|
Are you trying to bury the issue because you understand my explanation?
Why not just remove the provably fair claims so that players are deceived?
|
|
|
|
Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/02/ivanka-trump-donald-trump-tax-affairsRick Wilson, co-founder of the Lincoln Project, a group led by anti-Trump Republican consultants, dismissed the idea of Ivanka running for president in 2024 or beyond. “She and her bizarre android husband are planning great things for their future, but it doesn’t mean they’re gonna be viable in terms of winning and holding higher office,” he said.
Other commentators suggest that, while Ivanka will follow her father’s example by shrugging off this latest political controversy, the legal implications could be more damaging.
Michael D’Antonio, a political analyst and author of The Truth About Trump, said: “I think that she has ambition, period, so there’s no doubt that she imagines herself to be a prominent figure indefinitely. I don’t know Trumps believe that anything that comes out about them is significantly troublesome; they feel that they can talk their way out of anything where their base is concerned.
“But this payment may have criminal repercussions that are more significant. If she knowingly accepted this money and did it with any understanding that it was in order to evade taxes, and then her father signed the tax returns knowingly, both of them could have criminal liability. So I don’t think it’s a small thing that can just be written off as: “Oh well, it’s too bad that she made this mistake.’”----------------- The word going round in Washington seems that both Donald and Ivanka might be in trouble. It seems to be brewing.... By the way that bizarre android husband line mentioned above by Rick Wilson is just pure gold  @JollyGood whether Ivanka is guilty or not, how come such news comes out only during the election year, and most notably just a month before the elections are supposed to take place. Also I’ll second that line Android husband is actually good, but coming back to the topic now Trumps will claim that it’s a witch-hunt against them, and they’ll escape like they usually don’t you’ll think so?. Eg: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/02/trump-coronavirus-briefing-jared-kushner-witch-hunt something like this is going to come soon. Such news has been coming out pretty steadily since Trump was elected. The reason is he is the president. In 2018 the NY Times won a Pulitzer for their massive report (basically a book) on how the Trump family fraudulently avoided tens of millions in taxes when, and how after receiving a massive salary from the age of two years old, Donald Trump basically just helped himself to his fathers fortune and proceeded to lose more money than any other American during the 80s. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html |
|
|
|
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. Maybe an actual example will help you understand. Here's the result of an initial shuffle, before the players seed is used to determine where to 'cut' the deck: D3,C7,S5,S7,HK,DA,C8,S2,DJ,DQ,CA,D7,H3,HT,S6,C2,ST,HA,H9,SA,CT,C3,H7,S3,S4,DT,D8,C4,H6,H5,H2,D2,D5,CJ,S8,D4,D9,SJ,CK,SK,DK,S9,CQ,HQ,H4,C9,C6,H8,C5,D6,HJ,SQ I color coded the royal flush cards. You'll notice that no matter where the deck is cut, the player has no chance at being dealt a royal flush. Can you prove that the the shuffle was not manipulated to make royal flush possibilities happen less often than they should? |
|
|
|
From recent Fox interview: Atlas called the president a “super vigorous man,” adding that he has “never seen anyone with more energy and more vigor, at any age, but particularly at his age.”
“He is a very, very healthy guy,”Kind of reminds me of the first time Kim Jong-Il ever played golf. He was in his mid 50s and shot 38 under par with 11 holes in one. You'll never see someone his age do that again, or someone of any age for that matter. That's what happened though. What an incredible man that Kim Jon-Il was. And he won every election in a landslide. |
|
|
|
There is nothing wrong with receiving consulting fees while being an employee, unless the employee agreement specifically bans such a thing.
Yeah, in this case there is. If there were nothing wrong with it then there would be no reason for any company to pay any taxes ever. You're only saying that because it was Trump who did it.... Would you please look up some facts before posting obligatory left think? The corporate tax rate is way, WAY lower than the personal tax rate, so the US gets more income from taxing Ivanka than the corporate entity. The payment went to a company owned by Ivanka dummy. Read the NY Times report so you don't need to invent things in your head that don't make sense in the real world anymore. |
|
|
|
Interesting how the BTC community is so far right they genuinely see a race issue rather than a demographics issue. I'd have expected more political neutrality. That said, this post is so painfully american and you guys are weirdly race obsessed.
Eh, there aren't many forums that will allow open racism, much less a thread promoting White Supremacy, so naturally the few places that do (like bitcointalk P&S) will have a disproportionate amount. It doesn't necessarily reflect the community as a whole. |
|
|
|
....
He may not have the authority, but that's not stopped him trying things before. If he thinks he's going to lose - and he's already lined up 'fraudulent' postal votes as an excuse ...
He actually didn't 'line up fraudulent postal votes..." The Democrats are doing that. And he's not the only one reporting it. trump googled examples of people finding a dozen pieces of paper.. and exaggerated it into a big opposition ploy of millions of vote miscounts that can affect the tally of ~130mill votes sorry but a couple dozen lost pieces of paper does not amount to a election fruad 1,298 proven instances of voter fraud in the past 30 years. Maybe he'll realize that crying about a rigged election will only fool the most gullible and use the perfectly acceptable health related reasons to bow out of the race (and secure a deal to avoid criminal prosecution once he re enters civilian life). |
|
|
|
There is nothing wrong with receiving consulting fees while being an employee, unless the employee agreement specifically bans such a thing.
Yeah, in this case there is. If there were nothing wrong with it then there would be no reason for any company to pay any taxes ever. You're only saying that because it was Trump who did it. ....
“...this payment may have criminal repercussions that are more significant. If she knowingly accepted this money and did it with any understanding that it was in order to evade taxes, and then her father signed the tax returns knowingly, both of them could have criminal liability. So I don’t think it’s a small thing that can just be written off as: “Oh well, it’s too bad that she made this mistake.’”[/color]
...
(big yawn)
This is over the border into the idiotic realm.
She apparently received “consulting fees” paid by the Trump Organization, helping reduce the Trump family’s tax bill, while she was simultaneously an employee of the organization.
Trump’s private records show that his company once paid $747,622 in fees There is nothing wrong with receiving consulting fees while being an employee, unless the employee agreement specifically bans such a thing. These people are all in the highest tax bracket, so there would be no net gain in moving money from one to the other. The fact that they make more than ~$550k/year (which puts them in the highest tax bracket) doesn't mean the tax laws don't apply to them. What a silly idea. |
|
|
|
The voter turnout is going to be at record low levels for this election. Apart from the COVID 19 pandemic, there are opinion polls which claim that a large part of the American population is not supporting either of the two candidates. Some may go out and vote for third party candidates as a protest, but the vast majority will simply abstain from voting.
Even with the pandemic, they're expecting record setting voter turn out. Over 1 million people have already voted, at this point in 2016 that number was less than 10k. |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
