🌟🎲🌟 MoneyPot.com

[1982dre]

refill your hot wallet I want to w/d pls  

Currently processing withdrawals manually as a precaution.  Will get yours done quickly.

edit; *All withdrawals cleared
*excluding NotTardy for quick investigation purposes

Thanks got mine.

[Helix61be]

that's crazy i just withdrew an hour before this, came back and saw the win,i could barely believe it.
   

[RHavar]

For reference, user 'NotTardy' has hit a Dust Lottery jackpot for an amount of 94 bitcoin.

Ouchies, that's like 10% of the bankroll in a single bet?  


Hmm, a "jackpot style bet" is a very interesting case. Because it's so accessible to players (they can do it with only a few bits),  it allows virtually anyone to push investors into negative bankroll growth. I'm not sure what the house edge of the game, but let's just assume it was 15% and the gambler was aiming to win 10% of the house bankrol. From investors point of view, their EV would be 4.5% of what ever the gambler is betting (0.3 * 0.15) -- however, they're risking 10% ... which puts the investment a 2.2x kelly risk each bet (and any kelly above 2 means investors should expect to lose money over the long term).

(Although, I could be off base here, if the house edge was > 20%, then that's totally fine. Investors just got very unlucky).

Anyway, congratulations to the winner! Pretty incredible win

[Dogedigital]

For reference, user 'NotTardy' has hit a Dust Lottery jackpot for an amount of 94 bitcoin.

Ouchies, that's like 10% of the bankroll in a single bet?  


Hmm, a "jackpot style bet" is a very interesting case. Because it's so accessible to players (they can do it with only a few bits),  it allows virtually anyone to push investors into negative bankroll growth. I'm not sure what the house edge of the game, but let's just assume it was 15% and the gambler was aiming to win 10% of the house bankrol. From investors point of view, their EV would be 4.5% of what ever the gambler is betting (0.3 * 0.15) -- however, they're risking 10% ... which puts the investment a 2.2x kelly risk each bet (and any kelly above 2 means investors should expect to lose money over the long term).

(Although, I could be off base here, if the house edge was > 20%, then that's totally fine. Investors just got very unlucky).

Anyway, congratulations to the winner! Pretty incredible win

The house edge is 9.22%.

[superbit]

For reference, user 'NotTardy' has hit a Dust Lottery jackpot for an amount of 94 bitcoin.

Ouchies, that's like 10% of the bankroll in a single bet?  


Hmm, a "jackpot style bet" is a very interesting case. Because it's so accessible to players (they can do it with only a few bits),  it allows virtually anyone to push investors into negative bankroll growth. I'm not sure what the house edge of the game, but let's just assume it was 15% and the gambler was aiming to win 10% of the house bankrol. From investors point of view, their EV would be 4.5% of what ever the gambler is betting (0.3 * 0.15) -- however, they're risking 10% ... which puts the investment a 2.2x kelly risk each bet (and any kelly above 2 means investors should expect to lose money over the long term).

(Although, I could be off base here, if the house edge was > 20%, then that's totally fine. Investors just got very unlucky).

Anyway, congratulations to the winner! Pretty incredible win

Curious on this, should moneypot have accepted the bet then?

[gordonhill]

For reference, user 'NotTardy' has hit a Dust Lottery jackpot for an amount of 94 bitcoin.

Ouchies, that's like 10% of the bankroll in a single bet?  


Hmm, a "jackpot style bet" is a very interesting case. Because it's so accessible to players (they can do it with only a few bits),  it allows virtually anyone to push investors into negative bankroll growth. I'm not sure what the house edge of the game, but let's just assume it was 15% and the gambler was aiming to win 10% of the house bankrol. From investors point of view, their EV would be 4.5% of what ever the gambler is betting (0.3 * 0.15) -- however, they're risking 10% ... which puts the investment a 2.2x kelly risk each bet (and any kelly above 2 means investors should expect to lose money over the long term).

(Although, I could be off base here, if the house edge was > 20%, then that's totally fine. Investors just got very unlucky).

Anyway, congratulations to the winner! Pretty incredible win

The house edge is 9.22%.

Just for reference : https://www.moneypot.com/bets/566859037

[Dogedigital]

~99% of the bets are all under max win 1.5btc.  

While it is true that it could enter negative growth if the majority of bets were near the max bet threshold, that is not the case here and just because a kelly is available at more than 2 does not necessarily mean investors should expect to lose money over the long term.

[RHavar]

Curious on this, should moneypot have accepted the bet then?

Yeah, seems fine. Based on the bet stats it seems the the bet was ~2.766x kelly, and I believe investors will back any bet up till a 3.333x

I personally disagree with such leverage, but there's definitely some legit reasons to do so  (namely attract gamblers who would otherwise find the limits too restrictive, and allow investors to deposit less but still risk a lot, to minimize counter-party risk). It's what investors signed up to, so it seems fair (and it's certainly a lot less risky then the guy doing the gambling)

[Lanzador]

Curious on this, should moneypot have accepted the bet then?

Yeah, seems fine. Based on the bet stats it seems the the bet was ~2.766x kelly, and I believe investors will back any bet up till a 3.333x

I personally disagree with such leverage, but there's definitely some legit reasons to do so  (namely attract gamblers who would otherwise find the limits too restrictive, and allow investors to deposit less but still risk a lot, to minimize counter-party risk). It's what investors signed up to, so it seems fair (and it's certainly a lot less risky then the guy doing the gambling)

I thought MP ran at a 2x Kelly last I heard....3.333x is a little absurd I feel like.

[abreezy]

was the bet legit?

[ajareselde]

was the bet legit?

MP paused his WD to check it, giving him only partial amount of payout, but it turned out pretty fast that the bet was indeed legit,
and he was paid out in full. On a personal note, i thought the guy will be a bit more excited in chat, and he seamed pretty indiferent to me (for a jackpot winner of 72 freaking bitcoins)

[Dogedigital]

Please note we may be down at times due to a ddos attack.  We will not be extorted.

Hello,
 
You have 1 hour and 20 minutes left for the payment.
Since we haven't heard back from you, your website will go down for the 1 hour and 20 minutes until 5 BTC is sent to 1Az7TzV7vD5etpJNz1h9JV6NzCBjyzgaez
If the payment is completed within the 1 hour and 20 minutes, we will leave you guys alone. If not, much larger attacks will occur and the price to stop will be increased to 7.5BTC
 
Regards,
ONICPtr

[katerniko1]

Please note we may be down at times due to a ddos attack.  We will not be extorted.

Hello,
 
You have 1 hour and 20 minutes left for the payment.
Since we haven't heard back from you, your website will go down for the 1 hour and 20 minutes until 5 BTC is sent to 1Az7TzV7vD5etpJNz1h9JV6NzCBjyzgaez
If the payment is completed within the 1 hour and 20 minutes, we will leave you guys alone. If not, much larger attacks will occur and the price to stop will be increased to 7.5BTC
 
Regards,
ONICPtr

agree thats the spirit, every a bit serious site shouldnt pay them. hopefully it wont take long.
regards.
-Katerniko1

[Michail1]

Please note we may be down at times due to a ddos attack.  We will not be extorted.

You mean if you pay him, he would never come back and do it again when he/she/they want more bitcoin?  

[RHavar]

You mean if you pay him, he would never come back and do it again when he/she/they want more bitcoin?  

Yeah, paying those assholes is a lose-lose situation. You support a criminal, and set yourself up as a sucker who is known to give out money. It's a lot better to be known as someone who won't pay a cent even if your site goes down, than someone who will.

Keep fighting the good fight  

[ranlo]

You mean if you pay him, he would never come back and do it again when he/she/they want more bitcoin? 

Yeah, paying those assholes is a lose-lose situation. You support a criminal, and set yourself up as a sucker who is known to give out money. It's a lot better to be known as someone who won't pay a cent even if your site goes down, than someone who will.

Keep fighting the good fight 

On an interesting note, they claim to have kept our site down for the past few hours (based on wording in the emails). There's been zero slowdown or anything, though, so either they don't know what a DDoS is or I don't. Because we clearly have differing opinions on what it means to take a site offline.

[RHavar]

On an interesting note, they claim to have kept our site down for the past few hours (based on wording in the emails). There's been zero slowdown or anything, though, so either they don't know what a DDoS is or I don't. Because we clearly have differing opinions on what it means to take a site offline.

Are you sure it's not just an empty threat? I've got quite a few threats asking for money, with *zero* follow-through, just in the off change they get paid. Every time someone serious has attacked one of my sites, they've always DDoS to the point it's offline, with the timeframes of when the demo attack will stop and then asking for money before the attack goes on again. Although even they have tended to get bored pretty quickly when it's obvious they're never going to get paid.

Cloudflare actually made a good blog post about some of the fake ddos threats: https://blog.cloudflare.com/empty-ddos-threats-meet-the-armada-collective/

Here's the saddest part:

Our conclusion was a bit of a surprise: we've been unable to find a single incident where the current incarnation of the Armada Collective has actually launched a DDoS attack. In fact, because the extortion emails reuse Bitcoin addresses, there's no way the Armada Collective can tell who has paid and who has not. In spite of that, the cybercrooks have collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in extortion payments.

[CrazyCraig]

On an interesting note, they claim to have kept our site down for the past few hours (based on wording in the emails). There's been zero slowdown or anything, though, so either they don't know what a DDoS is or I don't. Because we clearly have differing opinions on what it means to take a site offline.

Are you sure it's not just an empty threat? I've got quite a few threats asking for money, with *zero* follow-through, just in the off change they get paid. Every time someone serious has attacked one of my sites, they've always DDoS to the point it's offline, with the timeframes of when the demo attack will stop and then asking for money before the attack goes on again. Although even they have tended to get bored pretty quickly when it's obvious they're never going to get paid.

Cloudflare actually made a good blog post about some of the fake ddos threats: https://blog.cloudflare.com/empty-ddos-threats-meet-the-armada-collective/

Here's the saddest part:

Our conclusion was a bit of a surprise: we've been unable to find a single incident where the current incarnation of the Armada Collective has actually launched a DDoS attack. In fact, because the extortion emails reuse Bitcoin addresses, there's no way the Armada Collective can tell who has paid and who has not. In spite of that, the cybercrooks have collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in extortion payments.

We did experience a small window of downtime earlier today from the DDOS. ~30 mins. It was quickly rectified. Unfortunately, DDOS is just part of this industry. Happens to the best.

[ranlo]

On an interesting note, they claim to have kept our site down for the past few hours (based on wording in the emails). There's been zero slowdown or anything, though, so either they don't know what a DDoS is or I don't. Because we clearly have differing opinions on what it means to take a site offline.

Are you sure it's not just an empty threat? I've got quite a few threats asking for money, with *zero* follow-through, just in the off change they get paid. Every time someone serious has attacked one of my sites, they've always DDoS to the point it's offline, with the timeframes of when the demo attack will stop and then asking for money before the attack goes on again. Although even they have tended to get bored pretty quickly when it's obvious they're never going to get paid.

Cloudflare actually made a good blog post about some of the fake ddos threats: https://blog.cloudflare.com/empty-ddos-threats-meet-the-armada-collective/

Here's the saddest part:

Our conclusion was a bit of a surprise: we've been unable to find a single incident where the current incarnation of the Armada Collective has actually launched a DDoS attack. In fact, because the extortion emails reuse Bitcoin addresses, there's no way the Armada Collective can tell who has paid and who has not. In spite of that, the cybercrooks have collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in extortion payments.

It reminds me a lot of the calls people get "from the IRS" demanding they either pay the "IRS" using Western Union wires or they will go to prison, and there are people wiring tens of thousands of dollars to avoid jail time. To the "IRS" that is apparently not even in the U.S. Like someone wired their money to Panama. I'm like... really? And it's apparently a multi-million dollar business.

[CrazyCraig]

On an interesting note, they claim to have kept our site down for the past few hours (based on wording in the emails). There's been zero slowdown or anything, though, so either they don't know what a DDoS is or I don't. Because we clearly have differing opinions on what it means to take a site offline.

Are you sure it's not just an empty threat? I've got quite a few threats asking for money, with *zero* follow-through, just in the off change they get paid. Every time someone serious has attacked one of my sites, they've always DDoS to the point it's offline, with the timeframes of when the demo attack will stop and then asking for money before the attack goes on again. Although even they have tended to get bored pretty quickly when it's obvious they're never going to get paid.

Cloudflare actually made a good blog post about some of the fake ddos threats: https://blog.cloudflare.com/empty-ddos-threats-meet-the-armada-collective/

Here's the saddest part:

Our conclusion was a bit of a surprise: we've been unable to find a single incident where the current incarnation of the Armada Collective has actually launched a DDoS attack. In fact, because the extortion emails reuse Bitcoin addresses, there's no way the Armada Collective can tell who has paid and who has not. In spite of that, the cybercrooks have collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in extortion payments.

It reminds me a lot of the calls people get "from the IRS" demanding they either pay the "IRS" using Western Union wires or they will go to prison, and there are people wiring tens of thousands of dollars to avoid jail time. To the "IRS" that is apparently not even in the U.S. Like someone wired their money to Panama. I'm like... really? And it's apparently a multi-million dollar business.

Wait... I need to call my bank.. I tried explaining to that IRS guy that I didn't get my money from Prince Hickapa yet but he didn't buy it.