The only urgent change that has to be done as soon as possible, in my humble opininon, is a very simple one, and is putting a huge warning on the investing windows about how risky the investment is, how returns aren't at all guaranteed, how there will be a lot of variance and there can be huge losses on the short term, only invest what you can afford to lose, etc, etc. Maybe even put a little warning always next to invested amount when it is >0.
Maybe increasing investors awareness, there would be less whining, which is the biggest problem at this moment...
I agree, that would be very good to do Doog. Something like "You have a 10% chance to lose 80% of your investment. Are you prepared to lose 80% of your investment? If not, do not invest!" Totally agree on that. I would add also a little disclaimer in red explaining what variance is. |
|
|
|
The show is on, nakowa playing with 11k roll. Wow. Edit: he changed his mind after a few bets: 13:46:24 (171208) <josephene> no more show. 13:46:32 (106686) <pmpmpm> why not ? 13:46:38 (152378) <christina> josephene try 90% haha 13:46:47 (171208) <josephene> 'cause I cannot beat the house. |
|
|
|
|
Oh. Nakowa divested his 11k.
|
|
|
|
dooglus wants out, he can't stand the variance and the ONLY reason the site remains is to be fair to the people who are still invested.
Dooglus is making good money by taking 10% weekly commission on ALL the profits made on his site. That's a good, risk-free business model for him, so let me strongly disagree on your statement quoted above. |
|
|
|
Doog, let me ask you a question just made to you on the chat and that peaked my interest: are you acting like the funds on the bankroll were 100% yours, or not? I wonder that too. Normally casinos use their own money to fund their roll, and thus they protect it. In this case, your profit is in the commissions and you are actually totally divested. If that's your business model, I'm fine with it. I would just like to know if: a) are you acting like the money in the bankroll was yours? Not 100%, but at least 50% - I make this differentiation because the "dilution" part is one of the things that is killing investors with losses. if not: b) what would you do if a big part of the casino's roll was yours? No FUD intended, and no harsh feeling from me, but for me the fact you are 100% divested is very telling, and I'm very interested on your reasoned answers on the above. Thank you for addressing our concerns, as always... I think you are over invested Rampion. You had more trust in it a few weeks ago but now you want to change things and question Doog his care. Are you prepared for a -80% drawdown from here? If not, why not? You are right, I'm clearly overinvested. I trust dooglus, I trust math, and while I think 1% is very small, its clear that all this concern started to grow in me when I invested 4x the amount of coins I had before we went to 1/4 Kelly. After that, I went berserk and invested exactly 15x my initial investment. Too many coins to think clearly. The fact remains that the only rational thing to maximize long term profits is too go full kelly, while realizing this is a risky high variance/high potential profits investment - and thus investing just what you can comfortably afford to lose for good. I will man up, take the 20% loss I had in the last days and divest at least 50% of my funds, so I can comfortably ride the waves without whining like a little bitch  |
|
|
|
Did you finally get your free Jupiter? |
|
|
|
We will contact you per email as soon as your order is ready with the details for pickup.
Starting the production lines did not go as smoothly as they did expect.
meeeh, I don't think that they will start shipping todat.( It doesn't look like they will ship this week at all. AFAIK they are still working on debugging (+25% hardware error, right?), webinterface, etc. - as soon as they have gone through these processes they should implement everything on hundreds (if not thousands) of machines, pack them up, etc. People in here daydream and think that you can take the very first version of a bleeding edge piece of hardware directly from the production line, pack it up and send it up to thousands of customers in just one day, without any kind of testing/debugging. Wishful thinking and day dreaming all over this forum... |
|
|
|
Now someone explains me what will happen if nakowa starts playing again with max bet, put the bankroll down to -10K (it can easily happen and it is mathematically provable), and then he invests again.
This is exactly what he just did, and what he is planning to do in the future. |
|
|
|
Doog, let me ask you a question just made to you on the chat and that peaked my interest: are you acting like the funds on the bankroll were 100% yours, or not? I wonder that too. Normally casinos use their own money to fund their roll, and thus they protect it. In this case, your profit is in the commissions and you are actually totally divested. If that's your business model, I'm fine with it. I would just like to know if: a) are you acting like the money in the bankroll was yours? Not 100%, but at least 50% - I make this differentiation because the "dilution" part is one of the things that is killing investors with losses. if not: b) what would you do if a big part of the casino's roll was yours? No FUD intended, and no harsh feeling from me, but for me the fact you are 100% divested is very telling, and I'm very interested on your reasoned answers on the above. Thank you for addressing our concerns, as always... |
|
|
|
That guy really wants to lose it, doesn't he?
I guess... 00:42:14 *** fuckit (169618) [#148584193] bet 2170.97057849 BTC at 92% and won 165.18255156 BTC *** 00:43:32 *** fuckit (169618) [#148585325] bet 2336.15313005 BTC at 92% and won 177.75078975 BTC *** 00:48:31 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590355] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC *** 00:49:14 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590882] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC *** Well, let's look at it positively. If he continues like this he will lose it. Even 92% can go wrong. He just withdrew 3100 BTC. Nice winnings. Oh, damn. Well, gamblers will be gamblers. I bet that he will come back and do the same again. I guess he just tried to cover his 35% loss by reckless gambling, leaving his fellow investors holding a bigger bag. Well, that's life, and I guess that finally he realized that funding a casino is not a "long term, stable investment"  |
|
|
|
Also Dooglus, I would suggest making investors pay for each divest they do. However give every user 1 free divest per day.
This will stop the daytraders that are creating more negative EV for the long investors, and also its still fair to those people that needs quick access to their coins. A non day trading investor will not have used up their free fee and thus have nothing to worry about.
I don't agree that daytraders are creating negative EV for long term investors. By being divested part of the time they increase the long term investor's share of the profits, increasing their EV. It's common for players on the site to invest between playing sessions. I don't think it's fair to penalise them doing so by charging them an extra fee each time they divest to play. It makes them less likely to play at all. Daytrading is not creating -EV for long term investors, but a cold hard fact remains: those who invested at site's inception and never divested are now stuck with a huge +30% loss, despite of the +3M btc and 150M bets wagered. Crazy stuff, as the numbers seem large enough for the house edge to be working fine. Anyhow, your point about a divestment fee discouraging divesting to gamble is very spot on, I guess we are all just brainstorming to find a solution that makes the site more profitable for investors that fund the bankroll without divesting and causing "bank runs" that make you and other investors nervous. Mechs: I criticized you hard for putting pressure on doog to cripple max profit, and I still think that was a big mistake. We went to 1/4 Kelly in the middle of a session in which Nakowa lost 5k. You and some others believe this loss was caused precisely by lowering max profit - I believe that's baseless, lucky numbers didn't change and IMO a higher max profit would have led Nakowa to lose way more, but we will never be able to find out who is right. Nevertheless, I perfectly understand the reasons that made you nervous, and I felt extremely bad for you when I read about your loss. I'm very happy you sorted it out, that would have been a mind blowing loss. Just let me recommend you against "picking pennies on a train track" by betting thousands of coins at 92% odds, you will want to kill yourself if you'd lose such an amount in such a stupid way now that your anger is taking over. |
|
|
|
Is this something I have any chance of winning? There's an email address on the ticket, but I imagine it's a throwaway. He came into the chat asking "did you read my email?" so I'll have his IP address logged too. How illegal is what he did? He ended up saying sorry after all. That makes it all better. Right?
You cannot win anything, as it is with criminal prosecution. He can face jail time for trying to extort you. I think I'd chuckle and let it slide too (I'm lazy), but he might do this to someone else who's more gullible then you in the future too. Blackmail is despicable ... How do you file charges of extortion when you are running an illegal casino? The royal mounted police would have a field day with that. "Mr. Officer, I have this online casino in which some days up to $150M are wagered, but do not worry, its just magic Internet money... " |
|
|
|
|
Ah.... No. You are just a filthy scammer as it was obvious from minute 1.
|
|
|
|
You really are a class act, so you steal people's money to invest in another casino, then you try and make it seem like your doing them a favor by investing there money in another casino to pay them back.
As I have already said security was compromised, a small bug was exploited and BTC was lost (and as I recall I have mentioned that we will not be taking ANY responsibility in that event due to our safety margin being non existent, e.g. 0% fees), if I have really wanted to steal peoples money I could disappear with the 880BTC invested in the system at its peak but I didn't. Instead I have made the best situation out of what happened and took full responsibility as well as have agreed to make everyone whole, I have even agreed to sink my own 13,000$ in the process of making everyone whole and I am sitting here with a fever working actively to ultimately repay everyone owed despite the constant threats etc. How am I a thief again? The offer was altruistic in nature to begin with, I had no intention of making any profit in the first few months. The 100BTC is enough to cover about (roughly) 1/3 of the debt, if I could repay it fully I would. You have no idea of what running a business means, you speak about "updating people" like those who were scammed should be grateful to you for not just disappearing. You started a business, people trusted you their hard earned money, you screwed up: just be a man, take responsibility and use that 100BTC to pay back the money you owe. |
|
|
|
|
I don't like the investment fee, I think investment should be encouraged by being totally free.
On the contrary, I'm entertaining the idea that a divestment fee applied on profit only could be good for the long term investors and thus the Casino. It would be a fee independent from the weekly one, and it could be redistributed between investors that did not divest, being a reward for maintaining a stable roll for the Casino. At first sight it seems to me a nice way to minimize the risk of "bank run", which was the main concern during nakowas winning streaks.
|
|
|
|
Anybody received a UPS tracking number yet ?
Overdelivering now, no need for trackings. |
|
|
|
A lot of the discussion about investment daytrading daygambling misses the point:
It doesn't matter if investment daytrading is long-term -EV or not (as I said before, if the site is compromised it could be +EV, because then the bets aren't random either anymor), but the real point is this:
What's the point of allowing investments in the site to be another form of gambling, when there already *is* a way to gamble if you want to do so?
Right now, a number of investors lost more than their share of the house loss because of this trading. It makes them unhappy.
So the only relevant question, in my opinion is:
Is a majority of investors in favor of daytrading (because they like to do so themselves)
or
Is a majority of investors against daytrading (because they suffered additional losses because of it)
(yes, there could be a third, indifferent group, but I'm simplifying here)
I propose we find out what the majority of investors think about this, and then bring the issue to dooglus for consideration.
As I've said before, I'm in favor of limiting investment daytrading: introduce a one hour (or so) delay to re-investing after divesting (and add additional measure to reduce the risk of circumvention via multiple accounts). The goal is not to reduce daygambling to 0%, but to limit it.
I fully agree with your analysis on daygambling. I think the "daygambling" possibility adds a random gambling aspect on to of the volatility created by the small house edge. I love the fact JD is extremely liquid, but I strongly believe a stable bankroll will be better for the site in the long run. The fact is that investors who do not "daygamble" are getting hurt, and I have the impression this won't be good in the long run. |
|
|
|
|
Tucenabar, I cannot really understand you graphs, care to explain them again?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
