you can't control*. If you get to see the client seed I pick and *then* pick the server seed, then it's not provably fair.

It has to go like this:

1) you pick a server seed
2) you show me the server seed hash
3) I pick a client seed
4) I play
5) you reveal the server seed hash

Originally you were missing step 5. Then you were missing step 3. Now you have all the steps, but you have step 3 before step 1, which breaks the whole system.

2-of-3 multisig doesn't help you if the holder of the server seeds is corrupt because he can use the server seeds to win the majority of the bankroll and then the other multisig key holders have no choice but to allow him to withdraw the coins.

Ultimately, the server "knows" what rolls are coming up, and so the guy with access to the server also knows, and can abuse that knowledge. It's crucial that the investors trust everyone with server access.


It sounds as if you are making changes to Bet King that could potentially risk the funds of the investors - ie. you're switching to the MoneyPot model. That includes exposing your investors' coins to games with less than 1% house edge, which they didn't sign up for. It would be better in my opinion to require the investors to withdraw from the existing site and deposit to the new one. That way you are sure that they consent to the changes you are making.


That seems unfair. He has been an ass at times in the past, but it's not fair to assume that he will behave badly in the future.

It will be interesting to watch and see how everything works out.

I think you mean "can't", right? Otherwise your point is good.

Right. I mean we can't know the weights, we can only know the results.

It's also kind of tricky to subtract off the JD blocks, because it's not trivial to identify the JD blocks. Some deposits stake before they are moved to an xJDCLAMZ address. Perhaps I should tag each JD vote with an identifying mark to make this easier.

I'm interested to know about your parent company, and how it "overlaps" with BetCris and the WPN, as you mentioned here:


I've seen people ask about that many times in this thread, and each time they do you ignore it, and follow up with 2 or 3 long posts repeating things you have already said many times. It could look to a suspicious mind as if you are avoiding the question.

So are you willing to answer? What is your parent company, and how is it connected to BetCris and/or the WPN?

I PM'ed you yesterday but didn't get any reply. Please don't tell me you're just trying to drop the price and have nothing to back it up.


Note that while JD has 74% of the CLAMs which have ever moved, some of the remaining 26% is sitting idle. Lost, in cold storage, on an exchange that doesn't stake, etc. There's over 100k at Poloniex which never stakes. So JD's share of the staking weight is higher than 74%.

If you scroll to the end of https://just-dice.com/misc/wagered.txt you'll see that JD stakes around 1200 CLAMs per day. The network as a whole tries to stake one CLAM per minute, or 1440 per day. 1200 is 83.33% of 1440, which suggests that JD has around 83.33% of the staking weight.

As for knowing the voting weights of the other ~17%, we can't, unless they tell us. All we can do is count up the votes on the blockchain and see what is actually being voted for.

I didn't hear about anyone actually counting votes yet, but it will need to be done sooner or later.


This morning I registered a new petition on the blockchain (see http://txti.es/clamour for a list):

    petition ID 0000cb61 -- "I am aware of clamours but I don't like any registered proposal yet"

If you wish to register the fact that you are deliberately abstaining, you can use that petition ID to make it clear that you are actively not supporting any petition. It begins with a bunch of zeroes, suggestive of supporting "nothing".



That proposal was created by Deb. She reads this thread religiously, but never posts in it.

But the idea is older:

Trent Russell proposed it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623147.msg13101661#msg13101661

I replied like this:


then smooth responded like this:


and that's about all the discussion of it I saw.


The point is that if you wait a year before digging up your CLAMs, you lose out on staking them for that year.

Increasing the staking reward increases the incentive to dig your CLAMs as soon as possible, which removes the uncertainty caused by the undug CLAMs hanging over us.

Economically, increasing the staking reward is very similar to decreasing the digging reward, but has the benefit that:

  a) it is easier to implement

and

  b) it doesn't involve removing coins that we already told people they "may already own"


There's no cost to submitting a proposal. But crappy ones hopefully won't get any attention or support.


People should manage their wallets such that transacting with a portion of their coins doesn't affect the rest of their coins. The Just-Dice hot wallet transacts constantly, and yet is very able to continue staking at all times.


This is probably true, but I don't see it as a bad thing for CLAMs to move away from venues which choose not to participate in staking.

Perhaps it would encourage Poloniex to really use CLAM as it was intended to be used and enable staking to help secure the coin and reduce the evil monopoly (TM) of that one dice site.


They do, and that would presumably continue to be the case even if the staking reward increased. The lending market would have to adapt to keep up with the staking rate.

Actually I found exactly such a roulette game. luckybitcoincasino.com used to pay out 2-to-1 on any multiple of 3. It's meant to pay out on 3, 6, 9, ..., 36, but it also paid out on 0. I told them about the bug and they said they didn't have time to fix it.

Here's some screenshots showing it pay out 2-to-1 on zero:





I don't think the game was provably fair, and suspect it was probably not actually fair at all - which is why they could afford to pay out on zero...

I'm not an expert, but doesn't having a big short position mean that you already borrowed a bunch of CLAM and sold them? If so, why would there be dumps happening? It sounds to me like you're hoping people will panic in response to your message and sell cheap so you can buy back the coins you already dumped and get out of the hole you are currently in.

Good luck with that!

If you are going to dump some coins cheap, let me know how many and what price and I'll take them off your hands OTC, to save us both the exchange fee.

No, only by staking. The screenshot showed a negative fee, so you can tell it's a stake. It's merging two smaller outputs into a larger one, but the output is 1 CLAM bigger than the sum of the inputs.


Yesterday I implemented a system for Just-Dice investors to tell the site which petitions they want to support. Each time the site's wallets stake a block, they set the CLAMspeech according to user wishes. This page shows how the JD wallets are voting at any particular point in time. Currently Just-Dice is abstaining in 84% of the blocks it stakes, since the owners of 84% of the bankroll have not yet specified any petitions that they support.


Peter Todd made a proposal for Bitcoin a long time ago, that if implemented would allow users to send coins to others in a way such that they couldn't be spent until a fixed date, or a fixed block number. That wasn't possible to do in any other way at the time.

Shortly after the initial proposal was made, the feature was implemented in CLAM.

After that, Peter Todd's proposal was improved, and finally implemented in Bitcoin. CLAM is still running with the initial, inferior proposal.

Kef's petition is saying we should switch CLAM to the way Bitcoin ended up implementing it.


Yes, you could do that, but it wouldn't help you at all.

Your plan:

  1. vote
  2. move to polo
  3. move back
  4. vote again

Note that after staking, your coins cannot be moved for 500 blocks, so you have an 8 hour gap between steps 1 and 2. Moving to polo and back only takes ~10 minutes each way, but coins can't vote again until they have sat for 4 hours without being involved in a transaction. So there's at least a 4 hour gap between steps 3 and 4. Adding all the gaps together I make that about 12.5 hours between steps 1 and 4.

A better plan would be:

  1. vote
  2. vote again

You still have the 500 block (8 hour) gap between the two steps, but that's all.

And even better plan would be:

  1. split your coins into lots of small outputs
  2. vote
  3. vote again

There's a 4 hour gap between 1 and 2, but then there's very little gap between step 2 and 3, or between all your future votes, since when you stake only one of your small outputs is locked up for 500 blocks and the rest keep on trying to stake.

Do you have a policy about people spamming their referral links on competitor sites?


This guy did it knowing it was against the rules, and doesn't appear to care.

I had already added it to my list at http://txti.es/clamour - according to https://just-dice.com/misc/clamour_weights.txt it is the most popular option at Just-Dice so far (other than the default 'do nothing' option, of course).

I see JD made its first CLAMour vote:



and it also made a vote supporting your 'remove digging' one. See http://khashier.com/tx/dc9ce47ba791c60c2e4ab72a5f9837e24d8e0cb1ca2eed997724815ff3e52f26 for example.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. What does your "it" refer to?

BAC's ratings were made in anger. I don't think they're relevant.

What is the point of having a thread like this if every time someone asks a difficult question you spam the same 3 posts on top of it to hide the difficult question?

Please either answer the questions or explicitly admit that you don't want to answer them. Repeatedly spamming the same out-of-date information about tournaments that already finished is annoying, ugly, and rude.

I just made it. It's 23:09 Pacific.

Reload the Just-Dice site. On the 'account' tab, you'll see:



And at https://just-dice.com/misc/clamour_weights.txt you can see how the JD wallets are currently staking. The number at the start of each line is the number of satoshis voting that way:



http://txti.es/clamour has a list of the petitions I know about so far.

Waiting for a 4k nyan-gap won't improve your odds at all. You know that, right?

All it will do is mean that you are playing less games, and so your money will last longer just because of that fact.