Bitcoin Forum
June 26, 2019, 07:07:01 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 »
61  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 20, 2013, 09:23:33 PM
a large investor can try to freeze nearly everyone else out when there's no whales around by inserting a large local value so that max-bet rises to where anyone operating at 10% with 10% of coins deposited can no longer cover a single max-bet so is frozen out of taking the low-level action.  As soon as a few start doing that everyone who wants any action when whales aren't around ends up having to deposit all coins anyway.

I don't think so.  Everyone still contributes 1% (or 0.1%, according to the recently proposed modification) of their total investment (invested + local) to the max bet.  The guy operating with 90% of his coins in local still gets 1% of (invested+local) matched from every max bet.  The large investor can say "I have a million coins locally", and add 10k to the max profit.  In that case he probably gets 99% of the action.  But he's 99% of the bankroll, so that's fair, right?

Other issue with it it transparency.  If someone's balance is near the max-bet then they'd be in and out of investing a lot if there was a whale betting.  It would be hard for them to verify that their ending balance was actually fair.  The lack of ability to easily see that your balance was what it should be in those circumstances is possibly the largest argument against it from an investor's perspective.

Transparency is already an issue.  When a whale wins 1k then loses it back and you end up a little down on the deal, can you see why?  Am I just taking a few coins off and thinking you'll never notice?

I could add an entry to your investment history every time someone invests or divests, showing your new percentage share of the bankroll, but that seems a little much.

I suspect that just having a selectable risk percentage is going to be a simpler, more efficient implementation. 
62  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 20, 2013, 08:52:38 PM
What is to stop someone from claiming 10,000 coins are in local storage but are 'invested' to get more leverage on the site?

A signed message from an address containing the coins?

Furthermore, what system is in place to ensure that the coins remain in that address?  

I think you're missing the point.  I don't care if they really have the coins they claim to have or not.  I let them risk 1% of their total claimed amount, until the coins I have control of from them are less than 1% of the total they claim.  Then I force-divest them.

It could be that they have in fact invested all their coins, and the other 99% in the "local" storage are a lie.  That just means that they're risking 100% of their coins per roll, and will go bust when the first max bet wins.

I don't think this passes any extra risk onto other investors.  It is somewhat like trading on margin, but with the important difference that there's no risk of slippage when I have to "liquidate" their position.  I just remove them from the bankroll.

The effect I'm looking for is a way that people can risk more than 1% of what they've sent me without making the calculations too complex.  I think this "fractional reserve" idea does it.  Please don't just react to the fractional reserve concept at a gut level.  I don't need to be holding all the coins you claim to be risking 1% of (and I don't even care whether you have them either), so long as I always make sure I have access to all the coins you're actually risking per roll.

Well then forget about the local coins completely, they are totally irrelevant.

What you are trying to do is simply a more computationally efficient way to get arbitrarily increased risk exposure, right?

A person has a deposit amount and a coin multiplier amount. Right now the multiplier is 1. You track real coins on deposit, and multiplied coins. If a loss on an account holder's multiplied coins exceeds the deposit balance, then the real balance is wiped out. The max bet is 1% of the total number of multiplied coins on the site.

It's clever, but I suspect implementing it will be less efficient than you think.  You need to track two balances per account.  You need to test for the edge cases for when the loss exposure on a bet would potentially exceed the remaining reserve of some account. What do you do then?  Force liquidate or lock account when reserves are less than the potential max loss from a single bet?

Also, both the real coins and the multiplied coins will still be changing after each bet right?  Or I suppose you have the total number of multiplied coins fixed and the multiplier amount be variable after each bet.
63  Economy / Gambling / Re: Looking for advices for a slot machine game (btw: I'm nakowa) on: July 20, 2013, 06:20:06 PM

2. the investors can't enjoy a multiplied profit from the rise of share price as do satoshidice.com share holders (some of them enjoyed a 32-fold profit!).
 

Cheapest IPO shares were .0032, highest sale was .0075.

64  Economy / Gambling / Re: Looking for advices for a slot machine game (btw: I'm nakowa) on: July 20, 2013, 06:18:44 PM
This guy is a gambling genius.


65  Economy / Gambling / Re: No one can beat the house, but I won... on: July 20, 2013, 06:17:15 PM
Pretty amazing results...

66  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 20, 2013, 05:44:48 PM
if you decide to implement the variable investment rate, can you also make an option to enter
how much I have in my cold storage? This way, I won't have to manually manage the investment,
unless it becomes insufficient.

I've only just woken up and not had coffee yet, but could this be the answer for people wanting to invest more but put off by the CP risk?

Every user has not just "balance" (for playing with) and "invested" (coins actively in the bankroll) but also a "local" balance, which is coins the user holds themselves, but consider part of the bankroll.  On every roll, the site risks 1% of ("invested" plus "local") for the user.  The user's percentage of the bankroll stays constant, since everyone is risking 1%, and it works fine until "invested" shrinks to less than 1% of "invested" + "local" (since the site then doesn't have access to the 1% they're risking).

This allows players to risk 1% of their whole holdings without having to send their entire holdings to me.  They only need to send 1% plus however much extra they want as a buffer.

It's a shame this doesn't appear to address the issue of people who want to risk less than 1% of their investment, because otherwise it looks like a good solution to me.

Example:

Say there's 9k invested.  New investor has 1k BTC but doesn't want to have to trust me with it all.  He deposits 100 BTC and says "there's 900 BTC more where that came from that I'd like you to consider the whole 1k invested, but I'll hold it for now".

I update the investors list to say that there's now 10k invested, that the new user has 10% of the bankroll, and that 900 BTC of his is "local" (to him - need a better term for this).  Then a whale loses 2000 BTC.  Total bankroll is 12k.  New user's 10% share is 1200 BTC.  "local" is still 900 BTC, and so the user is free to withdraw up to 300 BTC if he likes.

He's risked 10% of his 100 deposit on every roll without the site having to do lots of math on each roll, just by storing one extra value per user: "local", representing the amount they claim to have invested but stored locally.

What is to stop someone from claiming 10,000 coins are in local storage but are 'invested' to get more leverage on the site?

A signed message from an address containing the coins?

Furthermore, what system is in place to ensure that the coins remain in that address? 

For example, F.GIGA.ETF had a signed message saying 900 shares of GIGAMINING were backing it, but there was no way to determine if the backing shares were later sold off, as some suspect.
67  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 20, 2013, 05:54:55 AM
This seems to be frequently misunderstood.  Any suggestions of how to reword the "invest" tab to make this clearer would be appreciated.

You could replace all references to "invest" with "house". Invest implies some entitlements and can also be misunderstood as shares. Bottom-line the "investors" are just playing the house.

Entitlements: Ive seen quite a few users trying to enforce their entitlements. "Im a shareholder and demand the edge&risk be so and so" sound familiar?

Shares: Some might also think that invest=shares like sdice were you never actually lose money. You only get dividends. The share price might fall but you never get fewer shares.

At least change "Be the Bank!" under the invest tab with Be the House!. Bank is the old fiat were trying to replace Wink

I do kinda like the change in nomenclature.  Play as the house!
68  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: 0.25 BTC Bounty - Show me a Mt Gox USD Withdrawal :) on: July 20, 2013, 04:30:16 AM
Well thats the big question.  You can register as an MSB with FinCEN but that still doesn't give you a money transmitter license for states.  You have to apply for a money transmitter license in each state.  The process almost never takes less than a year... unless they somehow became an agent of an already registered MSB/money transmitter.  

registration is almost irrelevant.  They need a license

But I imagine they found new partners outside US that will pass along the wire.  I think Germany and Canada's stance on bitcoin is more supportive of innovation.


69  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: 0.25 BTC Bounty - Show me a Mt Gox USD Withdrawal :) on: July 20, 2013, 03:39:18 AM
Just sent .25 BTC to 1Dp2MLMRKJKQAQuFeWYWKYUN3JJSJ6FGeT  Please confirm.

The man comes thru!

Thank you zeroblock for stepping up.
70  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Play or Invest : 1% House Edge : Banter++ on: July 20, 2013, 03:32:13 AM
Had a great time on Just-Dice today.  Spent a few hours, quite a few coins, and gave people a decent show to watch while still ending up breaking even.

I enjoyed watching you.  You made 5182 bets, wagered 21,506 BTC, and ended up with a profit of 0.00000000 BTC.

Here's a chart of just your play from today:



That was a badass run.

Though it ended in tears, after this chart stopped...  oh my...  Deviated from the 1,3,7,15,32 reset progression and paid for it dearly.
71  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 20, 2013, 03:31:25 AM
I think there's about 0% chance of dooglus implementing it so I'm done discussing it.

Who knows, he has considered something along these lines:

could you have different interfaces for the bettors, that access completely different bankrolls that are not mixed together?

I could make two completely separate sites, and the players could decide whether they wanted to play against the men or the boys...  But who would want to play on the site with the 10 times smaller max bet?

I'm assuming the bankrolls need to be combined to offer a single combined max bet to the players.

It's possible to treat the two bankrolls as separate and rebalance what percentage of the whole bankroll is owned by each sub-bankroll after each roll.  Then the percentages within each of the two sub-rolls is constant.  And that's the solution I will implement if/when I do so.

I'm considering two different things there:

1) Make two sites.  But what's the point.  Rejected.

2) Allow variable levels of risk.  You only risk 0.1% of your investment per roll, only contribute 0.1% to the max bet, but only get 10% as much exposure to all bets as if you risked 1%.

2) is quite different than saying "I want my fair share of bets up to 10 BTC but nothing any higher".  It is saying "I don't want to risk 1% of my investment on the big rolls and am prepared to get less of the small rolls also".

I imagine Deprived would be in favour of having 2) implemented, but will let him speak for himself.

If you can implement #2 in a computationally-efficient and user-selectable way, I am ALL FOR IT.  It will be really cool to see all of the people complaining about too much variance see their share get diluted over time as the people with optimal risk setting (1%) reap maximum reward.
72  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 20, 2013, 12:03:52 AM
Wagered in the first month is 500,000BTC.  Assuming that holds steady, EV of doog's fee is 500,000*12*.01*.05 = 3000BTC / yr.  Or about as much as a lower midlevel Goldman Sachs manager, or a 3rd year associate at Wachtell, without having student debt, having to bill 2800 hrs/yr or pay rent on that midtown pied--terre.

That would be 3,000 btc ($270k) while returning 60,000 btc - 3000 btc = 57,000 btc ($5.1 million) to investors.

I must admit, that looks good too.

He could easily add 2% management fee though, if invested capital stays steady at 25,000 btc that would be an extra 400 btc that he earns for sure while returning the same profits of 57,000 btc to investors but not returning 25,000 btc of original capital but 24,600 btc.  

Heck it's too low to even bother, he could ask 4% management fee per year (0.01% per day), giving him 3 btc per day, or 1000 btc per year, and returning 24,000 btc to investors instead of 25,000 btc.

If the site is in the red for half a year he makes at least a living.


Vanguard charges 0.08-0.25% management fee on most of their products.   

They are by far the biggest financial investment fund.  They are also the only one that people should invest in.  Hedge funds are losing investments, and have dramatically underperformed the SP500 for the last decade.  The only ones that make money do insider trading, and those are under attack (SAC) and make it nearly impossible to beat the market after fees.

I think a management fee on total equity rather than on return would depress investment. 
73  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: 0.25 BTC Bounty - Show me a Mt Gox USD Withdrawal :) on: July 19, 2013, 11:53:31 PM
Now, can we all settle down?

Reread the bounty conditions. It was for withdrawals initiated after the 4th of July. Yours appears to be initiated on the 3rd of July.

7/3/13 @ 16:16 PDT = 7/4/13 08:16 JST.

Bounty up.

-EP

EP, if you don't get your bounty, come to just-dice, I'll send you .25 if you promise to try to bet it up to .5 and pay me half if you make it there Wink
74  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: 0.25 BTC Bounty - Show me a Mt Gox USD Withdrawal :) on: July 19, 2013, 11:15:36 PM
Now, can we all settle down?

Reread the bounty conditions. It was for withdrawals initiated after the 4th of July. Yours appears to be initiated on the 3rd of July.

That is some weak-ass nitpicking.

Congrats Episking on getting cash out of Gox, and thank you for sticking with the withdrawal process when many of us lost faith.

Now come bet your bounty on Just-Dice... Smiley
75  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 19, 2013, 11:13:27 PM
Doog now has a sound that plays if a whale wins or loses a big bet.  That can be a cue for weak-kneed investors to divest.
76  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 19, 2013, 10:26:26 PM
I really don't see an issue with having a commision of 10% or even 20%

Remember the more money Dooglus makes the more chance the site will get better technically and Dooglus will spend time working with the site.

Of course any talk of taking a % of "managed funds" regardless of profit similar to a hedge fund is a complete scam. A analysis found the majority of hedge funds never make their clients back the 2% and are actually scam investments, except the client agreed to the theft in the first place.

Taking a bigger cut from profits is totally cool, any talk about a cut from our money is not cool.

Hedge funds take 2% of managed funds per year + 20% of the profits.

Dooglus, my advice; increase commision now to between 10% and 20%. Give certain large investors who have lost hundreds of Bitcoin to Celeste a 5% commision for a long time to recover their loss whilst supporting your site. Apart from the investors that have taken huge losses anyone in the positive now or soon should become cool with a larger rake.

When Dooglus offers different tiers of investment, the riskier ones will have to have a much smaller commission, perhaps 5% because the risk is unacceptable for a large commision. This all depends on how Dooglus sets up the different investment vehicles on the site.

I agree that percentage on the funds under management sucks for the investor but as dooglus said in some other thread 20% of nothing is nothing.

I think there is a good reason why there are no money management companies that charge only a percentage of the profits. If it would work we would long have seen it.

You can't run a business with months or years of no income and stay motivated. It might also push you to take unnecessary risk with the capital.


Let's not forget that dooglus his most important job is as a custodian. He needs to safeguard the money on a daily basis. Not losing that comes before making a profit.  

A custodian is payed with a percentage of what he safeguards.


I think therefore that a percentage on funds under management should come first and foremost. And indeed he should get a bigger stake of the profit so that he becomes also rich if he makes the investors rich.


I'm thinking out loud here but if he were to charge say 2% per year on the funds under management, charged daily, and raise commission to 10% of profits.

That would give him an income immediately of 25k x 2% / 365 days (= 0.005% per day) = 1.4 bitcoin per day. It's not a lot but it pays some bills at least.

And if he succeeds to double the money that would be 25k btc profit ($2 million) x 10% = 2500 btc ($200k) making him rich - if - he does that many times over and continues to make profits in BTC. (In contrast to Mr Voorhees!)


I also don't like to see fixed management costs being added but right now I get the impression this is not working for him nor will it make him rich, even if he succeeds.

Wagered in the first month is 500,000BTC.  Assuming that holds steady, EV of doog's fee is 500,000*12*.01*.05 = 3000BTC / yr.  Or about as much as a lower midlevel Goldman Sachs manager, or a 3rd year associate at Wachtell, without having student debt, having to bill 2800 hrs/yr or pay rent on that midtown pied--terre.
77  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 19, 2013, 10:08:25 PM
Another key issue that I think some people may not yet appreciate is the expected distribution of outcomes during a martingale, which is a popular system bettors use on the site.

It looks like this :


Most of the time, investors will be depressed as the big bettors suck coins out of the site seemingly every session.  But there will be sessions where catastrophic failure occurs.  The investors that hold fast until those sessions will reap large rewards.

78  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: July 19, 2013, 09:06:04 PM
If Jobs taught us anything, its that Simple is best for the consumer experience.

Changing things in an emotionally reactive way is bad. Changing things confuses people, makes the future harder to judge. Adding complexity is bad. The site is in its infancy. Just observe it over a long enough timeframe to understand what it is, before trying to turn it into something else.
79  Economy / Securities / Re: S.DICE - SatoshiDICE 100% Dividend-Paying Asset on MPEx on: July 18, 2013, 03:55:45 PM
Seriously??? I am really shocked to see most of you are so happy with this ending.

Apparently, Erik really know finance and really good at misleading people by his knowledge. What happened here is someone took over Erik's shares at a discount price - 0.00126315. Then Erik told us that your share is worth 0.00126315 but I will add another 0.00223685 because I am responsible. Come on! Look at MPEX, the past 30 days average is around 0.0025. I believe this is how they value shares at real life stock market.

This is not the only one. When Erik tried to offer the shares at first, the shares are valued at 8 P/E ratio. Afterward when people start to losing money and blame Erik, he was like - don't too focus on price movement, please look at
annualized return, the P/E ratio is 8! Now when he try to buy back those shares, he seems forget to mention P/E at all - its time to look back to price! Wow! What a generous guy! If we give the 8 on current earning, the price will be at least 0.0045.

Is this fair???

If we ignore all the noises - the buyout thing, the 0.00126315 and the new owner - no one know if they are really exist. What we are 100% sure is Erik issued shares at around 0.0035. Now he buy back at same price. What he got? A business with public recognition through IPO. What shareholders got? Nothing.

Is this fair???

I hear you man.

Trades on mpex the past month look like some heavy insider trading for millions of shares, making the people that sold for a much lower price almost half of the mpex shares.

Erik, was this you buying up or one of your friends with inside knowledge?



Of course it was him.  Remember when he was going to steal all the dividends last month too?  Dude knows how to extract bitcoins from the community. He has probably acquired the majority of the float on MPEX over the last month.
80  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Play or Invest : 1% House Edge : Banter++ on: July 18, 2013, 01:36:07 AM
Losing a week wage in 5 minutes, arrghh Grin Celeste is a maniac... Anyway, the feature allowing investors to choose what part of their investment will people bet against would be very appreciated. I have done some simulations and the current setup means that if the site has bad luck and there are whales this crazy, we can all be down for months with a pretty decent probability. I mean, I don't mind, but I am sure there are more risk averse investors out there...

Lost half a year's wage in 25 seconds. :-P
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!