I'm guessing this is a fake bittrex-richie?


Be careful out there, people. Scammers gonna scam.

Updated bootstrap.dat again. See quoted post for details:

It's hard to come up with a provably fair way to run a raffle.

OP did it, but maybe there's no market for a raffle anyway.

(It's like playing dice only much slower?)

I don't think anyone is proposing taking property away from anyone. What is being proposed is a fork of the coin which is identical other than that certain coins don't exist in the fork; the current coin (XPY) continues to exist, and a new coin (XPY2) is created which is functionally identical, only without the GAW coins. Is that theft? I don't see how.

As an existing holder of N XPY, I would also have N XPY2 (unless presumably I was GAW). I could choose to trade my XPY2 for "real" XPY, or vice versa, depending on which of the two I wanted to hold. They would both be listed on exchanges, and their prices would move independently of each other.

If there's general agreement that the fork is a good idea people would sell their XPY, pushing the price towards 0, while buying more XPY2, increasing the price. GAW still have their millions of XPY, nothing has been stolen, but the free market has set a more appropriate price for their out-of-thin-air gains and decided that they value a coin without the pre-mine (or whatever it is - I've not been paying attention) more highly.

It looks like you have two windows both autobetting at the same time.

One went -1 +2 +1 +1 +1 +1
The other went: -16 -32 -64 -128 -256

If you consider them as two separate series of bets they make sense.

Maybe there's a bug that makes the auto-bet feature somehow run two independent series of bets, I don't know.

If the casino is covering some bets itself and passing others to moneypot, doesn't that increase the potential for the casino cheating? Presumably there would be two sets of seeds (in-house, and moneypot) and the site gets to choose which set of seeds to use for each bet, giving them two chances to win each bet.

I guess that could be counteracted by declaring up front "we will pass all bets with a potential profit of more than X to moneypot", but that's not ideal.

I had control of a whole bunch of BTC at the time, and held it in a real local wallet, but I ignored the advice and reused a single address over and over. I would have gained some extra coins if I took the advice seriously.

Despite holding tens of thousands of Bitcoin and over a billion DOGE split over 10 or so wallets, each containing around 100,000 different addresses, I ended up only having 52 funded addresses on the snapshot date. I guess that's better than most.

Biggest bet we've seen for a while:

The initial distribution gave a little over 4.6 CLAMs to each funded BTC address. Assuming Satoshi has 1 million BTC from mining 20,000 blocks at 50 BTC each, and assuming each block's coinbase has a different address he would have around 4.6 * 20k = 92k CLAM.

Still nothing to sneeze at.

And the coin was "pre-mined" - it's just that after the pre-mine it was then given out to everyone rather than hoarded.

The three little people on the left certainly have very convincing thumbs. I'm not sure about the giant on the right. He appears to be missing both thumbs and several major fingers too.

That's not what I call "prefessional".

I was happy to see how well the CLAM market dealt with having 20k CLAM dumped into it yesterday:



The price has mostly recovered already.

Usually when someone withdraws a bunch from Just-Dice to sell on the exchange, the CLAMs are bought up by Just-Dice players and/or investors and quickly find their way back onto Just-Dice. This time it's different, and only 8k or the 20k have come back to Just-Dice. I'm curious about what happened to the other 12k. I wonder whether they are being held by trading bots on poloniex who bought up the coins cheap during the dump and are waiting for the price to recover fully before offloading them at a profit. Or maybe the dump went to old existing buy orders placed by people who don't check the exchange regularly, and so they didn't yet discover that their hopeful low buy orders actually got filled.

Take a look at the CLAMs which were distributed in block 5001 (just as a random example):

http://khashier.com/tx/9aeedbc1c717956deebfce90e359243cb642c8caea297c56f0f3b9f3eb0321a8

Most of the 4.6 outputs haven't moved since they were created, but a few have. In this screenshot we see just one of the first few outputs has been 'spent':



So we can't tell that an output is 'claimed' until the initial-distribution output is spent. That happens when you move your claimed CLAMs anywhere or when you successfully stake a block with them.

They could expire by the CLAM developers deciding that "after block 500,000 any CLAMs which haven't moved since block 10,000 are no longer spendable", and the rest of the network accepting their decision and switching to the new client version.

There's no way anyone can know if you claim your CLAM but don't move it. It looks exactly the same as if you don't claim it. But most people will either start staking their claimed CLAM or move them to an exchange. Attempting to stake isn't detectable, but successfully staking is. Once your claimed output stakes it shows up as spent, and a new unspent (larger) output is created. That's how we 'detect' which coins are active.

It's possible that there are thousands of CLAMs that have been claimed but never moved. There's no way we can know about those until they stake or otherwise move.

I also use virtualbox and was having trouble getting SWC to run in it after a week or two of not playing.

I fixed it just by switching the networking from "NAT" to "Bridged Adapter". I left the RAM at 2 GB and don't think I've ever looked at the video settings.

I figured this might help others experiencing the same problem. Here's how my VM looks now that it's working again:



Edit: I should also mention that I had to uninstall the old version of the client - it wouldn't update itself correctly. I saw two things in the list of installed programs: one "swcpoker" and one with like "swc_msi" or something. The one with msi in its name uninstalled cleanly when I asked it to, but the swcpoker one would flash up a big window for a tiny fraction of a second but then the window would insta-vanish and the swcpoker item wouldn't go away. I ended up blowing away the swcpoker folder from inside Program Files using the file manager. After I did that I downloaded a new installer binary and installed it. Then when I tried to log in nothing would happen. No error message, but no tables showing up. That's when I changed the network mode from NAT to Bridged and it started working.

Not that it makes any difference, but he deleted one of my posts from the conversation too, even though I didn't include your referer link:

I think it's a positive sign that CLAM is valued highly enough that thieves want to steal it. We see the Serbian scammer on IRC trying to scam people out of their CLAMs and now this Ponzi scheme is trying to steal it too.

I think if I was you I would have mentioned it in that light: "good news for CLAM : even lowlife scammers want a piece of the action!" or something.

What I wouldn't have done is signed up and posted a fucking referral link to the scam!

Sites don't need to "employ scripts that prevent you from abusing martingale".

Martingale abuses you if you use it long enough.

In your example, after 10 losses in a row you've lost 1.023 BTC,
after 16 losses in a row you've lose 65.535 BTC, and don't have enough to double for your 17th bet.

You can expect to hit a streak of 16 losses in a row every 56000 rolls or so (at 49.5%).

See why no special script is needed? Play long enough and you'll lose without the site doing any cheating.

Given the length and complexity of the previous puzzle, do you think this one would be so simple?

You're probably not looking for a private key. You're probably looking for the IP of a minecraft server - or ANYTHING else...

I think I only saw one of your posts that was removed, but it was a referral link to a Ponzi scam.

There's a subforum for Ponzis and this isn't it so the mod's actions seem justified to me. The forum policy seems to be that if you want to promote scams, you do it in the scam subforum.

I don't really see where you're coming from with this. A scam is a scam even if it accepts CLAM - that doesn't make it any less of a scam. Note that they've recently stopped their "100% guaranteed" payouts, too - just in case you needed any further proof that it's just another incarnation of the old double-your-bitcoin scam.

Q: Does martingale really works?

A: Yes, if you're lucky.