Is there any way to know whether I belong to anyone's trust list?
Yeah, go to your Trust Settings page and hit Ctrl + f and see how many times your name comes up. This works only if the people on the default list (DT1 or DT2) or people who you have on your custom list trust you. For example, if user#50000 not on my trust list, not on the DT list, will trust me it will be no show on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust, or do I missing something? It works here, next week https://bitcointalk.org/trust.txt.xz |
|
|
|
That's sorted out but there's still a challenge for LoyceV: get a list of removed DT2 members. I didn't keep track of who was on DT, but there's a list of DT1 and DT2 members created by coinlocket$. I will probably do an update on it but before I need to know how often the lists will be updated to avoid useless work on it. |
|
|
|
Tagged
Ok, since you tagged them, I've tagged them and Lauda is back on DT and feedback are again red I will lock the thread. Ty for collaboration. |
|
|
|
As said before. I never said they are not scamming since someone seems to have the change of hash proof. I'm just writing what math is on one not cheating contest when someone talks about variance and luck or unluck. |
|
|
|
I have never been a legendary, so I don't know what you mean.
Have you bought this account from someone else? If not then how you not know that the account was legendary and that's why you received 1000 merit on airdrop. For reference you can see: https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=The%20FrisianIt means you have received only 1 merit from your post which is the evidence that you got 1000 merit on airdrop and 1000 merit was distributed on the airdrop only for legionaries. Some hero ranked users, got 1k merit instead 500 for airdrop based on their activity Theymos said it several times on the forum. |
|
|
|
99,9999173% 20000 <----
This is still only for 1 number. No, is for a range of 7 numbers and the math is: (1-((1-7/10000)^20000))x100=99,9999173% For 1 number is (1-((1-1/10000)^20000))x100=86,4678251% |
|
|
|
~
Just looked at it, and yes is strange but not impossible, HOWEVER read below.
The below screenshots show that 9994 to 10000 are all missing. This is simply NOT possible in this reality.
The maths show is possible but very improbable % to roll 9993-1000 Rolls
0,6977991% 10
6,7629034% 100
29,5398270% 500
50,3536401% 1000
75,3523895% 2000
87,7633586% 3000
93,9249530% 4000
96,9839603% 5000
98,5026461% 6000
99,2566183% 7000
99,6309380% 8000
99,8167742% 9000
99,9090350% 10000
99,9548392% 11000
99,9775793% 12000
99,9888689% 13000
99,9944738% 14000
99,9972565% 15000
99,9986379% 16000
99,9993238% 17000
99,9996643% 18000
99,9998333% 19000
99,9999173% 20000 50% of users will hit the range 9993-10000 in around 1000 tries. This seems very strange but the post I've made here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5045277.msg49125605#msg49125605 was about a site without scam and here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5045277.msg48004767#msg48004767 this guy seems to have proven this site uses different hashes and scam their users. I'm not saying they are not scamming since they change hases, I was talking only about the variance in a not cheating probably fair game. |
|
|
|
You forgot the most important part. This isnt about 1 number. This is about a RANGE of numbers that are not hit IN ORDER. 1 number missing isnt something unusual. But a RANGE of numbers are HIGHLY unusual for the amount of sample size we have 18K for myself, 18K for some other guy, 10k for someone else... We all came to the same conclusion, the upper tier of numbers simply do not show up..... at all. Not just SOME of the time. But AT ALL. None. Notta, golden goose egg. This is only possible if the casino is CHEATING on it's "Provably fair" claims. And if they are cheating here, they are MOST LIKELY cheating in every other aspect of their casino as well and there are very credible explanations of how that can/could be done for each of their site's features. The credibility comes from the fact that we now know the site cheats. If the site couldnt be proven to have been cheating, then these explanations would carry as much weight.
What range of numbers? I just rolled 9983.  And I've started here 2 days ago after reading here. |
|
|
|
Adding a little, very little something  I've rolled 9983 and missing 0.00000001 BTC on the winning  |
|
|
|
It looks like - as LoyceV found out earlier in the thread - that existing DT members were at a slight disadvantage in this initial DT1 reorg. Being in DT means that other users are less likely to include you in their custom lists explicitly. This should change next month. I expect the next list to be bigger and more diverse so brace yourselves and work on your trust lists. I have reviewed mine and I think I'm ready except for one scammer. Anyone knows how to exclude TradeFortress with his shifty name? Or perhaps he's already on theymos blacklist.
Try to search here idk what is the command for windows https://emojipedia.org/camping/ You probably can use their copy on website 🏕️ |
|
|
|
100 earned Merit is kind of low?
Edit - After reading through the OP carefully it doesn’t seem overly difficult to get into DT1?
It’s certainly a lot more achievable than before?
Before was almost impossible. Now is possible for sure now everyone is incentivized to set up a custom trust list, this can be also exploited but with more people on DT2 we will get more people tagging for exploiting. |
|
|
|
Infatti, da qui il dubbio, se clicco su ricevi su exodus mi fa copia incollare il contratto, su un buonty invece chiedono il memo (address).  |
|
|
|
I have made over 18 000 faucet claims in 3 years and I haven't rolled 9994 and higher numbers.
This is still a low number. You can still roll under 10000 for millions of rolls! If you are lucky you will get 10000 on 1st try but if you are unlucky (and this is improbable) you will never get 10000, it can took even an infinite number of rolls to get the 1st 10000. Now if we consider an infinite number of rolls we have exactly one roll=10000 every 10000 rolls, and with all these results, we can calculate when we expect to hit 10000 with a median value. The Median value is the value where 50% of user will expect to hit 10000. The Median value for 1/10000 is 6888 and is the number of tries where we switch from lucky to unlucky person. The % to get the roll is the written below and I used this formula: % = (1 - ((1 - % of the roll) ^ rolls))*100 I made this example for 10000 with OpenOffice right now. The % to hit 10000 after x rolls is % Rolls
0,0999550% 10
0,9950661% 100
4,8772954% 500
9,5167106% 1000
18,1277435% 2000
25,9192892% 3000
32,9693361% 4000
39,3484504% 5000
45,1204829% 6000
50,3432078% 7000
55,0689010% 8000
59,3448637% 9000
63,2138954% 10000
86,4678251% 20000
95,0220400% 30000
98,1688024% 40000
99,3263737% 50000
99,7521991% 60000
99,9088437% 70000
99,9664672% 80000
99,9876646% 90000
99,9954623% 100000
99,9983307% 110000
99,9993859% 120000
While the % to hit 9885-10000 is % Rolls
10,65205309684930000000% 10
67,57755408427540000000% 100
99,64171479701720000000% 500
99,99871631713320000000% 1000
99,99999998352160000000% 2000
99,99999999999980000000% 3000
Of course, all above considering the website is not cheating |
|
|
|
Funny how they do accept anonymous deposits in the first place. If a casino or whatever service has a standard KYC policy, they should ask their customers to verify their accounts before they can deposit. Else it's just unfair.
This is not how it works, Even on pokerstars.com/it/es/eu (if the rules are not changed on last few years) when you open one account you can deposit ASAP, only when you withdraw they will ask for KYC. |
|
|
|
waw！ am surprise the way people are easly let themselves be fooled by some not very clever scammers,
i guess its in the humman nature,
This was a very low-risk task to complete. Also if the end you will not get the payment you could remove the following on the channel, not a big deal. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
