WAP2 was released in 2002.

The forum does not use HTML5 anyways. There is minimal interactive content and the styling is hardly anything fancy. The regular version of the forum is no better equipped than WAP2 in my opinion, and given the faster load times of the latter, it is the mobile version of choice.

There are two mobile versions available:

• https://bitcointalk.org/?wap
• https://bitcointalk.org/?wap2

I can't edit on this wiki for some reason. Everything is licensed properly to be transferred, so if someone with editing rights has the time, that would be great.

Thanks for helping me keep this thread updated! Unfortunately, as specified earlier, the thread is full. I am working on a new thread that will contain updated information (with a few more reserved posts).

Leaving a note here just so I don't forget: Silk Road 2.

I don't think Peerdice is actually provably fair. Here's why.

Players have no way of ensuring that other players are actually other players.

Envision a "player" Alice who is actually a front for the house. The house of course knows all client seeds, and has the capability to calculate the result of the bet. Once all other client seeds are finalized, the house runs simulations of the results for various seeds; once one comes up in Alice's favour, it picks that as Alice's client seed.

In fact, I would go so far as to say such a system is nearly impossible to make provably fair. From what I can tell, there is no way to make a trustless three-party or over system as any two colluding parties can cheat the third, in this case Alice and the house. This is why there are two types of raffles, Instant and Provably Fair. Instant raffles are dictatorial, since exactly one party (the House) decides the final outcome, and are obviously not provably fair. Provably Fair raffles introduce trust into it, in this case trust of the blockchain and proof-of-work, so it is provably fair in the sense that the House cannot modify the outcome and miners are economically disincentived to modify it due to losing the block reward.

Someone with more experience than I may clarify. Perhaps Mental Poker algorithms, or simplified versions, may work; perhaps such a profair system can be proven impossible. My point stands though that the current version is not Provably Fair.

Edit: Don't get me wrong. I believe bit777 is a very trustworthy entity and am certainly not accusing it of actually being unfair! Indeed, I often play Peerbet instant raffles which are not even advertised as profair, and I do not even suspect any rigging. I do believe that advertising Peerdice as Provably Fair is a bit misleading, however.

Emphasis mine. See their terms.

A chargeback-free system will take some getting used to, but we have to remember that the protections have not existed forever. Hundreds of years ago, cash was chargeback-free; fraudsters could theoretically scam hundreds of pounds from whole villages and then run to the next village. The villagers were prudent enough to exercise good judgement and this was never a great concern. Today, we must relearn that skill.

There is one of me in the world. So I am comparable to 210 000 000 kg Au?

This definition of comparable is too lenient to be useful.

This is an awesome website! Glad to see this data growing above and beyond a BitcoinTalk thread.

I'll probably still update this thread, but that's on the backburner as I'm extremely busy right now. From what I can tell, BitLegal has already incorporated all the content of this thread, so that makes it very low-priority.

Updated.

Done. Sorry for the oversight.

This is no longer correct. Since June 10, 2013, Bitstamp has been used as the source.

It's possible and seems to be a good idea, but more research is needed before it is confirmed to be safe from exploits.

See this thread.

TL;DR: More research is necessary.

Your wish is my command.

 1. 2013-11-30: 1.13229 USD/mBTC
 2. 2013-12-04: 1.11156 USD/mBTC
 3. 2013-11-29: 1.06536 USD/mBTC
 4. 2013-12-03: 1.05057 USD/mBTC
 5. 2013-12-02: 1.00049 USD/mBTC
 6. 2013-11-28: 0.99856 USD/mBTC
 7. 2013-12-05: 0.97506 USD/mBTC
 8. 2013-12-01: 0.94567 USD/mBTC
 9. 2013-12-10: 0.94156 USD/mBTC
10. 2013-11-27: 0.93709 USD/mBTC
11. 2013-12-06: 0.89436 USD/mBTC
12. 2013-12-11: 0.89042 USD/mBTC
13. 2013-12-13: 0.88299 USD/mBTC
14. 2013-12-09: 0.86749 USD/mBTC
15. 2013-12-12: 0.86285 USD/mBTC
16. 2013-12-14: 0.86041 USD/mBTC
17. 2013-11-26: 0.84932 USD/mBTC
18. 2013-12-15: 0.83837 USD/mBTC
19. 2013-11-23: 0.83285 USD/mBTC
20. 2013-11-25: 0.80780 USD/mBTC

Note that the last day is not on this list.

He is also the richest Canadian, despite not living in Canada. That was something I found interesting.

Precisely. Unfortunately, it seems that many here choose to blissfully ignore their bigotry, instead blaming the "gender gap" on imagined "fundamental differences between sexes".

I'll be on that list eventually... hopefully .

(My join date was in October 2011 though, and I haven't posted every fortnight, so it may well be a few months yet.)

Poland added.


Source?

Denmark added. I'm waiting for further confirmation before Switzerland and China.