IMO a better implementation is with nonce-system. This way a player have to do this:

1. Go to provably fair tab
2. Copy serverseed hash
3. Set clientseed
4. Start betting all you want
5. After you are done with your betting session, go back to provably fair tab
6. Get the serverseed
7. Put the details in a verifier

This will then generate all the bets you made. So you do not have to do it "every bet".


I can come up with limitations here too (if you made hundreds or thousands of bets, obviously you don't have a full history of it, most times only like 30 bets on "my bet" tab.) But I do think it works better in reality than the "per roll" implementation. Especially because most players just check their bets after a losing streak, and this allows to easily verify your latest bets.

I personally think all websites can improve their implementations and I am planning to "review" the provably fair implementation of most popular sites (with clear transparent arguments, nothing subjective.) Just not sure when I have time for it.




To better understand the provably fair mechanism, really do read my article http://dicesites.com/provably-fair

Like I said:

In the case of NS BJ, the implementation is really bad indeed. Like most BJ games TBH, generally dice sites have better provably fair implementations. You have to do this to make sure it's fair:

1) Open provably fair tab
2) Copy "Next Hash" (note: you cannot easily copy this, you must be using browser developer tools to do this)
3) Change client seed (note: they do not generate it in the browser, but they give it in an AJAX request together with serverseed hash, this is bad and you -must- change clientseed every bet because of this)
4) Make the bet
5) Open provably fair tab
6) Compare "Deck Hash" with copied hash
7) Go to external verifier and fill in all details

And you must do this for every bet.

They can do the following things to improve the implementation:
1. Allow easy copying of "serverseed hash"
2. Generate clientseed in browser after receiving the next serverseed hash
3. External verifier shouldn't include resources from NS
4. Ideally: use nonce-method which allows easier verifying

Thanks. But, tbh, I personally don't see how it can be that much. I only got stats per currency on 10 jan 2015, so I could make the following calculations:

2014-09-09   0
2015-01-10   23,565 BTC + 1,008,077 NVC (4365 BTC) + 1,005,193 PPC (1658 BTC) + 1,002,993 NMC (1655 BTC) + 105,758 DASH (1108 BTC) + 685,105,819 DOGE (356 BTC) + 8,572,105,491 RDD (343 BTC) + 8,343 LTC (104 BTC) + 8,105 CLAM (48 BTC) = 33202 BTC
2015-08-25   14123010 BTC (According to thebitcoinstrip you had 9003 BTC wagered in last 30 days)
2015-09-24   14132013 BTC


So this makes the following daily average bets:

Between 2014-09-09 and 2015-01-10 (123 days): 270 BTC per day
Between 2015-01-10 and 2015-08-25 (227 days): 62.069 BTC per day
Between 2015-08-25 and 2015-09-24 (30 days): 300 BTC per day

As you can see 300 BTC per day seems realistic, but 62.069 BTC per day is pretty impossible.


These are daily average of other sites (BTC only and only stats from my site so not since start of sites which actually results in relatively higher amounts for most sites):


As you can see,  62.069 BTC per day is quite unrealistic.



Are you sure you don't have some calculation error with the alt coins? Would you mind sharing per currency stats like you did before? (see edit)


Either way I do not think anything bad (as in scam etc) about FortuneJack at all(!) I just think there is a mistake in the wagered amount calculation. (see edit, it actually does look like intentional lying)




edit: ah I was editing my post by deleting and adding new, but fox already quoted me lol. Will just edit I guess...

Reason why I edit, is because I can see you have wagered amounts per currency already.

I noticed BTC wagered is 10,570,963 BTC. So there is no alt-coin miscalculation. Still I do not believe the 62.069 BTC per day wagered.

That makes the expected profit of only BTC: 105,709.6 BTC. This would have made you one of the most richest BTC owners in just 227 days. I do not believe that.

And you are still only able to provide a max bet of only 1 BTC at dice? Lol..

Wagered per currency

Seems only LTC and DASH are really popular alt-coins compared to the other alt-coins heh? I mean on a level of 138 till 2.782 times more popular than the other alt coins. Lol.

I do feel obligated to explain how to calculate the "house edge" on the tickets:  (1-(prize/tickets-allocated)/ticket-price)*100 so that is: (1-(3.5/50995)/0.0002)*100 = 66% HE

 I understand it's just an optional extra thing and that's okay, but just want people to know what they are getting. Better just make Bets

It is important to realize that provably fair only works when you actually verify your bet outcomes. Some implementations are worse than others too. If you like to understand the basics of provably fair I advise to read my article: http://dicesites.com/provably-fair

There has been at least 2 clear cases of rigging the players even with provably fair, both at scam site dicebitco.in. This was detected because some people actually verified their bet outcomes. If no one verified their bet outcomes, no one would ever know.

You could have a look at my site: http://dicesites.com

Personally I have easily more than doubled my investment at PRC over the last 1.5 years, had decent profits at SafeD too and actually have a few coin loss on BD for a while now. But that doesn't mean that much.

More interesting to look at recent wagered amounts, your share in BR (currently at PRC you would get small share), commission/house edge/kelly-options and most importantly how much you estimate to trust the website. Do remember dice.ninja that stole 2k btc from investors.

That imgur bug sounds interesting. Some comments from a imgur dev here, but not much info. Seems like they just sent content-type headers of whatever file it was (imgur hosts images but also mp4s/webm.) So they only had a validation for "valid files" upon upload. And then this validation was bypassed which successfully uploaded HTML files. I hope they will release more details about that, it does sound weird that such a big site cannot secure their core functionality.

edit: MalwareBytes is still blocking it too: "It's blocked because the root cause of their issues has yet to be identified and resolved. Once this happens and is confirmed, the block will be removed."

Seems pretty obvious... that topic is about:

"YOU ARE ENTITLED TO A REFUND if you used Quickseller/Panther52 as an escrow" (topic title)

and you reply with:

"So you're saying all these default trust members are same group and supporting each other but not supporting for clean forum or what? If this continues like this then forum will loose it trust for trading."

Seem pretty off-topic?? "Defaulttrust" has nothing to do with the original thread. There are other threads for that. Note: he also deleted the posts that you were replying to.


Vod even has 2 other topics linked to ensure it stays on-topic:

There are plenty of other threads to discuss the pros and cons of DF too.

I have been wondering this for a while now and I know others have too. I will keep the first question simple :p

Are the wagered stats of 14+ million BTC on the homepage correct?

That reminds me, I would like an "Invest all" button on that page. Hope that's possible, would save me many seconds of copy-pasting, thanks.

Very sure he is paying it. The "rakeback" is basically between 2.5% till 15% which is possible with his commission.


Pretty nice promo btw. Wondering if this has a good effect on btc gambling sites. Things like this obviously work for pokerstars etc. Maybe change a subtle thing in chat to reflect the VIP status of each player. People like to show their ChromeStar on PS.

You could do it like this: let's say the idea is "lowest odds of getting a specific streak" (so not longest streak, but least-likely streak w odds between 50-90.) Normally a site would say "min x avg bet", but you could say: "max 2 BTC prize, you get 1000x of your avg bet". So if the least-likely streak has an avg bet of 0.0008, the prize for first would be 0.8 BTC. Then the second least likely is 0.0006, gets 0.6 BTC. ETC. till the 2 BTC is finished.

However if you would do anything with a streak etc. imo you do need to:
1) Make a live-updating leaderboard tab which also show the potential amounts the persons would win if it ends now.
2) Make a live-countdown on that tab to make sure everyone understands the deadline.
3) Don't use my example amounts/numbers, I am just guessing, I have no idea if "avg bet" is a good use too. It might be bad because after a long streak people would just bet really big to make the avg much higher and still win all the prize. It was just an example of how to potentially share the amount fairly among big and smaller players. With the streak idea that is actually relatively more difficult tho.

The original game is agar.io, so makes sense to make it .io too.

Lol, guys, maybe it is time for all of you to open your eyes. The odds that the site is really sold are extremely low.

For me personally the forum has been frequently slow for a few weeks, I actually think it even started around the "XT drama" at reddit. But I am not sure if it is my own connection (having ISP problems too so could be.) Anyone else noticed this?

Correct, same issue.

Temporarily you can try "Search messages" with some keyword your new message might have (for example only a dot: .) to still see the new message (check "Show full message in results")

But I assume theymos will fix it soon.

Yes, I probably should rename it back to "cold wallet" since it might be confusing now.

ATM PRC indeed has 84% of the "invested amount" in their public cold wallet. Generally Dean likes to keep it above 90%, so I assume he will top it up soon (few days ago it was 90% but invested amount went up.) The other 10% should be in warm and hot wallets, since it's not practical to do all withdrawals from the cold wallets.

Thanks special thanks to unibtc for hosting this contest.

0.05%

#6021809

No no A player called 'hui' who likes playing these high multipliers had a 110k losing streak once w/ those odds Luckily it only took me less than 10k.


edit: new 1100x  https://i.imgur.com/vLsVF2W.png #5763190