You can use this:

https://just-dice.com/api/supply

{"moneysupply":1541886313048927,"digsupply":81867962870962,"stakesupply":64446172641730,"activesupply":146314135512693}

You probably want activesupply/1e8.

I'm not saying it's a scam. Perhaps part of the problem is the language barrier. What comes across as crappy customer support may simple be the result of support agents not understanding the language well enough. It's hard to tell the difference between being issues being willfully ignored and honestly misunderstood.


That seems to suggest that around 20% of your users have trouble every day. That in itself is a worrying sign. What are they all having so much trouble with? It seems to me that you have too many players on a site that isn't really ready for prime-time yet. Fix the bugs first, and then focus on attracting players. Doing it in the opposite order is just making more work for yourselves.


I'm not familiar with either BetCris or WPN, and so haven't ever experienced their customer support. How does it compare to yours?

Forget the word "scam". All I said was that the only place I've seen negative feedback repeatedly ignored or labelled as "FUD" is for services which ended up being scams. Legit services tend respond to negative feedback in a more professional manner.


Where was "Monday at the latest" stated? I've not seen it anywhere. Is it possible that you are replying to me via some channel I'm unaware of? That could explain a lot.

Conversely aren't you also saying that MP is the worst place for investors to invest, and that they'd even be better off at PRC, paying the highest commission of all investment sites?

This is the first time I've worried about betcoin being a scam.

One thing all scam site threads have in common is that negative criticism, no matter how valid, is rejected as "FUD" or "trolling".

Is that the best you can do? How about actually addressing the concerns people have raised rather than claiming that there is a "discussion" going on, while discounting the views of anyone who disagrees with you?

Meanwhile the dice continue to roll my way:



and I'm having no trouble at all withdrawing my winnings:



So if it is a scam, at least it is "paying" at the moment...

Please guys, if you're legit, step up your game and get on top of the customer support situation.

While I don't think the tone of DrkLvr_'s reply was helpful, I think I see things the same way as him.

If the digger makes more money, the rest of us make less. There's no way for everyone to make more.

You talked about how when you are a "top 10" holder of a coin and want out, you sell it slowly so that you get a better price for it. That means you make more than if you would by dumping it quickly, but the buyers *pay* more than they would if you had dumped it quickly. That's good for Ivan, and bad for everyone else.

Somebody selling 500k CLAMs into an 800k market is always going to depress the price. Selling them cheap is better for *us* than selling them expensive.

If you're looking for someone to "blame", I think you need to look at the developers who came up with the initial distribution method. They're the ones who (probably unknowingly) gave 500k CLAMs to a single person. In retrospect, rewarding people with CLAMs for filling the BTC blockchain with unspent outputs wasn't the best idea. The rest was pretty much inevitable from that point. Each market participant acts in their own perceived best interest.

Looks good. Is there any way of playing it using a Linux computer?

I've heard of people having success running Windows in a virtual machine inside Linux, but I don't have a copy of Windows.

I'd like to enter, but I don't want to buy (or download) Windows.

I'm guessing this must be running across multiple sites, based on the size of the prize pool guarantees. Do any of the other sites support non-Windows players?

He's done digging, apparently. But not done selling.

And when you say "better", better for who? It's a zero sum game. Better for the digger means worse for the rest of us, doesn't it?

I've turned 1 BTC into 6.1 BTC so far, mostly playing at 6%. I know I should quit while I'm ahead, but it's so tempting to carry on.


Sweet!

I'm wondering if there's any update on Ticket #32870: missing poker status points. I got stiffed on some VIP points, but haven't heard anything about it for over 24 hours now:





Notice also that "Betcoin Andrew"'s avatar image is broken. Inspecting the page source, I see the image tag points to https://www.betcoin.ag/files/betcoin/styles/thumbnail/public/?itok=Ae86M2jw, but when I try viewing that image, I see an error message:



Can you explain the terms I asked about ("theoretical rake" and "win/loss")? I don't think the support guy I was talking to understood my question, because he seems to have ignored it.

I understand that you're mad about the price dropping, but I don't think your two sentences make sense together.

The digger had a certain large amount of CLAM to dig. He wanted to sell it all. If you're right that he could have profited 10x more, that means he could have taken 10x more value from us CLAM holders. Wouldn't that have fucked up the coin more? We would end up having bought the same number of CLAMs from him, but having paid 10x more for them. How is that good for us?


I think that if it ever came to the point that I felt I had to stop using CLAM at Just-Dice, it would make more sense to use an established more stable coin (like BTC (but don't tell uvwvj)) and simply put a cap on the bankroll size to avoid things getting out of control like they did before.

We're not near that point now. I just don't think it's worth the hassle of making a new coin, setting up a block explorer, petitioning to get it listed on exchanges, having to listen to attacks from all the people who disagree with the arbitrary choice of initial distribution, and all that stuff that goes along with making a new coin.

In the 'biggest wins' tab I see wins over 2 BTC, so I guess it used to be higher than it is now.

Also, it shows the time but not the date.

Also, I've been having amazing luck at dice:



I realise it's provably fair, but it seems I can't lose at the moment!

It seems the article you quote contradicts your statement rather than confirming it.

It says that the same numbers were drawn on 6th and 10th, but different ones were drawn on 7th and 8th.

It seems to me that there's about a 1% chance each year of having the exact same draw happen twice within a 1 year period:

>>> 49*48*47*46*45*44/6/5/4/3/2/1/365/365
104

But yeah, maybe it's fixed. Who can say.

That's not true - your chance of doubling your bankroll depends a lot on your strategy.

For an example of a very bad strategy, suppose you go all-in at 98% over and over until you lose, or double your bankroll:

  each time you win, you multiply your bankroll by 99/98 = 1.0102040816
  so to double your bankroll, you need to win math.log(2, 99.0/98) = 68.27441 times
  the chance of winning 68 times in a row is (98.0/100) ** 68 = 0.25314 = 25.314% - much lower than 49.5%

For an example of a better strategy, try:

  bet 0.5 at 33%
  if you win, you get 99/33 = 3x, so you get 1.5 back, a profit of 1 - you've doubled your money

  if you lose, bet the other 0.5 at 24.75%
  if you win, you get 99/24.75 = 4x, so you get 2 back - you've doubled your money

  the only way it goes wrong is if you lose both the 33% and the 24.75% - the chance of that is (1-0.33) * (1-0.2475) = 0.504175
  so the chance of success is 1 - 0.504175 = 0.495825 = 49.5825% - a fraction higher than 49.5

So it's possible to find strategies that are better or worse than 49.5% chance of doubling up.

You make a lot of sense. I don't know how I got drawn into this discussion again. I was trying to stay out of it. I don't know what the answer is, and should refrain from talking as if I do.

What was the glitch? Does it explain why I didn't get any status points for the session where I earned the table-starter bonus? Will the error ever be made right?

Yes, I could, but I won't. I don't consider the CLAMs in the JD bankroll mine. They belong to the investors. For the voting phase I will have JD vote according to the wishes of its investors. For any subsequent soft-fork phase, I hadn't thought about that until now. I guess I need to have an option for each investor to decide whether they want to go with the soft fork or not, calculate which percentage of the bankroll is in favour, and use that percentage to decide how many blocks to stake in favour of the fork. That works, right?

If we're going to get hung up on what I *could* do, I could right now decide to orphan all blocks not staked by JD and take all the block rewards for myself. Hell, I could just steal the whole bankroll and not let anyone withdraw. All of those things are pretty easy to detect however, and quickly trash the value of the CLAMs I'm holding.

So long as I stick to my word and allow the owners of the coins I'm holding to have their say (in voting and in agreeing to any forks) then I don't see a problem. Although of course it would be better if no single entity had custody of more than 50% of the coins.

I was talking to Creative about this a couple of days ago. I was voicing my concerns that giving voting power proportional to stake means that the rich get to have their own way at the expense of the poor.

As Benjamin Franklin apparently never said:

  "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."

I worry that the CLAM rich will vote to disenfranchise the CLAM poor - but Creative points out that the voting system is only a provably fair way of gathering information about consensus. Any change would still be subject to the usual soft-fork rules, requiring a super-majority to be in favour of the fork before it activated. And the "CLAM rich" would have to be pretty short sighted to vote in any change which would be seen as unfair - because that would damage the price of the coin, and so end up affecting them negatively. Adding the ability to express your opinion on-chain in a well-defined way doesn't cause any harm, and allows us to get a clearer view of what the community wants than the current best system we have - that of shouting at each other in forum posts.

1) If it is truly exponential then each extra service multiplies the price by the same amount. Since 1->2 multiplies by 3, 2->3 should also multiply by 3, so it should be 9x with 3.

2) But it isn't exponential. After JD started taking CLAM, bitdice.me and fortunejack.com also started accepting it, but the price didn't increase much at all on that news. bustaclam.com too.


I've looked at doing something like that in the past, but came to the conclusion that it's probably not a good idea. If there was some way of giving "staking rights" to a third party without also giving "spending rights", then more people would feel comfortable signing away their staking rights. That would lead to bigger staking pools. Currently JD doesn't have much competition, because it is the most trusted, and so even though smooth's pool is free, people would rather pay the 10% for "a name they can trust". If you didn't need to trust smooth, everyone would stake with him, and he'd be able to 51% the network. I think it's best for that reason not to separate "staking rights" from "spending rights", to force people to think seriously about who they trust to stake their coin.

None of that is any reflection on smooth's character. I'm only using him as an example of "someone with less rep than JD".


It's hard to understand what you're asking. I don't know of any web wallets for CLAM (unless you count JD, bitdice, etc.). The CLAM client won't listen for RPC commands on external interfaces by default - it only listens on localhost. Comodo seems to be a company that issues SSL certificates.

If you can be clearer in what it is you're asking, I can hopefully help you better.


I think part of it is that before this massive dig, people were kind of believing that it would never really happen. "Sure there are a bunch of big wallets out there, but if anyone was going to dig them they would have done it by now". But now that it happened once, people realise that it can easily happen again. Then there's also the fact that we were probably going through a price bubble when he started, too. The price was rising steadily, so nobody was selling, so the price was rising... A sudden increase in supply can easily burst such a bubble.

Note also that it's not only a "bit higher supply". Before the digger the supply was 500k staked + 330k dug = 830k. Now it's 650k staked + 830k dug = 1480k, so the supply has almost doubled in the last 3 months. Even if we don't count staking, the digger's 500k represents a 60% inflation of the money supply as a percentage of the 830k supply we had when he started (500.0 * 100 / 830 = 60.24).

Edit: updated digging charts show it has really flattened off since our whale digger stopped:





Edit2: I miss KLYE. That last chart is clearly in need of a few more lines to turn it into a dinosaur with a gigantic penis.

I'd just like to state that I am not bidding on MoneyPot, and am not part of any group that is.

It was brought to my attention that QuickSeller was PMing MoneyPot app owners spreading lies about me for whatever reason. Rest assumed I don't have any intention of buying MoneyPot. And as of last week's pevpot draw no longer even invest there.

Your addresses are worth 4.6 CLAMs whenever you dig them (according to the rules as they currently stand).

It makes no sense to delay digging them. If you dig them now, you can start staking them immediately. By this time next year you'll have almost twice as many, through staking.

If you wait until this time next year, you'll still only get 4.6 per address, even assuming the digging rules haven't changed by then.

As for stopping digging after 3 or 6 months, that's for the community to decide. Creative is putting together a system that will allow CLAM stakeholders to vote on-chain for proposals that change the CLAM consensus rules. Your proposal would be one such thing you could vote for. If it's popular enough, it will happen.

You may not have been around the gambling subforum when dicebitco.in was running, but let me remind you:

 * Just-Dice had recently shut down, leaving a big hole in the "investment dice site" market

 * Lots of people suddenly found themselves with BTC burning a hole in their pocket, and nowhere trustworthy to invest it; we were having to choose between the fancy looking new sites and PRCdice, which had its own problems at the time

 * dicebitco.in appeared from nowhere, looking very polished and professional, and offering decent signature ad payments

 * Lots of forum members started advertising for them. I ran their ad in my signature for a month myself before reconsidering

There's no coincidence here. Pick any random forum member involved in the gambling sub-forum at the time and the chances are pretty high that they ran the dicebitco.in ad for a while.