Edit: God damn it, this always happens to me. I divest all when I see my investment plummeting and as soon as I divest, the investor profit goes almost all the way back to where it was. Lost 10 days worth of investment in 10 minutes.
I know there's some investors (like cowbay) who wait until a they see investor profit go down, then invest, and divest when it goes up again. But all in all, I'm not convinced you will outperform just putting money in (but only as much as you can afford losing!) and forgetting about it for a few months. And for added benefit, help promote some of the MP casinos  . For instance, had you put money in at the earlier investment opportunity, you'd now be currently sitting on a 36% profit. I'm not sure if that's worth the risks or not, but hey, it's better than having lost money =) |
|
|
|
So do I win?
Yeah, yours is the best so far  ! But a couple weeks before you posted that, I had already given the bounty to blockage  On a side note, most of the replies to this thread are pretty hilarious. Seems like people don't like reading |
|
|
|
I checked my script again and I found an error on the counting part, I have missed something. Also from the total number of games some wining games were not recorded.
I apologize that I rushed on some conclusion based on wrong data.
No problems! Thanks for having the guts to admitting that, I really do appreciate it =) If you have any questions on any other findings, let me know, and i'll happily work them over with you =) |
|
|
|
Well, I just won 777 games, not 790.
So now, not only that it doesn't makes sense, but I think you should check your calculation and compare it with my bet history of my last 1686 games, bacause I had 777 wining games and 909 loosing games. I don't know zhere you come up with the 790 wining games bacause the reality is different.
That's not true. The 1686 games you're talking about is between 1931456 and 1933142 (inclusive), which means you should have won: https://gist.github.com/RHavar/f5d1cdc76d916e15688aPlease check them all, because I guarantee you won them all, and I can guarantee there's 790 of them. I checked both the provably fair, and the database. Every single game you should have won, you won. All 790 of them. |
|
|
|
"
!prob >= 2.06
Shiba: Probability of ≥2.06: 47.814538%
"
So this means in 1000 games 478 should be wins and 522 looses. This is a 44 difference (522-478=44)
In 1686 games this means that 806 (805.9 to be exact) should be wins and 880 should be looses. This is a 74 difference.
The reality:
I played 1686 consecutive games with 2.06 cashout point.
The results: 777 games won and 909 games lost. This is a 132 difference.
The difference of 132 is nearly double as it should been, 74.
This is pure matematics and probabilities. The deviation is way to big. A 10% - maxim 20% could call normal because of the variance, but nearly double?? I have made many tests with randon numbers and this is not normal.
The conclusion: I think the game it's NOT FAIR.
Edited: By the way, the last game ID thai I played is 1933142, and the first I guess is 1933142-1686.
Since you've given me good data to work with, how about we run through an example of how we can verify if this was fair or not? =) Let's start with a script that would generate all the game outcomes (and check it terminates with the final hash, proving its the "official" chain). var crypto = require('crypto');
// Set this to the hash you wish to start from:
var hash = process.argv[2];
if (!hash) throw new Error('You need to call this script with the starting hash!');
var terminatingHash = 'c1cfa8e28fc38999eaa888487e443bad50a65e0b710f649affa6718cfbfada4d'
while (hash != terminatingHash) {
console.log(crashPointFromHash(hash));
hash = genGameHash(hash);
}
function divisible(hash, mod) {
// We will read in 4 hex at a time, but the first chunk might be a bit smaller
// So ABCDEFGHIJ should be chunked like AB CDEF GHIJ
var val = 0;
var o = hash.length % 4;
for (var i = o > 0 ? o - 4 : 0; i < hash.length; i += 4) {
val = ((val << 16) + parseInt(hash.substring(i, i+4), 16)) % mod;
}
return val === 0;
}
function genGameHash(serverSeed) {
return crypto.createHash('sha256').update(serverSeed).digest('hex');
};
function crashPointFromHash(serverSeed) {
var hash = crypto.createHmac('sha256', serverSeed).update('000000000000000007a9a31ff7f07463d91af6b5454241d5faf282e5e0fe1b3a').digest('hex');
// In 1 of 101 games the game crashes instantly.
if (divisible(hash, 101))
return 0;
// Use the most significant 52-bit from the hash to calculate the crash point
var h = parseInt(hash.slice(0,52/4),16);
var e = Math.pow(2,52);
return (Math.floor((100 * e - h) / (e - h))/100).toFixed(2);
}
Ok, now save this as verify.jsNow what you need to get a recent hash, after the streak. If you didn't copy from the game, that's fine, you can even use the current one. But for simplicity, I'm going to use the terminating game hash: So we invoke the program with: node verify efe51340f3f8744d90d3c9ac349745a4aeddee2852eddbddcc4fee47c7d1a79c > all.txt
This is going to take a while, as it generates all games. It's important to let it terminate, as that will prove it's part of the canonical chain. At the top of the file, is going to have the most recent games, so let's pipe it through head to only get them: all.txt | head -n 1686 > recent.txt
and in "recent.txt" will have last 1686 games now you can open that file, and make sure it matches what you saw. And let's count what % of them were >= 2.06 cat recent.txt | awk '$1>=2.06' | wc -l
which outputs: 790, or 46.856465%. As you note, it's lower than the expected 47.814538% but that's just gambling. Hope that makes sense =) |
|
|
|
"
!prob >= 2.06
Shiba: Probability of ≥2.06: 47.814538%
"
So this means in 1000 games 478 should be wins and 522 looses. This is a 44 difference (522-478=44)
In 1686 games this means that 806 (805.9 to be exact) should be wins and 880 should be looses. This is a 74 difference.
The reality:
I played 1686 consecutive games with 2.06 cashout point.
The results: 777 games won and 909 games lost. This is a 132 difference.
The difference of 132 is nearly double as it should been, 74.
This is pure matematics and probabilities. The deviation is way to big. A 10% - maxim 20% could call normal because of the variance, but nearly double?? I have made many tests with randon numbers and this is not normal.
The conclusion: I think the game it's NOT FAIR.
Edited: By the way, the last game ID thai I played is 1933142, and the first I guess is 1933142-1686.
I don't quite understand, you've made a net profit of 4.9 bitcoins, and never had any problems with withdrawing them, and still think it's unfair? I must be a really, really shitty scammer. Anyway, the hash of game 1933142 was efe51340f3f8744d90d3c9ac349745a4aeddee2852eddbddcc4fee47c7d1a79c, as you probably saw on your screen. So why don't you try plug that into this 3rd party provably fair verifier: https://jsfiddle.net/1L1uqcgv/6/embedded/result/And you'll notice, the outcomes will have matched what you saw. |
|
|
|
If so, it seems quite suspicious to me. I mean, how unlikely is it for a player to win over 200 bitcoin within a short period of time, when the max bet per game is only 1 bitcoin?
Probably the more relevant figure is the "max profit", but yes, it's rather unlikely. The site losing ~100 btc in a day, has only happened 4 times in BaB history I believe. The last two, which were right after each other.  |
|
|
|
|
Sorry, BaB is getting hit by another DDoS (this one, interestingly most the ip's come from ec2). I've reported the offending ip addresses to AWS, and ramped up the DDoS protection (let me know if you're having issues with that, or need me to whitelist an ip address for your bot)
|
|
|
|
And it is indeed contributed only by 2 whales. realhavok's net profit went from -50 to +50 within 2 days, and whitetuxpeng's net profit went from -100 to +6 in a day.
Yeah, they were by far and away the biggest winners. But the games in general during this period of time have been pretty good. Like gizane and a few others have done pretty well too, (and a few others have done badly ) |
|
|
|
|
Players have won an incredible 200 bitcoin in the last four days!
So I'm going to inject another 100 BTC in the bankroll, to keep the max profit nice and fun for everyone. Good luck!
|
|
|
|
Hah, Ryan! Maybe add an option where people can bet where they think the crashpoint will be exactly. Or maybe ranges of crashpoints. Like: Bet 50 bit that the crash point will be between 1.00 and 1.09. If that happens you get 10x(?) your bet = 500 bits. If you bet that it will exactly crash at 1.00, you get 99x your bet. Would be a fun game  Could go crazy on the multipliers though, as you could bet it will crash at exactly 504.94 or something, which has a probability of almost zero. It's definitely something I've considered, and has volatility benefits, but I think the primary problem is in the UI. Bustabit now at its core is quite an elegant and simple game, but with these sort of side bets it might make it quite difficult to visualize/show without being too confusing |
|
|
|
I have never understood the point of "prerolling". Can someone explain this phenomena? Is it just something people do to give them a false sense of security that the same result won't happen twice in a row? Just another example of gambler's fallacy I supppose.
Yeah, it has no impact at all. The main reason people like it, seems to be so they can accumulate huge loss streaks, without actually losing much. But as you spotted, it's just the gambler fallcy. If you have a 50% chance of winning, it's still a 50% chance of winning even if you pre-rolled a 30 loss streak. But in general, casinos do well by encouraging superstitious behavior (Some physical casinos, really take it to the extreme actually. Like put easter-eggs in their games, and show misleading stats on overhead screens). |
|
|
|
nice to see a guy calling players who cannot afford big bets uneducated. im sure that will bring members flocking to play. in all seriousness you really shouldnt act as if small bettors dont matter. its not their faults they cannot afford 2btc bets. little people matter too is all im saying
That's not what I meant at all. And for the record, I'm also not talking about 2 BTC, I'm talking a 2 millions time less, or $0.000242895 And the limit isn't even harmful to small players. In fact, I've seen several players who have been playing **MONTHS** without making a single deposit, and without ever betting less than 1 bit, all from the faucet. This is a behavior I have no problems with, nor do I even have a problem with someone betting a single satoshi. But someone who claims the faucet, then autobets (an average of) 20,000 bets isn't a use-case I particularly want to support, nor do I think it's really gambling. |
|
|
|
You're going to have to present the player with two different seed hashes, one for if they bet to win over a threshold and the other for under it. Gamblers can be a suspicious lot, and having two different seeds, one for big bets and one for small could turn them off.
Yeah, I don't see a way around that. But I'm not sure most players will care that much. The educated ones can still easily follow along (and likely aren't betting dust anyway, so it doesn't affect them). But then again, I haven't been able to get through to most developers to properly use the provably fair, verify it and expose it (which is strongly in my interests, as it removes doubts). I think 6 months later, probably 95% of volume are going through casinos that don't even bother to randomize the client seed ( even though I've repeatedly shared a gist on how to do it: https://gist.github.com/RHavar/a6511dea4d4c41aeb1eb ), let alone doing more advanced verification or saving the client-seed and hash to reuse if there's an error. So if developers don't care (even with prodding), I have trouble imagining users do. |
|
|
|
That's the chance of blowing up at a certain point, but it ignores the chance of him happening to also choose the same point (based on his other bets, he wasn't waiting that long).
Well, as the player has complete control of what they want to cashout at, so it's pretty difficult to assign a probability to it. =) |
|
|
|
That sounds more like a UI issue? Could show like popup "Game still running.. will divest after current games are finished" then "We divested 100 BTC. You still have x invested". And in addition there could be a "divest all" button that just gets all after current games finished. Etc. Pretty sure that's all possible. Or you don't mean that?
That'd work fine for a game like bustabit, but the more you generalize, the harder it gets. If a player gets disconnected say playing blackjack, they'd reasonably expect they can finish the game tomorrow, but that wait is a pretty hard sell for divestors. Anyway, I think it's a solvable problem and have played with several ways to do it. But it's not something I foresee adding to MP any time soon |
|
|
|
I see. So the current Moneypot system can only work with games that the bet result is known immediately, but not games like blackjack, right?
Pretty much. Otherwise investors could use the information from partially completed games to know to invest or divest. There's some clever things you can do to get around that, but it's not been done (and would require an infeasible amount of work, at this stage) |
|
|
|
bustabit (also owned by me) doesn't offer an investment feature at the moment |
|
|
|
i have taken out and it works like a charm. however, i yet to try to take it out from moneypot.
As in, to withdraw your money? Just go to the "send" tab, enter a bitcoin address, an amount and confirm your password (and 2FA if you have one) |
|
|
|
I Want to ask
if I invested my money, can i take my money back at any time ?
Yeah, you just own a stake in the bankroll which you can claim back at any time. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
