Moneypot dice vs Just-Dice provably fair

[eidde]

Which one do you guys like best? Doing some research for a new dice site.

[CryptoMrM]

Just-Dice.

[RHavar]

They're just different. If you're a human verifying the bets, Just-Dice's is strictly better. If you're automatically verifying bets, MoneyPot's is better as it's simpler, and you can do it immediately.  Automatically verifying bets however, has the downside that the user needs to trust the auto-verification.

Actually the earlier prototypes of MoneyPot used to use Just-Dice's provably fair scheme, but it was too difficult for apps to verify (they need to keep their own independent, and complete record, and batch verify them) especially in the case of things like races (apps parallelizing bets for instance) and non-exclusive api calls (e.g. even as simple as two tabs open).

Actually, for instance one thing I want to build is a browser-plugin that MITM all bets to moneypot  (regardless of the casino it originates from) and randomizes the client-seed and verifies the bet (and gives a warning to the user if it doesn't). Such tools like this wouldn't really be feasible with JDs scheme.

But however, if you expect end-users to verify the bets, I'd definitely use JD's scheme.

--

Edit: It's actually quite possible to combine both schemes, in one that allows both batch verification AND realtime verification. Something I considered doing, but laziness won the day, and I'm a sucker for simplicity.

[coinableS]

Personally I prefer the self verification of the rolls over the auto verification of moneypots provably fair system. But maybe that because I'm more developer focused than others and I like to do things myself.  Both seem to be very reputable places, I have used both and have no complaints about either.

[RHavar]

Personally I prefer the self verification of the rolls over the auto verification of moneypots provably fair system.

Just to be clear, you can self-verify MP bets too. It's just a pain in the ass.

Here's the procedure for manual verification both:

Just-Dice:
1. Record the server seed hash
2. Change the client seed to something you picked
3. <make 1 or more bets> (and remember the order, direction and amount you bet)
4. Ask the server to reveal the server seed
5. Use a script to generate the outcomes
6. Compare the lists

MoneyPot:
1. Record the server seed hash
2. Change the client seed to something you picked
3. <make 1 bet>
4. Use a script to check the outcome, given the bet result (and client seed)
5. Compare


--

So the advantage to JD's scheme, is if you trust your memory (or bet predictably) you can bet over and over. It's honestly much better for a human. But MPs advantage is it happens on a per-bet basis, and if you trust the verification script you can automate it. All MP casinos (with the exception of DustDice) are third-party, and their interests strongly align with players  (they make more money by having players win than lose)

[BetterBets.io]

Personally I prefer the self verification of the rolls over the auto verification of moneypots provably fair system.

Just to be clear, you can self-verify MP bets too. It's just a pain in the ass.

Here's the procedure for manual verification both:

Just-Dice:
1. Record the server seed hash
2. Change the client seed to something you picked
3. <make 1 or more bets> (and remember the order, direction and amount you bet)
4. Ask the server to reveal the server seed
5. Use a script to generate the outcomes
6. Compare the lists

MoneyPot:
1. Record the server seed hash
2. Change the client seed to something you picked
3. <make 1 bet>
4. Use a script to check the outcome, given the bet result (and client seed)
5. Compare


--

So the advantage to JD's scheme, is if you trust your memory (or bet predictably) you can bet over and over. It's honestly much better for a human. But MPs advantage is it happens on a per-bet basis, and if you trust the verification script you can automate it. All MP casinos (with the exception of DustDice) are third-party, and their interests strongly align with players  (they make more money by having players win than lose)

One thought on this script, we could always ask a trusted third party to create an easily usable script to verify all bets. Our team and yours are both big fans of transparency, just need someone willing to take the time to make the script. Either way, Just-Dice and Moneypot/BetterBets are all here to provide a fair and enjoyable experience for all players who like to use Bitcoin for gaming and gambling.

Good fortune to all of you.

[waterpile]

I prefer Just-Dice provable fair system 

[orryde]

Probably fair i choose Just-Dice

[eidde]

Would it be possible to get the best of both worlds? A system where a user could safely use the same client seed over and over while the server used a hierarchical server seed. Something related to Bitcoin deterministic addresses.

[SyGambler]

if you only want to know about the provably fair for these sites , then you can trust em both
JD and MP both have good reputable here so you can trust both , just choose the site that you love betting at more
also it's useful to research about sites that have bounties , rainbot ....etc but as I said both MP and JD are great to play at

[bitbaby]

I think although the automatic verification is far more convenient but I think some of the gamblers still prefer to manually verify their rolls and which is why Just-dice's verification method is preferred by mainly high rollers, people who play for fun and roll with not big amounts don't want to bother verifying bets manually and they prefer the automated version.

But even the automated one can be verified manually when in doubt so I think I would go with the Automated version.

[Superhitech]

Would it be possible to get the best of both worlds? A system where a user could safely use the same client seed over and over while the server used a hierarchical server seed. Something related to Bitcoin deterministic addresses.

Yes, that is possible, but it would take more work.

It's actually quite possible to combine both schemes, in one that allows both batch verification AND realtime verification. Something I considered doing, but laziness won the day, and I'm a sucker for simplicity.

[RHavar]

Would it be possible to get the best of both worlds? A system where a user could safely use the same client seed over and over while the server used a hierarchical server seed. Something related to Bitcoin deterministic addresses.

There's probably some clever solutions, but you can do it pretty easily by first implementing the JD solution and (on demand) generating a new salt for each in bet in the sequence. Before each bet, you tell the client what the `sha256(outcome + '|' + salt)` is going to be, and after after each game you can reveal both the outcome (before applying the client seed) and the salt.  The benefit of that, would be you would have two independent ways to verify bets, either in batch (great for humans) or realtime (great for bots).  However, I'm highly skeptical that the overhead and complexity is worth while for the 0.01% of people who care (and who already have no problems verifying their bets).

[Unread]

Bustabit,Sunday Then I see someone win 9 BTC
https://www.bustabit.com/game/1771047

[ndnh]

Just-Dice. 

[Winalunt]

there is no significant difference among them as both of them are online casinos which are not made just for your profits.
but i guess moneypot (bustabit) is  a lot better than dice sites.

[ndnh]

Money pot, the big flaw with Just dice is that if you play casually by the time you've made a few dozens bets its impossible to remember exactly your bets. Maybe this doesn't apply to people who for always bet lo, but I like to feel my bets and not write down those bets so the money pot system is for me

Just look at the "My bets" tab.

there is no significant difference among them as both of them are online casinos which are not made just for your profits.
but i guess moneypot (bustabit) is  a lot better than dice sites.

Moneypot, here refers to the https://www.moneypot.com/ , not the other one.