I'll throw out my theory (opinion).
[...]
Now most of the clams were scooped up by traders and are still on Poloniex.
Except: 12:21:12 INFO: 497,454 CLAM were dug up and 592,785 CLAM were staked for a total of 1,090,238 CLAM
12:21:12 INFO: Just-Dice's onsite bankroll of 837,052 CLAM represents 76.78% of that amount
That percentage stays pretty constant, so the CLAMs weren't scooped up by traders, and are still on JD. I suppose the traders could be storing them in the JD bankroll until the price recovers. That would be assuming the sold clams came from JD. So assuming the sold clams were on poloniex to begin with (or at least not JD), and the fact the JD bankroll hasn't increased by a lot, and the fact the poloniex clams for sale has increased. And yes that's a hell of a lot of assuming....  |
|
|
|
Can someone explain what happened to the clamsprice? I thought the price crashed a bit when dental dumped part of his won clams. But that wasn't all that happened, right?
People are still worried(rightfully so) about the guy digging tons of clams. AFAIK he is only 30-40% done with digging his massive amount of btc addresses. Not sure though if anything else is in play. I'll throw out my theory (opinion). Assumptions: Digger does not follow the JD-Chat nor Bitcointalk. ( If he did I think he would find an easier way to dispose of his clams). Price with the digger was holding steady between .0045 - .0055 He wasn't dumping them lower. So Dental wins 40K on JD. People panic, worried that he is going to dump them all on Poloniex. He did dump 4-6K from an earlier win. People start dumping and the chicken-little syndrome kicks in (sky is falling). I believe the digger also noticed the price falling and added to the chaos. The price dropped to around .002 before people calmed down. Now most of the clams were scooped up by traders and are still on Poloniex. As reg investors start to buy back in and move clams off the exchange the price is starting to recover.. We'll probably see the .0045 - .0055 range again in the not to distant future. |
|
|
|
|
I have to agree there is no proof he scammed anyone. Maybe the title should be changed to "iGotSpots is a sucky developer".
This is a good thread to at least clue people in to the type of dev he really is.
He is NOT a programmer by his own acknowledgement. "Yet he has claimed to be the only alt coin programmer that knew anything"
He sucks as a businessman. You don't tell your clients to piss- off and then truly not understand why they are mad...
So basically I would not recommend anything Spots touches.
Also the comparison between HYP and Snowballs?
Hyp is still around Snowballs is not.
Hyp is still being developed Snowballs is not.
Hyp still has some value Snowballs do not.
I followed most of his threads, maybe if he actually listens to people, there wouldn't be so many people that feel they got scammed.
|
|
|
|
seems like clam is done, not much backing.
Glad you weighed in. I was waiting for your comment....  On Poloniex Clams has 67 BTC in buy support. LTC only has 44 BTC. Does that mean LTC is done too? I don't mean to start a debate on the virtues of LTC, but just to point out the flaws in his assumption that Clams has no backing. According to http://www.litecoinsucks.com/ LTC is headed to zero  And it's on the interweb so it must be true.... Plus with a site name like litecoinsucks, you know it has to be unbiased... |
|
|
|
Clams are certainly starting to look cheap. The digger can't have an unlimited supply, and if he is stupid enough to sell regardless what the price is, then buyers should see an opportunity at some point.
I bought low and sold high last time, though no where near the lows or the highs. I bought in again at 0.06, but think I will go for more soon if the price keeps falling.
I agree that the digger is overrated in importance, that people are scared and getting out only accelerates the price fall, 1 person doesn't make the market (unless it is Just Dice!)
Overrated in importance? Cause of him, the price went down from 0.014 in mid August to 0.002 ATM. You can calculate %. No single coin has suffered that crash over 90 days period unless there s something seriously wrong it and unless the devs name is Homero Garza. I hold 7 different PoS coins and none of them has suffered even close price drop. The only difference is the digger. So yes, I would say, he s big time important for CLAM. With him in the game, there s no CLAM. Remember, 0.0001 by next Monday, just watch. Do you really mean .0001 or did you mean .001? Big difference. If he wanted to sell all 400K at .0001 I would come up with the 40 BTC and buy them all. So assuming you meant .001 .014/.001 = 14 or a 1400% drop in price. (I'm not sure about my math). Have you heard of HyperStake? It's still around and being developed. It went from a high of .00009880 to around .00000200 now. For a 49,200% drop. |
|
|
|
it's rational to want to do something about the situation. To remove digging altogether would remove Clams' best and unique feature, so it is not a reasonable option. As Bitcoin and most other cryptocurrencies have built-in reductions in their distribution methods, I believe it is reasonable to propose reducing dig rewards to half at (about) 1.5 years from the release of Clams, and continue to halve the dig reward every 1.5 years from now on. I'm not a programmer, but I imagine reducing the dig reward could be done by imposing a 50% (and later 75% and so on) fee on transactions from the original distribution outputs that gets paid to a burn address. Assuming the software is ready to go, this can be announced a month or so ahead of the fork to make things fair for everyone, including the large digger.
I also feel that something should be done, if CLAM is to remain something that people want to use. The current massive ongoing dig appears to be worth something like 500k CLAMs, and started when the active supply was something like twice that, and so it will end up adding 50% to the active supply. Note that although it appears significant, that 500k CLAMs represents only around 3% of the initial distribution. There is another 12 million CLAMs out there still waiting to be dug up. There is no guarantee that the current 500k CLAM dig is the last big dig, or even the biggest one. There are very likely huge numbers of CLAMs waiting to be dug from other old wallets - think of the MtGox wallet, the SilkRoad mixer wallet, various other mixing services and other black market sites, BTC-e, satoshidice, and many others. So while it's possible that we get through this current dig and still have some investors brave enough to hold CLAM throughout, will they stick around the next time it happens, or the time after that? I'm inclined to support the opinion of dooglus that something needs to be done. If it were to come down to some kind of a vote, the clamspeech part of staking txs could be used. (I say this as someone who stakes.) Here's another idea to put on the table. Maybe digging could be slowed down in some way. For example, a coin from a block before X (where X is when the initial distribution stopped) can only be spent in a tx that stakes the coin. This would place a limit on the velocity of digging without actually taking away the ability to dig the coin. With the current difficulty, a single 4.6 CLAM output/claim would be likely to take a great deal of time for a user to "claim". So much time, in fact, that it may not even be economical to do so. An alternative might be to give undug CLAM additional weight and chance to stake. This would make the process of claiming more likely, but still limit digs overall. This is, however, probably not fair to existing stakers. To make it more fair, the block reward could be removed from digging stakes. This would mean that undug CLAMs would not give a 1 CLAM reward when staked. This, however, would be a change to the money supply/inflation. An alternative might be to attribute "missed" stakes, due to claiming stakes, to normal stakers either at the next block, or into a pool/window spread out over subsequent stakes.
That would leave us with a situation where unclaimed CLAM have additional weight to stake more quickly, but are still limited based on current difficulty and the block time. When unclaimed CLAM stake, they would not give a reward, but instead add their 1 CLAM reward into a pool. When normal blocks are staked, that pool would be apportioned out. Not sure how I feel about this idea - interested to hear what dooglus, xploited, and the rest of the gang think. It is definitely more simple than the idea I outlined yesterday; though without some of the additional advantages. Will give it some thought. Everything being discussed is a reaction to the current market situation. IE the price getting dumped. If the digger was instead the stake-er, and JD lost half it staking power, we would be having a different discussion. Or if someone hit a max bet on JD and now had 200K clams to dump on the market, limiting digging isn't going to matter much. Clams have so far proved to be pretty resilient. We had the LTC digger in the Dec-Jan time frame. Price dropped, but then rebounded. The large investor that decided Clams were not for him. Dumped 30K on the market on the Mar - Apr time. The price dipped a little and then rebounded. For awhile the digger seemed to be happy with the .0045 - .005 price. Recently there were a series of events that caused the price to crash. A regular player on just-dice had a BIG win. 39K clams. In the weeks before the same guy had a few other bigs hit's and cashed out several thousand clams at market prices. When people saw his win there was a panic that he would dump all 39K on the market and crash the price, so people starting selling out to cut their losses. Now my theory is the digger is not following Just-dice, or BTC talk. He sees the price start to collapse, so he started unloading as fast as he could, and kept the collapse going. We seem to be leveling out at around .002. This could go either way. In summary, even if you somehow limit digging, you can't prevent market dumping. |
|
|
|
seems like clam is done, not much backing.
Glad you weighed in. I was waiting for your comment.... On Poloniex Clams has 67 BTC in buy support. LTC only has 44 BTC. Does that mean LTC is done too? I don't mean to start a debate on the virtues of LTC, but just to point out the flaws in his assumption that Clams has no backing. |
|
|
|
I estimated he was 36% done. So maybe another 4 months of dumping.
He's currently working on block 6539. If you list all the initial distribution CLAMs in reverse order of the block in which they were created, block 6539 is 27% of the way through. I don't know of a better way to estimate how far through he is. You made me have to look at the blockchain... First block was 733 and last was 8995 So there were 8262 blocks with clammettes. So 8995-6539 means he's been through 2456 block already. 2456/8262 = .2972 My initial assumption was we started at block 1000 and went to block 10000. Of course even that is an estimate. No way of telling exactly how many rewards per block he will get. Also some of the blocks in the 733-8995 range are not distribution blocks. I notice the last dig was blocks 6519 and 6521. Looking at 6520 it's only for 2 clams. Then I figured maybe we skipped every other block. 6518 is for 2 clams too. But 6517 is also 2 clams. So not just every other block. Doog, I don't remember how you estimated his total, but I though you took into account some of the non-distributed clam blocks. I don't know if Xploited has the exact number of distribution blocks. I also looked at a few of his transactions. I was looking to see if I could see a trend, of sending clams to poloniex. Several of the digs ended up in the same address with a total of 46.2 clams, or 10 rewards. Almost like he's grouping the clams for staking. Then there were other addresses that ended up with 4 or 9 clams. I couldn't find a pattern. |
|
|
|
Even with all digging (from this large digger) completed the amount of new coins doesn't justify such a low price.
I can imagine the price being about half of it's peak. But an 80 percent drop is silly.
Not to mention the BTC price is causing sells on top of everything.
Seems like CLAMs is due for a bounce from this bottom.
Nothing justifies 20-30% drop per day. No sane investor s gonna sell that way. Unless he wants to intentionally drive the price down or destroy the coin. Since he hold a lot of it I highly doubt he wants to destroy it. So, either he s insane or he s got a plan. Well there is always the possibility the whales an idiot and doesn't realize that this strategy is a mistake, and to much dumping is counter-intuitive. They stake and have a big wallet but they have no sense of market management if all they want to do is dump coins for 2 years (which is likely an overshoot as 2011-2013 txts would be quite something) then they should do something to contribute to increase the value of their investment and multiply their return. (Lol made me think it was an Einstein moment)  Calling this an investment is the mistake. This is Free money. He didn't spend any of his own money to get it. A lot of folks that claim their clams are not CLAMS investors, they claim and then sell them. I estimated he was 36% done. So maybe another 4 months of dumping. |
|
|
|
Hi I would like to know if there is the possibility that something is wrong with me clams wallet. It is sync and connected to the network, it shows 3 days for mining a block since 2 weeks  Is it normal or maybe I have to fix something? Thanks The 3 days is an estimate. How many clams are you trying to stake? We can give you a better real world estimate... |
|
|
|
Hello, I love the app. Not sure if I missed something, or if I'll need to get into programmers mode to do what I'm trying to accomplish: Type: Martingale Base bet: 0.00000100 Multiplier on loss: 2 After 6 losses in a row, increase bet to: 0.1000000 After next win reset to base bet Looking at what happened here, it seems that it didn't double after 6 losses. How do I get it to double the .1 amount after it kicks in? Screenshot here:  My sdbsf file: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=50390898911398911371Thank you for your help, amazing app! It doesn't sounds like your using programmer mode, so your best bet is to post this to the main dice-bot thread. whatever it's doing, it is doing something. It's not doubling any of your bets. They're increasing, but not doubling. The first lose goes from .000001 to .00000189 an increase of 1.89. But the next goes to .00000342 which is an increase of 1.8095 and then it goes to .00000588 an increase of 1.7192 |
|
|
|
Why is MaryJ disabled on bittrex?
The info says wallet maintenance. |
|
|
|
|
New feature request.
Sometimes in the middle of running a script, I'll lose my internet connection and have to login again. This causes the script to stop betting and reset. If you had a way to resume the script after logging back on that would be killer.
|
|
|
|
I login to MD but the start high and start low are not active. Also I get the error not logged in or registered, but I can see the balance is loaded. Can you tell me what is wrong?
Unfortunately I have no idea why this is happening. The bot handles the login process like this: 1. Get cloudflare clearance 2. Log in 3. Get auth key (for betting) 4. Get stats (wagerd, profit, wins, losses, bets) 5. Get Balance 6. Send finished login signal So yours works fine from steps 1-3, then step 4 doesn't work which should already return the failed to log in signal. But executes step 5 successfully, and then sends the failed signal. So I'll be honest, I have no idea whats wrong and I have not been able to reproduce the problem. But I'm working on some detailed logging features for the bot and once that is implemented, We will hopefully be able to find and fix the problem. I had the same problem on my laptop. Never did figure out what was wrong, but once it failed it was failing on a few of the newer releases. Worked fine on my desktop system. The laptop is behind a VPN. I tried deleting all of the dicebot app data and still had the same problem. I think it's still failing so once you have tracing setup, let me know and I can give it a shot. |
|
|
|
I've been trying out CLAM and while keeping the client always open (on OSX) with an expected reward time of 17~22 hours, I got 3 CLAMs since the 21st, so 7 days ago. The thing is, I got the 3 within 12 hours and haven't got any since. I know variation is expected, but how much of it is normal?
I think it's normal, at least normal for you and I. I seem to get stakes in spurts. I'll have very good days, and very bad days, but over the long term it all levels out. Some days I can get 10 stakes, and other days 0. So I would think that having less coins would make it more variable. Also I can have 2-3 stakes in an hour then go 24 hours with nothing. |
|
|
|
Does the above make you a scammer? Probably not, but its pretty borderline the way you handled the entire situation. I don't think the accusation can be totally unexpected.
People like to think of themselves as having been scammed. That way they are victims and are absolved of all responsibility for their losses. If people would only do a little research before investing, most of these losses can be avoided. And the reason this thread is actually a good thing. It helps people research better. The biggest scam so far is a life time staking option for people to stake a coin that is dead after 6 months. Followed by... The constant forking and combining of coins. He could increase the value because some wouldn't exchange coins, and he could combine coins anyway he choose. To all those saying he just made bad decisions, couldn't you say that about any of the scammers on here. Personally I wouldn't touch another spots coin. There are to many good coins out there... |
|
|
|
|
Not a real problem, but something to watch for when coding scripts
Weird problem. I noticed this on the latest level, but when I went back to the 3.0.3 beta I see the same problem.
I'm increasing nextbet on each loss. Every so often the bet is not increased. I add print statements to try to narrow it down. It looks like the script is correctly incrementing nextbet, but for some reason the actual nextbet is not updated.
Console log
BUMP 9E-06 1E-06 increase previousbet (.00000900) with the base (.000001)
nextbet 1E-05 nextbet is now set to .00001
Betting 1E-05 at 49% chance to win, low BOT bet .00001
BUMP 1E-05 1E-06 increase previousbet (.00001) with base (.000001)
nextbet 1.1E-05 nextbet is now set to .000011
Betting 1E-05 at 49% chance to win, low BOT bet .00001
Betting 9E-06 at 49% chance to win, high
Betting 8E-06 at 49% chance to win, high
BUMP 8E-06 1E-06
nextbet 9E-06
The code works most of the time. But for some reason right around .00001 it fails to bet the correct amount. That's not a hard and fast amount. But it just seems to start around there.
Here is a snip of the code.
Oh shoot. LUA got me again.
I added another print statement to the bottom of the else - win path, to print off the next bet. When I had a failure this was not printed.
Come to find out I had a check in the code for a total of ten losses, if I hit that I set another counter. I spelled the variable name wrong. When LUA runs into this it just abandons that section of code and continues.
I set nextbet before this error, but I'm guessing something is not passed correctly to the bot code and it gets the old value.
|
|
|
|
A new stable version of the bot is available at https://bot.seuntjie.com/botpage.aspxIt includes magicaldice.com and coinmillions.com and some more cool features, like a max and min bet, simpleswap exchange for deposits and withdrawals, and some new programming mode functions. Fantastic.... Do you have any additional info on the new programmer mode functions? Also what they would be used for? I don't really understand the set and get value functions. Thanks |
|
|
|
Just to let you know SILVERKING SAM has found us a great private investment so we have earmarked to purchase some roi bearing shares so once I start purchasing will add to asset sheet, very excited about this project.. Also tomorrow night when I get back from a day trip I will give out more bagfests.. Keep well.. Nice one, great news The market has started to find its level, Which is fantastic to see. I've scooped up few more Thank you again, for all the effort you put into QBK. Yes it's so cool and the support we have..I am so curious though who is the peep that keeps putting those coins on the sell wall high up just to play with the numbers lol hoping peeps will panic and dump? He tried this before and it failed.. Also good news is that there are several new Bagholders coming to scoop up QBK weekly for a long term good hold so once they start scooping too will be lovely.. I also scooped over 1k this past week in coins but am saving for bagfests, 500 for my son and rest towards next bagbonus cash out.. ..gor few buy orders in too.. Some of it is me, some of it is someone else or a few someones, but if he has the same thing on his mind, he wants the 10 seller to dump his coins now is my guess  Well I got dumped on and bagged another few hundred coins so I guess it can't be too bad lol there is always a good side to all this.. Someone numptied on me..I guess that;s why it's always good to have buy orders in.. Date Type Price (BTC) Amount (QBK) Total (BTC) 2015-09-15 19:27:46 Buy 0.00033088 51.49449952 0.01703850 2015-09-15 19:27:46 Buy 0.00033099 101.48131363 0.03358929 2015-09-15 19:27:46 Buy 0.00033088 44.34456601 0.01467273 2015-09-15 19:27:45 Buy 0.00033953 2.43934262 0.00082822 2015-09-15 19:27:45 Buy 0.00034077 48.36549579 0.01648151 2015-09-15 19:27:45 Buy 0.00034005 27.64008234 0.00939900 My guess is that we might have to change bagbonus rules to become more strict.. so if peeps move coins in between to manipulate the markets they get penalized..I wonder if that's a good idea or not..an open debate would be interesting.. I wonder if our Bagholders like the idea or not.. What are your ideas? I like to know.. I've been asking for this from the beginning, So I guess you could say I would vote yes. The coins was supposed to be a bagholding coins. And reward that behavior. So we should require coins be held for 30 days before the bonus date. You could start with the September snapshot. Make it for September and October. Of couse you should do spot checks along the way to make sure someone doesn't load up their wallet for the Sept snapshot, then move their coins to an exchange, then move them back for Oct. It would be cool if you could declare your bagholder status thru the wallet. This could lock down the coins, and report their value. Then you wouldn't have to do spot checks to see if everyone is playing nice. The wallet could do it. I know some wallets allow you to reserve coins from staking, so they are always available to spend. If we could reverse that so you declare how many coins you don't want to spend. The coins should still be available to stake, and some how (new richlist type thing called a baghold list, you could get your snapshots very easy. I'll take a look at the code and see if I can come up with anything. Done with the brain dump. Keep up the good work... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
