YOU found one of our easter eggs. 30,000 sat coming your way (later, not on PC)
Here's another: "provability fair". It should be "provably fair". |
|
|
|
 1 Hour and 20 Minutes to go !!!13PM? YOU found one of our easter eggs. 30,000 sat coming your way (later, not on PC) Thanks. I just tried visiting your site. It took 40 seconds before anything happened at all, then I saw the login screen. At the bottom of the login screen it said "Load Time 10.006347 seconds to produce 2.41KB from 1021.08KB (102.04KB/sec)" - so there's 10 seconds of the delay, but what's the other 30 seconds? It's really too long, and is going to make people go somewhere else. I fill in my username and password, click 'login', and it takes 21 more seconds before I see the game page appear. Again, it's far too slow. I see "0 YOUR BALANCE (SATOSHI)", click the faucet button, fill in the captcha. I see "Your Faucet Amount: 1000 Satoshi" and also, in red, "Balance must be 0 to claim the faucet". Does it show that "Balance must be 0 to claim the faucet" only if my balance is non-zero? It's in red, which makes me think I've done something wrong, but my balance does appear to be zero, so I'm left unsure. I click 'gimmie coins'. The faucet popup disappears. I still have a balance of 0. I've tried 4 times, and it's the same each time. I tried reporting the bug in chat, but my text didn't appear there either. I guess the site is just really broken for me, but it's loading (eventually) at least, so I don't know if it's a global problem, or just me. Has anyone else reported this kind of problem? I'm on a laggy satellite internet connection: PING google.ca (173.194.33.119) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from sea09s16-in-f23.1e100.net (173.194.33.119): icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=751 ms
64 bytes from sea09s16-in-f23.1e100.net (173.194.33.119): icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=737 ms
64 bytes from sea09s16-in-f23.1e100.net (173.194.33.119): icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=799 ms
but that shouldn't cause 40 second loading times and non-functional faucet should it? |
|
|
|
1 Hour and 20 Minutes to go !!! 13PM? |
|
|
|
function crashPointFromHash(serverSeed, clientSeed) {
function divisible(hash, mod) {
// We will read in 4 hex at a time, but the first chunk might be a bit smaller
// So ABCDEFGHIJ should be chunked like AB CDEF GHIJ
var val = 0;
var o = hash.length % 4;
for (var i = o > 0 ? o - 4 : 0; i < hash.length; i += 4) {
val = ((val << 16) + parseInt(hash.substring(i, i+4), 16)) % mod;
}
return val === 0;
}
var hash = crypto.createHmac('sha256', serverSeed).update(clientSeed).digest('hex');
/* In 1 of 101 games the game crashes instantly. */
if (divisible(hash, 101))
return 0;
/* Use the most significant 52-bit from the hash
to calculate the crash point */
var h = parseInt(hash.slice(0,52/4),16);
var e = Math.pow(2,52);
return Math.floor((100 * e - h) / (e - h));
}
Or, in English: To get from the sha256 hash to the crashpoint: 1) if the hash is exactly divisible by 101, crashpoint is 0x 2) otherwise crashpoint is (1 + 99e/(e-h)) / 100 to 2 decimal places, where e is 2^52 and h is the first 13 characters of the hash Intuitively: h ranges from 0 to 2^52-1. If h is very small, e-h is very big, 99e/(e-h) is very close to 99, and the crashpoint is 1.00x. If h is very big, e-h is small, 99e/(e-h) is very big, and the crashpoint is huge. |
|
|
|
Updated staking. Down a bit after the withdrawals, and stake weight on the network is up as well. Current average about one stake every 3 hours.
22. 2015-12-03 / stake 9.9995 / 9324.6816 / 1.01420487 / 9194.08088942 [height 757269, net of tx fee paid]
24. 2015-12-04 / stake 6.9994 / 8331.681 / 1.01505761 / 8208.08680578 [height 758570]
Any idea why the last two staked totals you credited are both x.999y? Seems a little strange. |
|
|
|
Voting is soon ready?
I'm hoping to add voting to Just-Dice today. In the mean time, if you have any petitions to propose, you can register them on the blockchain as follows: 1) write the petition in a text file. be specific, give numbers. make it so that if your petition gains widespread approval there won't be any argument as to what it is we have actually all agreed upon 2) sha256 hash your text file 3) take the first 8 hex digits of the sha256 hash; that's your petition ID 4) upload the text somewhere, along with its hash; I like http://txti.es/ - it's quick and easy, and lets you choose which URL you want. 5) make a transaction on the CLAM blockchain with speech "create clamour <sha256> <url>" where <sha256> is the hash from step 2, and <url> is the URL from step 4.
Note: in step 4 I would suggest having http://txti.es/<pid> be the URL for each petition with a petition ID of <pid> - but that's up to you. I registered http://txti.es/clamour and intend to keep it up to date with any reasonable petitions. For some definition of "reasonable". Note that it will be possible to see a list of all registered petitions by running "listclamours" in the forthcoming CLAM client release.
For example, I made a test petition. Step 1: I put it in text file: $ cat /tmp/petition1.txt
Test petition 1.
Not a real petition.
Just for testing
$ Step 2: I hashed it: $ sha256sum /tmp/petition1.txt
fd7fd6bbd86c072f6e4e323905154b7b40ee5c5fdd786ea574e59d58c2fc0bb5 /tmp/petition1.txt
$
Step 3: The petition ID is fd7fd6bb, the first 8 characters of the hash from step 3. Step 4: I uploaded it to txti.es, as http://txti.es/fd7fd6bbStep 5: I made a transaction with speech " create clamour fd7fd6bbd86c072f6e4e323905154b7b40ee5c5fdd786ea574e59d58c2fc0bb5 http://txti.es/fd7fd6bb" by using the CLAMspeech field when withdrawing from my Just-Dice account. Now anyone can vote for that petition by putting " clamour fd7fd6bb" in their CLAMspeech when staking. Just-Dice investors can support the petition by including " fd7fd6bb" in the list of petitions they support on the account tab (once I put that change live, in a few hours I hope). |
|
|
|
We are not Dadice and I will give anyone 10 BTC to prove otherwise.
What would you accept as proof? Seriously it may be fun to take the piss out of the new guy, but at a point, you just turn into a annoying fuckhead. settle the fuck down or at least try and prove something..
DaDice had rude unprofessional support staff too. But I don't suppose that proves anything; it could simply be a coincidence. |
|
|
|
I buy more clams every 8 hours so long as the Just-Dice investment ticker keeps increasing, its gone up around 60,000 CLAMS in 3 days which is a decent amount in this low volume period.
I think most of that can be explained by Poloniex having daily withdrawal limits. People bought a lot of CLAMs from curious a few days ago but weren't able to withdraw them all at once. |
|
|
|
This. https://youtu.be/6Pnqp5n9pgEWho can draw arrows and labels: "Doog", "Whale yellow side digger" and "CLAM community" in that short 71sec. video? That's very funny. I think we're at about 0:56 right now.  |
|
|
|
left out of your pie chart is staked clams that are in the pool but not dug and that number is big
You're right. Let's add those in. As of now:  One year from now:  Ten years from now:  Over time the staking overwhelms the initial distribution. But it takes a long time for staking to have any serious effect on the relative size of that undug yellow section. |
|
|
|
Reducing the entire problem to "(current) block-creators decide everything" is oversimplifying to a dangerous degree.
OK, so who should "decide everything", if not the coin's stakeholders? Exactly that is what i thought too. Though i think that danger is now avoided isn't it? Price stabilizes and the fork is dead or am i missing something?
I think this is what you are missing: Before this whale digger appeared, around 72k old addresses had been dug up. That's 2.2% of the initial distribution. Now that the whale digger has apparently finished, around 178k old addresses have been dug up. That's 5.5% of the initial distribution. There's 94.5% of the initial distribution still undug. People seem to be thinking that the whale digger's 3.3% is somehow significant, rather than being only 1/30th of the initial distribution. This is a single guy who probably abused a bunch of faucets. Think about what happens if the Silk Road wallet ever gets dug up. Or the MtGox wallet. BTC-e. SatoshiDice. MyBitcoin. Pirate's Ponzi wallet. The various big mining pools. And so on. There are many more potential whale diggers out there. BAC was actively petitioning the government to release the confiscated Silk Road private keys so he could dig the associated CLAMs. tl;dr: one guy digging 3.3% of the initial distribution != "danger is now avoided". His actions are tiny in the scale of things. Edit: some people find a graphical representation easier to understand. Everyone was freaking about about the impact of the orange area, but we're supposed to somehow not worry about the yellow area?  I do agree with the sentiment that some have expressed that We Survived the Great Digging Panic of 2015 and with the right response that can make the coin stronger and more resilient. But then you still have some people approaching it more from a FUD perspective ("Okay, but what about the next whale digger?! zOMG!!"), sadly.
Why do you call that "FUD"? 94.5% of the initial distribution is still unclaimed. Are you arguing with that number, or you think it doesn't matter that this massive inflation we've just seen could happen again repeatedly in the future? |
|
|
|
Ok, good feedback, were you able to try it on Ubuntu and Chrome? We have reported success using this.
I don't use either, due to privacy concerns. I use Chromium, which is Chrome without all the Google stuff in it, and Debian which is Ubuntu without the spyware. The flash poker client works until I click the 'tournaments' tab, at which point it shows about 10 and a half rows of tournaments and locks up hard. We would be interested in seeing a possible image of this or video Dooglus. Is this possible to share? Yeah. I reported this a few days ago in this thread and posted this image:  Note how the last displayed tournament line is only partially complete. The blue stops part way across. I just tried again with a slightly narrower browser and got slightly different results. Before switching to the tournament tab everything's fine:  After switching to the tournament tab it's locked up, and the last line is incomplete:  I reloaded and tried again. It froze in the exact same place. Right-clicking shows the version of the flash plugin I'm using:  Note that in all three of these crashes the broken line is the "1K CAGE" game. I don't know if that's relevant. I also see that the column headings don't line up right with the content. The "Tournament Name" column isn't wide enough to fit the long names in, and it's causing the following columns to be messed up. Under "state" we see "free", which should be under "buy-in", etc. I don't know if the same happens in the Windows flash plug-in or not. |
|
|
|
question about the "market BTC->USD" conversion for WPN tournaments... If I cash in a tournament I play, do I get the price when the tournament started or when I bust/win? (seeing as late reg. is ridiculously long on many) Any information is appreciated.
I think it would have to be the price when you get paid. Suppose you buy in to a big tournament for $500 and end up winning $100k. WPN are going to pay betcoin in US dollars, not Bitcoin, and so betcoin are going to have to buy $100k worth of Bitcoin on an exchange. What if the price of Bitcoin had doubled since you bought in to the tournament? They're going to have to spend $200k to get you $100k worth of BTC at your buy-in price. It's not like they're going to buy the $100k worth when you buy in, just in case you win. Because if you don't, and the price of Bitcoin halves while you're playing, they've lost $50k on the deal. I don't know though - maybe they're happy to eat such losses. |
|
|
|
Ok, good feedback, were you able to try it on Ubuntu and Chrome? We have reported success using this.
I don't use either, due to privacy concerns. I use Chromium, which is Chrome without all the Google stuff in it, and Debian which is Ubuntu without the spyware. The flash poker client works until I click the 'tournaments' tab, at which point it shows about 10 and a half rows of tournaments and locks up hard. |
|
|
|
If your goal is to make 1 Btc profit, for example, it does not matter what strategy you pick, the odds will end up the same in the end. If you pick the low risk low reward strat, you will have to play more rolls in order to get to the goal so in the end you end up having the same odds as the other strategy
This is incorrect. There are better and worse strategies. How can there is any better strategy except doing martingale? But you really need a lot of balance for sure to recover your bet. And I think worse strategy is just because you are no luck Maybe you didn't understand what I said. I am saying that some strategies are better than others for doubling your bankroll. Astargath was saying they are all the same, and all have 49.5% chance of success. He's wrong. |
|
|
|
Hmmm, It might be best if you actually read the link you put up. He is saying hello to BCT members and congrat to us for launch, not selling coins on this specific advert.
After I commented that he was too expensive, he cut his price in half. You're welcome. As far as his actual selling advert, he is nearly always in the cheapest top 6 on front page for selling coins. (Customers buying their coins)
Yesterday he wasn't. He was charging over $1000 per BTC. If you are throwing stupid stuff up, at least do some research, we welcome any feedback and comments, but trolling for no reason is just not cool
I'm not trolling. Yesterday his price was very unreasonable. Today it's better. we are doing our best NOT to attack back on stupid comments that have NO value to anyone
If you are trying not to attack, maybe don't refer to comments as "stupid" and players as "trolls"! |
|
|
|
As a matter of fact, just never deposit to any casino ever.
Except for the ones in your signature, right?  |
|
|
|
Are you the same people as betcoin.ag?
i think no, they are betcoin.tm They have a very similar name, and seem to offer almost all the same games. I'm not signing a message saying I love them if they're the same people as betcoin.ag. I don't love those guys at all. I just signed up at betcoin.tm to take a look around, and I see confusing information about various bonuses. For example, under "FIRST DEPOSIT BONUS": if you deposit 1 BTC you will receive an additional 3.01 BTC in your account. to withdraw any winnings from this you need to bet 888x 4.01 BTC ( 1 from deposit and 3.01 from the bonus ) so in total you would need to wager 1555.88 BTC
Fair enough - I deposit 1 BTC and have to wager 1.5k to clear the bonus. But then: If you meet the unlock requirement for your bonus, the maximum amount of your balance which becomes available is the original bonus amount.
What does that mean? Suppose I deposit 1 BTC and manage to turn it into 1000 BTC while wagering 1.5k BTC. Am I only allowed to keep 4.01 BTC of it? That seems to be what that condition is saying, and it seems very wrong. The wagering requirement is huge. After wagering 1.5k times my initial deposit I am very likely to either be bust or up a lot. It's unlikely that I'm only up a few BTC by that point. Putting a tiny cap on the amount I can withdraw in the unlikely event that I profit a lot makes this a very unattractive offer. Edit: I found another problem. The "About" page says: Advanced computer encryption algorithms ensure that every game is provably fair, and BetCoin™ games have the lowest house edge and the highest return to player ratio (RTP) available worldwide.
but I checked out the dice game and it actually has the highest house edge and lowest return to player ration (RTP) available worldwide. I guess there's something wrong with the advanced computer encryption algorithms!  >>> 100 - 1.9574 * 50 2.13 That's a massive 2.13% house edge, biggest even than Satoshidice's 1.9% (last time I checked). Just-Dice, bitdice.me, primedice, prcdice, betcoin.ag, safedice, fastdice, and pretty much every other dice game I can think of has a 1% house edge. So how can you claim this 2.13% game has the lowest house edge available worldwide? Edit: I was wrong. safedice is 0.5%:  PrimeDice 1%:  bitdice.me 1%:  betcoin.ag 1%:  etc. I'd like to sign a message saying I love you guys, but my first impressions aren't good. Edit: I also don't see any way to secure my account with 2FA. You say "BetCoin™ customers don’t need to worry about their funds’ safety, as they enjoy state-of-the-art, hacker-proof security", but you don't even offer google authenticator protection? With our system, even if your account password or your email account are compromised, the funds on your BetCoin™ account will be safe as the perpetrators will not be able to cash them out to another wallet than the one you have registered with.
Maybe you're going to ask me for a signed message before I can withdraw, but that's little comfort if a hacker is able to log in and gamble away my balance using just my username and password. Or do I need to sign a message each time I log in as well? |
|
|
|
|
Are you the same people as betcoin.ag?
|
|
|
|
Just to clarify, I have no desire to splinter the community either.
I would have thought this idea would have been seen as a less drastic move, then the current voting mechanism based on holdings.
If a vote is made and agreed to changing the protocol,
I assume the damage would be much greater than what "Cooked Clams" would do.
In regards to forking Clam to do this, people would only support this if it was by the Clam Team.
I was only suggestion it as an alternative to a change to the protocol.
As I understand it, what you are proposing is a new currency, forked from the existing CLAM currency. I don't see how that doesn't splinter the community. You'll have those people who keep using the current CLAM currency, and those who burn their CLAMs to get "Cooked CLAMs". You'll have two separate blockchains, two different markets on Poloniex, two different prices. Or did I misunderstand? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
