 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
|
this would reduce the size of the mempools, and make it easier to run a node, and save space on the blockchain. It could be done like a difficulty adjustment where the minimum fee increases if the average block is >90% full, and decreases otherwise.
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't need to use it for gambling directly. I could use it to rebalance funds between wallets that I use for gambling, without paying 2% for a mixer.
Most custodial service such as CoinBase set high transaction fees when you withdraw Bitcoin from their services to ensure the transaction confirmed quickly. You could use CoinJoin feature provided by Wasabi Wallet if you're concered about fees, while preserve your privacy altogether. This is not true. Coinbase's miner fees are often too low to get a quick confirmation. 2% is orders of magnitude higher than miner fees tho unless you're buying coffee. I could afford it, but 2% feels like overpaying. If I use Wasabi coinjoin I get directly linked to one particular rando who might have dirty coins, which is not as good as getting clean coins from coinbase. |
|
|
|
Basically any other "custodial" online wallet will do that but there's actually no "Mixing" involved in there,
Blockchain.com doesn't do this commingling. Would it if I upgrade to the interest-paying version? Blockchain()com is a non-custodial online wallet; you should search for " custodial wallets" instead. Interest-paying version requires KYC, you also need to send the funds to your main wallet if you want to send them out so you won't be able to " mix" your coins for obvious reasons. I can't recommend you any custodial service since most of them have the same policy as Coinbase so you'll like get the same results when you use them for gambling. Consider using a desktop client like Electrum and use the common privacy measures like never re-use addresses, you can also send the funds to a couple of different unused addresses before depositing it to Coinbase; or just use a real mixing service. I wouldn't need to use it for gambling directly. I could use it to rebalance funds between wallets that I use for gambling, without paying 2% for a mixer. |
|
|
|
It's a custodial service that's why it's "commingling" the user's funds?
Basically any other "custodial" online wallet will do that but there's actually no "Mixing" involved in there,
the service itself still has logs of where your account deposited from and where you withdrew into.
Not to mention the limits and the possibility of locked funds for various reasons like "too high deposit" and red-flagged addresses/transactions.
Blockchain.com doesn't do this commingling. Would it if I upgrade to the interest-paying version? |
|
|
|
|
Coinbase's commingling of user funds is actually useful in terms of preventing non-state adversaries from linking any two transactions sent from the same coinbase wallet. It's like every transaction goes through a free mixer, but the mixer can be subpoenaed. I got backed off of coinbase for gambling. Are there any other online wallets that commingle funds like coinbase does?
|
|
|
|
|
Suppose:
1. You run a few separate businesses that send and receive coins, and you don't want them to be associated with each other via spending each other's coins.
2. You don't want the hassle of manually selecting which coins to spend for each transaction because you do 20 transactions manually every day. Also for convenience it has to be a PC wallet. (for added security I run it inside an encrypted single purpose virtual machine where 99.9% of malware won't find it).
3. You memorized the 12 word seed phrase that Electrum automatically generated, and you want all your funds to be recoverable by it.
My old solution is to have several separate wallets inside a single account on blockchain.info. But this is extremely laggy and I don't trust them because the site is so buggy, plus it started offering loans and interest like a bank. So I'm switching to self custody.
What I want is a single wallet, based on that single seed phrase, which has separate compartments that work like separate wallets. I'm not too concerned about retaining segregation of funds in the event that I need to recover from the seed phrase (although theoretically encrypted metadata for that purpose could be hidden on the blockchain)
Alternatively, maybe I should run several instances of electrum with separate wallets based on appending alpha, bravo, charlie, etc to the original seed phrase. Will it let me do that?
What do you guys think I should do?
|
|
|
|
|
It does not disclose the next server seed hash until after you send your next client seed to the server. So it's possible that the server seed is being generated AFTER the server already knows your client seed, which makes the provably fair system completely insecure and useless.
|
|
|
|
I tested it out today again and on my very first roll the server seed didn't match the server seed hash. I did a 2x coin flip for my entire 1mbtc deposit. Before the round it said serverseed_hash = e09d311bd7d007bce4141ea30b7ea726cad88b592af8993d3c45b4a6d15e2138 After the round, it said serverseed = 5f14e5353a6b5d4ab3039a232cf9f72924d77cbbac1cb750ff7f1b5ea0c85809TeUBURTRQY, which doesn't hash to what they said it would hash to. This is the smoking gun of cheating. They are changing the server seed to alter the outcome of the game. Here's a screenshot:  Their bonuses seemed too good to be true and now I know why. Admins, can we please get red warning thing at the top of the wixiplay thread? BTW here's my php source code for checking the PF: $client_seed = "vnu3x7sp";
$server_seed = "5f14e5353a6b5d4ab3039a232cf9f72924d77cbbac1cb750ff7f1b5ea0c85809TeUBURTRQY";
$server_seed_hash = "e09d311bd7d007bce4141ea30b7ea726cad88b592af8993d3c45b4a6d15e2138";
$result_seed = hash_hmac('sha512', $server_seed, $client_seed);
$result_number = hexdec(substr($result_seed,0,10));
$lucky_number = $result_number % 10001;
echo $lucky_number;
if($server_seed_hash==hash('sha256',$server_seed)){ echo "\ntrue"; }
else { echo hash('sha256',$server_seed); }
|
|
|
|
I played some more rounds, carefully verifying each round. I used https://wtools.io/php-sandbox with this php source code: $client_seed = "...";
$server_seed = "...";
$server_seed_hash = "...";
$result_seed = hash_hmac('sha512', $server_seed, $client_seed);
$result_number = hexdec(substr($result_seed,0,10));
$lucky_number = $result_number % 10001;
echo $lucky_number;
if($server_seed_hash==hash('sha256',$server_seed)){ echo "\ntrue"; }
Most rounds verified, but occasionally it generated an abnormally long server seed whose hash didn't match, and I always lost those rounds. So the site has multiple ways of cheating. 1. If you don't request the server seed hash in advance it can change the server seed to achieve whatever result it wants, undetectably 2. even if you do request the server seed hash in advance, it will still sometimes change the server seed to achieve whatever result it wants. Definitely 100% scam. |
|
|
|
But then it hit me!
They can actually check if you're going through the impractical ceremony on not! I verified this by checking the network requests, and AFAICT the only way to view the server-seed hash is via a network request to "/ajax/modal" with "modal=fairness".
So this means they can actually if you're verifying the bets or not. So they could trivially cheat only when they know you won't be able to tell (when you never requested the server-seed hash).
Sounds like 999dice all over again.I agree. this combination of factors is suspicious: 1. new server seed every round 2. the server seed hash is only transmitted to the client when you click for it. Whenever you don't click to request the server seed hash, the server KNOWS it's not being watched and that it can get away with cheating, by changing the server seed to make you lose the roll. |
|
|
|
Generate new server seed and you will get old server seed
When I click "generate new server seed" it does NOT show the old server seed. Also, the server seed hash changes between every round, so there's no reason for it to not automatically show last round's server seed. |
|
|
|
I just played 523 coin flips (49.5% chance of success with a 1% house edge). Only won 199 of them. The probability of winning 199 or fewer out of 523 is 8.9696e-8, or about one in ten million. Their provably fair system doesn't work because they only show the server seed hash, but they never reveal the server seed of past rounds, so there is no way to do the calculation to verify that those rounds were fair. They say the algorithm is: $client_seed = "your_client_seed";
$server_seed = "your_server_seed";
$result_seed = hash_hmac('sha512', $server_seed, $client_seed);
$result_number = hexdec(substr($result_seed,0,10));
$lucky_number = $result_number % 10001;
echo $lucky_number;
But this is all they show you in the fairness dialog.  It never shows the server seed for the previous round, so you can't check the fairness. This is a fake PF system. I recommend avoiding the site until they fix their PF. |
|
|
|
|
edit: it's not a scam, I just had bad luck and underestimated the variance on the slot I was playing. It's a good casino. They always pay out quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
the cost per gb of storage space halves every 12-18 months so this will have ZERO effect on the decentralization of the network. It will be no more costly to run a full node in 2030 than it is now.
|
|
|
|
|
Why not hard fork it just once to add a rule that automatically doubles the block size every 75000 blocks? Block size should automatically keep up with Moore's Law.
|
|
|
|
|
couple months ago i had no problem getting money out. The deposit bonus system is nice tho, only 35x rollover which is better than most places' 40x. I've heard there were withdrawal delays lately. Then again I heard the same thing about Bovada last year.
|
|
|
|
|
What are your guys' experiences with bitcoinpenguin?
|
|
|
|
|
There ought to be a meta-boycott to boycott any company that gives in to boycotts. Make it more painful for them to censor things than to not censor things.
|
|
|
|
|
So today stromfront got taken down in a copycat attack, the same way that daily stormer was taken down several weeks ago: SocJus went crying to the registrars. This method would have been obvious to anyone with half a brain, but it took them 10 years to figure it out, which shows you how stupid the attackers are.
I don't agree with half of what these sites say, but I will defend to the death their right to say it.
Tor hidden services are not an ideal solution, because tor is very slow and has domain names that are impossible to remember. Tor does a lot of extra onion routing to anonymize the clients, which is not at all necessary for this use case and slows everything way down. How about a much lighter weight system that does less onion routing?
Requirements:
1. easy to use
2. Short, memorable domain names
3. Decentralization, so no authority is capable of shutting anything down.
4. faster than tor
5. more robust against ddos than tor. Use storage space on every node as cache so static content will be impossible to ddos.
What projects currently exist that are doing anything like this?
|
|
|
|
|
