Try opening it in "incognito" or "private window"  mode, if it loads then it means it's a cache problem or something, and you can clear your local data for the site.

At 418k BTC wagered, we're slowly closing in the half-a-million bitcoin wagered. I'd like to do something to celebrate with some giveaways, of the three which would you guys prefer:

* More physical coins (e.g.. http://silverwallets.com/ like last time)
* Trezors  ( https://bitcointrezor.com/ )
* CryptoSteels  ( http://cryptosteel.com/ )
*
* Plain bitcoin

Nice choice. =) I've matched your donation: https://blockchain.info/tx/7c51260315ded188de3a8f31e538730b3e41975d96fdd71b6988b0f149b6f3e6

1) Your whole provably fair page is nonsense.

1) The actual certification just says they evaluated the outcomes for statistical randomizes. That does not imply they can detect or certify that you're not cheating (as you claim). In fact, the certificate is more for the casino than the player. It (tries to) reassure the casino their outcomes are not-predictable, which means players couldn't take advantage of it. It gives zero assurances to players.

2) Who ever issued that certificate (itechlabs) are actually retarded, even for a retard standards. Their recommended algorithms are pretty much the worst algorithms you could possible use for a casino. I would assume someone who did CS101 would know better. If someone actually followed their advice, anyone who knows how you call the random number generator could pretty with a bit of elbow grease could reconstruct the state vector and predict future outcomes.

In fact, generating random numbers is really easy. Read from /dev/urandom and you're done. Or use a crypto rand from your favorite programming language, simple as that. Meanwhile they recommend the exact thing you should be avoiding..

3) Your site is not provably fair, you're asking us to trust you and/or the retarded company that issued a meaningless certificate.  

I can't tell if that's the most low-effort scam attempt in the history of bitcointalk, or just poor English  

Or maybe he's sending money to his own address 

https://blockchain.info/tx/261ddf28962974936ee4fb715b152bb883355d1a3841d1aadfcefc2d9b61c327

And you can verify it's his address here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg10830138#msg10830138


but who cares? The coins are unrelated to bitfinex and they went to a good guy  

Max bet doesn't directly fit in. The kelly will tell you the most you should risk per bet. E.g. Imagine I run a normal (1% HE) dice site, with a 1k bitcoin bankroll. The kelly says risking 1% per roll leads to optimal bankroll growth, which is 10 BTC. So that is the same as 1 BTC @ 11x  ... or   100 @ 1.1 x.  So a casino with a fixed house edge, should put limits on the max profit, not max bet.

(Sites like bustabit have a dynamic house edge, so it's not so simple. It has a limit both on max bet (1 BTC) as well as max profit)

I disagree on both counts. As long as PrimeDice is not restricting fauceters ability to withdraw (ala dadice, who wouldn't let someone withdraw faucet profits because they were using the faucet to make money) then it's complete valid wagerings. If you think it's a good strategy to increase your volume, then by all means give out free money. What would be far less clear is if they had "roll over requirements" (e.g. give someone a bitcoin, but make them roll it over 500x if they want to withdraw it), but that's not what PD is doing.

Also PD stats seem completely reasonable to me, according to thebitcoinstrip.com in the last 30 days they've wagered almost exactly 2x that of bustabit which doesn't have a faucet. Since of the low edge of bustabit, that means PD is making about ~6x of bustabit, which considering PDs popularity, reputation and advertising PD does seems completely reasonable. Also we know from JD, which was investor backed and couldn't fake stats -- there is a huge dice market. They PD numbers if anything seem small to me (possibly as a result of restricting the US market?).

Send me a PM when you do, if you send the funds to a published donation address -- I'll match your donation to which ever one you pick

I doubt the coupons are stolen, if they were they wouldn't be valid. AFAIK you can't even buy them, they're just given out at events.

In fact I've bought, sold, been given and given out event coupons several times. (Most recently I was given a decent amount of Digital Ocean gift codes which I had no use for, so I sold them to someone who did). I'm not going to pretend it's allowed by the terms of service, but I don't think it makes me untrustworthy or a money launderer...

Expected Value is indeed the same as Expected Profit.



Actually, I'm the one who originally wrote that table for MoneyPot showing the "Expected Value" so I'm to blame for the misunderstanding. The page is correct, just confusing. It's showing the expected value of that *one* payout being 9.9 bits. But there's a second payout (the lose payout, with prob of 50.5) which has an EV of -10 bits.

So that's why at the bottom of your screenshot it shows: "Total Expected value: -0.1 bits"


 

The feedback left is:


which seems a bit unfair, and a bit of an overreach of the trust system. (Worldwide) is selling legitimate coupons, it's hard to call that money laundering or untrustworthy. As I understand it, most of the coupons are got by going to an event and then people who have no use for them resell them (which is indeed against the ToS).  Meanwhile a service that offers explicit bitcoin mixing/laundering is praised and given + trust here (as it should be).

Glad it was sorted out, removing my neg trust.

The truth is coinbase is a legitimate company. They get a lot of shit from some bitcoiners because they vocally support larger bitcoin blocks, and then added ethereum support. Like all exchanges, they suck in some regards (mandatory know your customer stuff, they shut down your account if they find out you are doing something against their terms of service or using bitcoins for gambling/darkmarkets etc. It sucks, but they and all the other exchanges are legally required to do this. I've never heard an accusation against them for stealing funds, and strongly doubt they ever have or will. (Also like all exchanges don't leave money or bitcoin on them)

Yeah you are, considerably. I didn't checking your code, but "edge" is already defined as  "ev / wager" so you can just multiple that by the house bankroll to figure out the most you should be risking each bet. (assuming when a player loses, he loses his entire wager).

e.g. If you're running a game that has a 1% house edge, the kelly would say your optimal bankroll growth is achieved by risking up to 1% of your bankroll.


(Where many casinos screw up, is they don't take remove commissions from the EV. So say they charge investors 50% of the house edge each bet, risking 1% of the bankroll with a 1% house edge bet actually is more like ~2x the kelly)

While it is a kind offer, I think it's completely unreasonable of them to pay less than your complete balance. I'm sure they have rejected thousands or tens of thousands of people begging for their losings back, it would be ridiculously hypocritical to not do a full payout and if they decide to pay anything less than your full balance, I will leave my negative trust in perpetuity and encourage others to as well. It's amazing the amount of good will they're destroying by letting this drag out.

It's the "average" profit over an infinite amount of bets. Full details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value

Assuming you're running a sane casino, the EV from players perspective should be <0, and the house EV is always * -1 the players EV.

That's not a perfect generalization, but holds assuming:
 1) When a bet has two outcomes (win, lose)
 2) The lose outcome results in you losing your entire wager  (e.g. Dice)


My version is slightly more general, because it doesn't assume on 2)

Your explanation is right, but numbers are wrong. The EV is indeed the expected profit, but a player wouldn't have an expected profit of 0.99 BTC, but rather an expected profit of -0.01. And from the houses perspective, they have an expected profit of 0.01 btc for each one of these bets.

 The EV is simply calculated:


So taking a 1 BTC bet on a 1% house edge game doing 2x, from the players perspective:


49.5% (chance of winning)  * 1 (profit if win) + 50.5 (chance of losing) * -1  (profit if lose) =

0.495 - 50.5 = -0.01

In other words, the players have an expected value of -0.01  (over an infinite amount of bets, players will lose an average of 0.01 BTC per bet). Doing it from the houses perspective on the other hand will yield and EV of 0.01  (over an infinite amount of bets, their average win will be 0.01 per bet).