 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
|
1CoNSKfWNM7BR2r6qDhrQjxWJh9kUmBpxs
|
|
|
|
|
Begging here : 7757722939015356624
Thanks !
|
|
|
|
7757722939015356624 Thanks !  |
|
|
|
Have a problem with version 0.3.15 secretPhrase=MY_SECRET In my password uses ":,()*+' ", length 64  Client out that {"errorCode":3,"errorDescription":"\"host\" not specified"} +1 ! |
|
|
|
|
Ok guys, I think he understands now..
|
|
|
|
"Hello, I'm 13 and i'm a convinced capitalist." I want to make a stand. no point telling my parents, because they are socialists, and tbh they wouldn't understand anyway. Tongue
What's the link between your parents being "socialists" (such a demeaned word), and their inability to understand this choice or bitcoins ? Someone in this thread advised you to explore each opportunity, and I bet you agree with him, because you want to travel and do things. I like you. You seem curious, mean, mature and to have big balls for your alleged age, but please let yourself opportunities to think and evolve ideologically. The field is so huge and diverse, that you can not see the big picture at your age (+ you miss living shaping experiences). Judging by your use of the "socialist" term, and your certainty, I think it might be usefull. Economic lecture is good, but don't forget politics, philosophy, sociology and history (and not only authored by people you already know or like). You won't agree with all you read, but it will definitely enhance your comprehension abilities, and help you define yourself on your own. |
|
|
|
i have usually won using the site~ until my ip "hit the radar" then even @ 90% game i noticed strange unreal type clusters of reds ~ hmm you gotta do something to stop obsessive skilled playaz right? LOL  Why not using tor or a vpn with a new account, if you start losing because your ip "hit the radar". |
|
|
|
It would be good to be able to allow people to play multiple odds per roll, with a few preset combinations, and the option to build your own as well.
That is indeed an excellent idea ! I had though of using '1','2','3',.. keyboard keys as shortcuts to presets of playlines templates, but letting people do combinations in a single roll seems insane ! |
|
|
|
I dont get how people can feel sorry for such a fake(?) story, when there so much worse things happen every day. Like in the philipines right now. Go donate there, not for this Guy who is selfaware and master of his own body. He chose to do so, it wasnt natures force that made him do that.
While I appreciate your statement, your line of thinking is flawed (and I hate it). There are indeed really bad things happening everywhere, but that doesn't mean you only have to care for the worst and ignore everything else. |
|
|
|
|
Maybe doog can look up the ip used, and see if it is from a polish provider ?
|
|
|
|
On a separate note, Havelock has been acquired by The Panama Fund. Thoughts or concerns? When can we expect the next release of shares?
Somehow related to CFIG ? |
|
|
|
Smoke one for me, uv. |
|
|
|
|
- Clear your desktop,
- Enable 2FA everywhere,
- Install & use Keepass2 (or alike) with a strong & clean main password, and use different login/pass for each sites,
- Use keepass's keeotp plugin to store 2FA keys in the database,
- Use a plugin or ftp to save the database in a remote place,
- Use ChromeIPass (or alike) to access username/pass stored in Keepass database from your browser,
- Last but not least be responsible and think of what you do.
|
|
|
|
I am entering into the Cuban Cigar Giveaway ! |
|
|
|
I am 20% down. I wonder who is actually at a profit  First invested in June when site profit was ~ +1600. Stayed all in until being -10% late in September because of Nakowa... then decided to try my luck catching the waves with chunks of my funds. I managed pretty well, since I'm +11% with site profit being around +1200. I'm done dayvesting since, but I'm still sorry for those who stayed invested all along (as I used to). |
|
|
|
The site so far has had 145,551,114 bets and cumulative luck for all players is at 100.49%. This seems like a large enough sample size that it should be converging on 100%. With a 1% edge assuming the most common bet is a 2x 49.5% bet, it would seem a player luck of 100.49% essentially means a historical house edge of 0.51%. Is that logic correct? If so, is this a probable result with a 1% house edge?
If I understand things correctly, the luck percentage has the house edge built in already. The luck percentage displayed shows how many rolls you have won compared to how many you 'should' have won. The luck percentage should, over time, be very close to 100%. Really? I think luck is supposed to approach around 101%. Dooglus made a comment about it being above 101% before. I thought luck is deviation from expected results. So with enough wagers, it invariably trend towards 100% It is not take into account bet sizes, only outcomes so it should have minimal effect from variance. It is a good test of how well the RNG is working. I feel like after 146 million wagers, a player luck of 100.49% seems high. Not sure how one would go about testing that. If I remember well, doog explained once that the luck % had been boosted by numerous successful very low odds bets. Variance. Variance everywhere ! |
|
|
|
I am not saying you win 20 btc and you have to wait 5 mins before you could bet again I am thinking is smaller waits. I am saying maybe the max would be close to a minute or 2, but I am going with the max bet being a lot higher then the 75-80BTC that we are currently at now. I am just thinking about giving people some time to react to a big swing happening. Its not fair to investors if the big whale is betting quicker than an investor can react to. The length of time of the risk seems to me a bit longer for the investor than the better.
- Since the maxbet is a % of invested, your loss @ maxbet == +infinity is the same as @ current level. - 1 or 2 seconds are big enough to bother, trust me. - Investors are passive, gamblers active, it couldn't be otherwise. - If you divest when -, then gambling investment is not for you (imo) and / or you invested too much. |
|
|
|
I think that if there was a dynamic delay should be put in place after winning bets. The delay would be increased as it approaches the max profit, but have the standard delay after a losing bet. This would keep the site from going into a negative state in a short amount of time like what happens. The sites growth is designed to increase at a rather low rate so when a whale comes in and makes a large number of large bets in a short amount of time and then pulls out when they are ahead it takes the site a very long time to recoup from that. If there was a delay put in place after large winning bets it would decrease the amount of those bets that would be placed.
I still think this is a good idea..... I'm not so sure about the effect it would have on the fun factor. I often see people in the chat complaining /stop playing (and leave ?) because of lag or delay for dust bets. Do we really want high rollers to also complain ? Gambling is an irrational activity based on emotions & rushs of adrenaline. I believe those instant winning strikes are important for players to stand loosing strikes, and keep hope of recovering. Edit: typo |
|
|
|
FWIW I'm with dooglus and mechs on this. As regards disclosure, I in the top ten investors at the moment.
I invested in just-dice for a long term stable investment - based on e.g. 5000 BTC wagered a day, 50 profit a day. For me, I would rather have a load of smaller bets slowly meeting the 1% expected profit rather than a load of variance. In my ideal investor world, the max bet would be tiny and thus the variance would be tiny and we would rely on bet volume, however the max bet is certainly a huge attraction to some gamblers, so we want it high enough to attract people to the site, but low enough to still maintain a constant stable profit over time.
High max bet means that investing is more like gambling - if I wanted to be watching nakowa bet 300 or 400 a pop, I would just be betting 10 BTC on 50/50 myself, but I don't want to do that - I recommend that those people that do prefer that 'investment strategy' go ahead and play instead of invest.
For those saying to simply 'reduce your investment if you don't like the risk' - that isn't the answer either - if I've invested a certain amount of BTC on just-dice then I am expecting to make a certain amount per day on average and that amount is directly proportional to the amount I've invested - reducing my investment reduces my profit but keeps my risk exactly the same.
So for me the question is, how many of the bets are actually > 80BTC - I would guess that the percentage is pretty small, it's probably a very small number of gamblers who exceed this limit, and without those people (pick a set of days over the past month or so when nakowa wasn't online), we're looking at maybe around 5000 BTC a day average bet - this still gives around a 35% annual return. I'm personally very happy with this. If I wanted to go high variance I would gamble!
So, the balance has to be struck here in making the max bet small enough that we don't scare gamblers away. For me, 0.25% is pretty good given the amount of investment, so I back mechs and dooglus in the recent change.
According to you casino == long term, stable investment ? Long term and secure yes, but stable ? Variance may be annoying as an investor, but everyone must realise that those btc you loose go into the gambler pocket, they don't vanish in the air. Gamblers wouldn't gamble without variance, and no casino would work without gamblers. What is bugging me with your position will is that while it makes much sense given your position as a top investor, it doesn't make sense from a Casino Business model pov. From JD perspective, the ultimate goal is to gain wagered volume, whatever it comes from small or big bets. You're right when you assume the # of bets > 80 btc is very low, but guess what : a big chunk of wagered come from them. Sadly whales usually know that splitting bets to circumvent a low max is dumb because the house edge stack. On the other hand, your other option (wagered base) is interesting. |
|
|
|
Easily fixed - only allow people to change their risk level once per day. Then people can't game it - and have to pick the risk level they'll take for ALL action. The house doesn't need backing for the small bets - so if you want a share of those you should also have to take a similar part of the big action. People could still divest/reinvest when whales were around - but there's no stopping that whilst giving people control of their money. And the people who routinely divested when he bet before at 1% risk will likely do the same at .25% risk if a whale starts winning again - so it's not a new problem.
1 - Setup multiple JD account. 2 - Setup a bot which use inputs.io withdraws / deposits (or any offchain wallet) to move funds from one account (0.25%) to another (1%). If we decide to create this market of risk management, it should at least be capped to 1%. |
|
|
|
|
