Would that have helped in this situation?  The first spend had already been mined on the 0.8 chain, and so wouldn't have been in the mempool any more.  Even if the mempool persisted when the miner switched to 0.7, the first spend wouldn't be known and so the double spend would still be added to the mempool when broadcast.

I was expecting to see a dead flat spot due to yesterday's temporary hard fork.  Any idea why I don't?

That doesn't sound right to me.

You sent coins directly from MtGox to SDICE, so all the addresses that the coins in that transaction came from must be in Gox's wallet.  There are "sending" and "receiving" addresses, there are only addresses.  Gox either has the private key for that address or they don't.  The fact that they sent coins from it means that they do.

They also say that the address isn't linked to any Gox account, so your winnings wouldn't have been credited to anyone's Gox balance.  Therefore your winnings are sitting in Gox's wallet, but not counting towards anyone's balance.  They should be able to refund you without being out of pocket at all.


This makes me think that the person you were talking to doesn't understand the situation.  The address was used by Gox to send coins.  That means they have control of coins at that address.  I would ask to speak to someone else if I was you.

Feel free to use my words if you think they help support your case.

Hi Dabs.

Sorry, I was stressed out with other business yesterday when you posted about this.

One problem with your request is that there's not really a definitive ordering on the bets.  Do we count the time the bet transaction was seen by some random host on the network?  Or the timestamp on the block it got into?  Or the depth of the block?  (Blocks aren't always in order of timestamp).  Or do we count the order that the bets were paid out?

There are lots of different ways of ordering the bets, which will change the longest sequence of losses.

Another problem, and what puts me off from looking into this, is "who cares".  Are you wanting the information to check whether the dice rolls are random?  ie. "we would expect to see a chain of 10 losses but the longest chain is 20 so SDICE is cheating"?  Because other than that I don't really see the point.  Runs of good and bad luck happen, due to the random nature of the dice rolls.  Suppose I go through the blockchain and find that once there were 21 losses on the 50% game in a row, given some arbitrary ordering of the bets.  Then what?

I guess I'll do this when I'm bored, but I don't expect it to tell us anything very useful or interesting.  Maybe I'm just being grouchy though.  That happens too. 

Thanks for the tip organofcorti - that's very kind of you. 

It's weird that a date I set a couple of months in advance just happened to be pretty much the peak price, and so resulted in the highest percentage payout.

It looks like the MtGox price recovered pretty well from the panic selloff during the fork.

Very nice graphs.  The 2nd one reminds me of big scary needles rather than violins.


Is that true?  They increased for a few months Dec 2012 to early Feb this year, but other than that has there been an upwards trend?

A version of your first graph with the horizontal scale magnified about x10 would let us see that - just truncate the high values while the whale was playing.

3:55pm.  Shortly after the blockchain forked.  I don't know what the state of things regarding the fork is yet.  Did you not receive your payment?

Edit: the hard fork is over, and all my payments finally got confirmed on the 0.7 chain.

Here's the last of them, delayed almost 10 hours by the fork:

OK, I get it now.  They always paid 0.5% for a losing bet, but they used to subtract the transaction fee of 0.0005 (50k satoshis) from that, often leaving less than 0, so they'd send you a token 1 satoshi.  Now they don't subtract the transaction fee, so the min bet (0.01) pays out the full 0.5% when you lose, which is 0.00005000 BTC, or 5k satoshis.

That will result in less dust spam, or at least more easily spendable dust spam.

So it's time.

The MtGox price was $48.16/BTC:



The fiat exchange rate was 1.02733 USD/AUD:



So the payout is 74.6377%.

I'll make the payouts now.

Edit: done.

New highs!

That's cool.

I should probably mention for completeness than my data doesn't include any bets that were refunded for being too big or too small.  That's why you see nothing at all less than 0.01 BTC in 2013.

I'm wondering if it would be interesting to plot a violin plot where the thickness indicates the volume (in BTC) bet at each price rather than the number of bets at that price.  Then we'd be able to see that


for ourselves. 

If anyone wants to deposit to PokerStars using Bitcoin, I have a couple hundred dollars on PokerStars that I'm willing to transfer to your account there in exchange for Bitcoins.

Send me a PM if you're interested.

That doesn't fix the problem of filling the blockchain with lots of tiny "you lost" payments which will probably never be spent, and so will never be pruned.

Also, the current design is such that your payout depends on your bet, so if your bet never confirms neither do your winnings.  If they use a sendmany then your winnings depend on MY bet as well as yours.  So if my bet never confirms neither do any of the winnings paid out in the same transaction as my winnings.

Do you have a reference for that?  I must have missed it.  I thought losing bets have always paid out half a percent.  Here's what I think it probably my biggest ever losing SD bet: http://blockchain.info/tx-index/12114983

I bet 6 BTC and got 0.03 back - that's 0.5%.

Edit: my bad - I once lost 31 BTC and got 0.155 BTC back, but still it was 0.5%.

So I guess I don't know what has changed...


Thank you very much.  

Another rounding issue.  I put 0.001 BTC down in the 5-mine game and was told my first dig would be worth 0.0002 BTC.  I dug once, and took my winnings.  My balance went up from 0.0034 to 0.0035, so my first dig must have been worth less than I was told it would be:



When I play for a whole bitcoin play money, I'm told the first dig is worth 0.16 BTC, so I guess the first dig above was really worth 0.00016 BTC, not the 0.0002 I was told it was worth.



If you're going to round, you should never promise the play more than you're going to pay him.  I think I've reported a similar bug before, with the pig racing.

You have to let them age a lot before you can spend them for free.  Once the satoshi dust is around 10^8 days old it's high enough priority to spend for free.  The trick is to include a big coin in the same transaction, to push the overall priority up.

See http://blockchain.info/tx-index/50754520 for example.  Lots of dust + one 1200 BTC coin = free transaction.

OK, here it is.

  http://dooglus.com/allbets.txt.bz2

It's 4.8MB compressed,  69.5 MB uncompressed, one bet per line.  Time (seconds since 1970) and bet size (in satoshis):


The timestamp is the timestamp of the block which paid the bet out.

I just went through the claim site's database and made adjustments based on all the documentation that people have provided me with relating to database errors (withdrawals and deposits that never went through, etc.).

If your balance used to be incorrect, please check now and let me know if it's still incorrect.

Other than scales - I've not modified your balance because
  1) you didn't provide any proof of deposit and
  2) I don't know your account number

I'll add $180 to the total amount owning, since that's what scales says he's owed, and will talk with him when he gets back from his bush adventure about the details.

The totals owed are $28,180 and 1,769 BTC.

Currently, the exchange rates are:
    1.00 BTC = 46.400 USD
    1.00 AUD = 1.02105 USD
so if we were using those rates, the total amount owed would be
    28180 * 1.02105 / 46.400 + 1769 = 2389.11 BTC,
and so the payout would be
    1768 / 2389.11 = 74%.

I'll check the final rates tomorrow and post again, then make the payouts.

Has anyone heard from Brendio recently or have any way of contacting him?

I've emailed him (using his brendio.com email address) about the claim site, but he's not put in a claim.

His profile says "Last Active:   January 11, 2013, 07:58:24 PM".  Hope he's alright!

I don't have a list of all bets but can generate it.  I'm a little busy at the moment getting ready to give back $82k that I've become kind of attached to tomorrow.  But I'll prepare the bet list when I get a chance.