There is absolutely nothing stopping anybody releasing their tax returns while the audit with the IRS is going on.
....
Yeah, that's you trying to push someone else into doing something. You can ask nicely. Naw, leftists would rather sue to get them, or outright steal them. Ah, you don't approve of the democrats not being nice and filing so many lawsuits. Makes sense that you found a home in the Trump cult. There's really not much to be proud of in the behavior of the corrupt political and power system we loosely refer to as "the Democrats" for the last four years. Perhaps there were times when the Republicans were similarly corrupt and the Democrats were not, and perhaps there were times when both were, or neither was. We'd have to EXCLUDE all the historical decades when the Democrats were the party of slavery, the KKK, and of white supremacy. We'd also certainly have to exclude the Obama years, when Chicago style corruption was brought to Washington. That leaves a period from about 1960 to 2008 for consideration. Both parties have evolved since the time when Republicans were the progressive party that represented more cities, fought for the rights of immigrants and minorities and was mostly in the North. Luckily not all Republicans are accepting what has become of the GOP since becoming the party of Trump: one example |
|
|
|
|
Gonna be Christmas day for BADecker and crew if Trump ends up being asymptomatic and looking healthy on the other side of this quarantine.
|
|
|
|
Trump is not going to not participate in the next debate.
You'd have to have a crystal ball to know that. Who knows, he could get covid or something. Not nice. It takes about two weeks to get over a mild case of coronavirus, and up to 6 weeks for a severe case. Trump likely did not get the virus today, so that 2 week window has already started. The next presidential debate is in 13 days. I would also note that Biden was in the same room as Trump for 90 minutes just two days ago, so it is very possible that he also has it, or that he got it at the debate. Not good. I would be willing to bet that Trump will debate Biden. If he only has a mild case, he will likely debate in separate rooms. If he has a more severe case, he will likely drop out of the race. I'm not saying that he will or wont, because I don't know. That's my point. There's time for Trump to turn the positive test into political gain by Nov 4th, it's also possible he dies the night before. |
|
|
|
Trump is not going to not participate in the next debate.
You'd have to have a crystal ball to know that. Who knows, he could get covid or something. |
|
|
|
There is absolutely nothing stopping anybody releasing their tax returns while the audit with the IRS is going on.
....
Yeah, that's you trying to push someone else into doing something. You can ask nicely. Naw, leftists would rather sue to get them, or outright steal them. Ah, you don't approve of the democrats not being nice and filing so many lawsuits. Makes sense that you found a home in the Trump cult. |
|
|
|
Answer
The important thing to note is that the card deck is shuffled before the game starts and before the player seed is passed and known by the server. This is guaranteed by revealing the server hash. Let's suppose the deck was shuffled or deliberately constructed in favor of the house. After the player starts a new game their seed is passed to the server. The server uses the seed to calculate the shift number (it's described how it's calculated on the provably fair verification page). Then the card deck is cut based on the shift number. The number of cards that will be cut is not known in advance (and can not be predicted without knowing the client seed), thus it's impossible to construct a deck that with any possible shift number would still provide advantage to the house. This makes it useless for the house to try to cheat and initially shuffle the deck in its favor.
No, it's not. If the deck is constructed so that no A, K, Q, J, or T of the same suit had less than 11 cards between them, with the last card being considered next to the first card - a royal flush would be impossible to hit regardless of the seed the player chooses.\ In order for the game to be provably fair, the player seed needs to effect the initial shuffle - not simply where the pre shuffled deck starts dealing from. Answer
The layout of the reels is provided in the each Slots game page.
Yeah I already mentioned I found them. Thanks. I was able to find the reel layouts, it's good you provide them.
But like in video poker, the player seed is limited in what it can influence since the initial result is generated non transparently. |
|
|
|
...
What Trump did might or might not be classed as smart, it depends on what happens in the coming days when he/if he releases his tax returns
....
That's completely, totally meaningless in the presence of an ongoing, non-resolved, not-finalized tax audit. The very meaning of the audit is that the numbers are not settled. Duh.... An audit occurs after you've filed your taxes. It's basically just the IRS double checking to make sure everything is accurate. |
|
|
|
BUMP
Those screen shots I posted are from your game info pages.
Where are the reel layouts for slots?
How can you prove your card games are fair when the server generates the 'randomly shuffled deck' on it's own?
Hi, on each game page, you will find info symbol. When clicked, you will see ID and hash. After the game, check in detail on the Account > Transactions> Transaction ID > VerifyThe same on card games and all games at all. https://coins777.com Thanks. I was able to find the reel layouts, it's good you provide them. So the way you're determining the result in slots and video poker is by generating a result, hashing and providing that to the player for later verification, and then taking the player seed to mutate it into the final result. The problem is that there's no way to prove to the player that you aren't intentionally manipulating the initial result before hashing it and providing it to the player. The video poker example is the easiest to grasp: In order for the player to have a chance at hitting a royal flush, there needs to be 5 royal flush cards spanning no more than 10 cards in the initial 'shuffle'. If there aren't, the player has a 0% chance of hitting a royal flush no matter where they 'cut' the deck. You could be checking each generated result to see if 5 royal cards are close enough and, if they are, generate a new one and replace it, and the player would never know. As long as this is the case, your game isn't provably fair. Does that make sense? Seems you intend to just ignore and hope this goes away. Bad idea. Now that you're aware that your games aren't provably fair, you're intentionally deceiving players by leaving the provably fair claims up. Why not just take them down and be honest about the whole thing? Hi, i don't understand what kind of problem you find. I have already said that all games are conscientious and verifiable. Game developers have no intention of creating games that would be dishonest. Game developers make money by creating games well. Sign up and try free https://coins777.com       It's not a matter of whether players are being cheated or what the software developers intentions are. If you can't prove that the games are fair, you shouldn't tell people they are provably fair. Think about the example I provided: Using your system, you could cheat players by making sure that no deck is used that contains 5 royal cards within 10 cards of each other, and the player would never know. Therefore, it's not provably fair. I'm not saying you are cheating players. I'm not saying you will cheat them in the future. I'm not even saying you have the technical knowledge to cheat cheat them. All I'm saying is that if you did cheat players, players wouldn't be able to prove it. So don't tell players the games are provably fair, because they aren't. |
|
|
|
Hopefully these debates get better. Total win for Biden though as a messy debate helps him. Trump needed a great debate and he didn't get it.
The second presidential debate is likely to be the exact opposite of the first. It's moderated by Steve Scully, "the most patient man on television". Most people are probably imagining that Scully will be even weaker than Wallace, but as someone who's watched hundreds of hours of C-SPAN's Washington Journal over the years, let me assure you that he won't be, by far. Scully has decades of experience in moderating, he's the most active of the C-SPAN hosts at pushing back at callers, and he's the most willing to insert his own bias. His bias is that of someone who's lived in the DC bubble for so long that it's all he can conceive. He's someone who actually thinks that MSNBC journalists are unbiased, that the national security state is staffed entirely with honest actors, that the system made sense and was basically working pre-Trump, etc. While I'm sure that Scully will honestly try to be fair, he is fundamentally biased against everything that Trump stands for, and he will feel duty-bound to moderate him very harshly. I predict that the second debate will end up breaking into two disjointed pieces: the first will be a raucous debate between Trump and Steve Scully, and the second will be a peaceful, boring townhall between Biden and some citizens, with Trump muted. I predict there won't be a second debate. The Debate commission has already signaled some sort of format change so that the next one will be more civil. I imagine this will involve muting a candidate if it's not their turn to speak or if they won't stfu - Trump won't be a fan and refuse to participate. He doesn't have a choice but to participate. Trump checking out of the debate means Biden wins by default. With how much he's down, this isn't a smart campaign strategy. Sure he does. He already laid the ground work last winter when he said he wouldn't participate if he thought it was unfair and complained about the board of the debate commission being never Trumpers. Plus he's been spreading conspiracy theories about Biden cheating for weeks. In the end he can make up whatever reason he wants and plenty of voters will either believe him or not care. |
|
|
|
Hopefully these debates get better. Total win for Biden though as a messy debate helps him. Trump needed a great debate and he didn't get it.
The second presidential debate is likely to be the exact opposite of the first. It's moderated by Steve Scully, "the most patient man on television". Most people are probably imagining that Scully will be even weaker than Wallace, but as someone who's watched hundreds of hours of C-SPAN's Washington Journal over the years, let me assure you that he won't be, by far. Scully has decades of experience in moderating, he's the most active of the C-SPAN hosts at pushing back at callers, and he's the most willing to insert his own bias. His bias is that of someone who's lived in the DC bubble for so long that it's all he can conceive. He's someone who actually thinks that MSNBC journalists are unbiased, that the national security state is staffed entirely with honest actors, that the system made sense and was basically working pre-Trump, etc. While I'm sure that Scully will honestly try to be fair, he is fundamentally biased against everything that Trump stands for, and he will feel duty-bound to moderate him very harshly. I predict that the second debate will end up breaking into two disjointed pieces: the first will be a raucous debate between Trump and Steve Scully, and the second will be a peaceful, boring townhall between Biden and some citizens, with Trump muted. I predict there won't be a second debate. The Debate commission has already signaled some sort of format change so that the next one will be more civil. I imagine this will involve muting a candidate if it's not their turn to speak or if they won't stfu - Trump won't be a fan and refuse to participate. |
|
|
|
Those screen shots I posted are from your game info pages.
Where are the reel layouts for slots?
How can you prove your card games are fair when the server generates the 'randomly shuffled deck' on it's own?
Hi, on each game page, you will find info symbol. When clicked, you will see ID and hash. After the game, check in detail on the Account > Transactions> Transaction ID > VerifyThe same on card games and all games at all. https://coins777.com Thanks. I was able to find the reel layouts, it's good you provide them. So the way you're determining the result in slots and video poker is by generating a result, hashing and providing that to the player for later verification, and then taking the player seed to mutate it into the final result. The problem is that there's no way to prove to the player that you aren't intentionally manipulating the initial result before hashing it and providing it to the player. The video poker example is the easiest to grasp: In order for the player to have a chance at hitting a royal flush, there needs to be 5 royal flush cards spanning no more than 10 cards in the initial 'shuffle'. If there aren't, the player has a 0% chance of hitting a royal flush no matter where they 'cut' the deck. You could be checking each generated result to see if 5 royal cards are close enough and, if they are, generate a new one and replace it, and the player would never know. As long as this is the case, your game isn't provably fair. Does that make sense? Seems you intend to just ignore and hope this goes away. Bad idea. Now that you're aware that your games aren't provably fair, you're intentionally deceiving players by leaving the provably fair claims up. Why not just take them down and be honest about the whole thing? Hi, i don't understand what kind of problem you find. I have already said that all games are conscientious and verifiable. Game developers have no intention of creating games that would be dishonest. Game developers make money by creating games well. Sign up and try free https://coins777.com It's not a matter of whether players are being cheated or what the software developers intentions are. If you can't prove that the games are fair, you shouldn't tell people they are provably fair. Think about the example I provided: Using your system, you could cheat players by making sure that no deck is used that contains 5 royal cards within 10 cards of each other, and the player would never know. Therefore, it's not provably fair. I'm not saying you are cheating players. I'm not saying you will cheat them in the future. I'm not even saying you have the technical knowledge to cheat cheat them. All I'm saying is that if you did cheat players, players wouldn't be able to prove it. So don't tell players the games are provably fair, because they aren't. |
|
|
|
Look at the implied volatility on Put options (which are profitable if prices declines) on the S&P 500, and other major indecies after the election. Implied volatility goes way up for Put options contracts that expire after the election ends.
The fear of a disputed election is the biggest factor in the spiking IV for November - although it is true that even without Trump refusing to agree to a peaceful transfer of power if he were to lose - the short term markets would likely look better with a Trump victory. But that's certainly not proof of long term anything. The op-eds are interesting, but you aren't really proving anything either. You would need a crystal ball or some other thing that doesn't exist to back up your claims. |
|
|
|
Trump campaign accidentally blasted this email a few hours ago:  |
|
|
|
....
so who does he owe the money 💵 to?
Interesting question, because typically, you'd have no right to know such a thing. But now, Trump is POTUS. I can see how people would want to know that he was not beholden to foreign powers or agents of them. Russian oligarchs would be a good example. Typically commercial real estate loans are for a seven year period and are then renegotiated. But there are many foreign countries that do not allow non-citizens to own property, and so some form of deal must be made with locals to do something like build a hotel. On becoming POTUS, Trump set the properties aside I believe into a trust, because of exactly these sorts of concerns. I think he said he was going to put them in a blind trust, but then handled the whole thing the same way he handles his taxes. He put Don Jr. and Eric in charge and promised not to tell them what to do, and left himself access to all the money like normal. |
|
|
|
My position would be that the cloudbet return your last deposit to you
They accepted his action and he didn't break any terms. They owe him an apology and his entire account balance. |
|
|
|
Those screen shots I posted are from your game info pages.
Where are the reel layouts for slots?
How can you prove your card games are fair when the server generates the 'randomly shuffled deck' on it's own?
   Hi, on each game page, you will find info symbol. When clicked, you will see ID and hash. After the game, check in detail on the Account > Transactions> Transaction ID > VerifyThe same on card games and all games at all. https://coins777.com Thanks. I was able to find the reel layouts, it's good you provide them. So the way you're determining the result in slots and video poker is by generating a result, hashing and providing that to the player for later verification, and then taking the player seed to mutate it into the final result. The problem is that there's no way to prove to the player that you aren't intentionally manipulating the initial result before hashing it and providing it to the player. The video poker example is the easiest to grasp: In order for the player to have a chance at hitting a royal flush, there needs to be 5 royal flush cards spanning no more than 10 cards in the initial 'shuffle'. If there aren't, the player has a 0% chance of hitting a royal flush no matter where they 'cut' the deck. You could be checking each generated result to see if 5 royal cards are close enough and, if they are, generate a new one and replace it, and the player would never know. As long as this is the case, your game isn't provably fair. Does that make sense? Seems you intend to just ignore and hope this goes away. Bad idea. Now that you're aware that your games aren't provably fair, you're intentionally deceiving players by leaving the provably fair claims up. Why not just take them down and be honest about the whole thing? |
|
|
|
(This is one of those times where I highly recommend reading the actual report by the journalists who did the research before falling for click bait
The N.Y. times right?? Yeah... Yeah. Always putting their noses in the business of people in power. Remember this one? https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/us/politics/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-email-at-state-department-raises-flags.htmlWhy can't they just mind their own business instead of snitching on our publicly elected leaders? To be clear, everyone knew Trump did not pay taxes back in 2016, so I don't actually think this will have any affect with voters. Billionaires do not get rich cutting checks to Uncle Sam, so there's that.
Is right wing media already trying to convince people that the NYT report was just about Trump not paying taxes back in 2016 and hey he's a billionaire so who cares? Don't fall for it. Read it for yourself. |
|
|
|
Been reading this for the last half hour... too fucking long, they should have made it a tweet. Trump appears to have scammed the IRS for $73 million, or as trumpists would say - such an astute businessman, got the taxpayers to fund his fake billionaire lifestyle. Totally presidential. Interactive timeline is cool: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/09/27/us/donald-trump-taxes-timeline.htmlImpressive how it wasn't your standard 'lied about my income' scam, it was a refund scam. Gotta be brave to pull one of those. Or stupid. |
|
|
|
Things were going excellently before Covid really, but the left has quite successfully blamed Covid on Trump and shut everything they can down to make trump look bad, even admitted in that aoc tweet before she deleted it..
I keep hearing this defense, implying that the democrats are blaming Trump that the virus existed at all. Just to be clear, Trump is being blamed for the covid related decisions he made based on what he knew and when. He's not being blamed 'for covid'. and shut everything they can down to make trump look bad, even admitted in that aoc tweet before she deleted it..
The shutdowns are happening in pretty much every country in the world. The aoc tweet you're referring to never existed. Somebody photoshopped it and a Republican running for congress in FL shared it on facebook and people have been believing it ever since. "Fact check: A fake tweet claims AOC urged governors to shut down businesses to hurt Trump" https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/07/14/fact-check-aoc-didnt-tweet-keeping-economy-shut-down/5352149002/ |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
