bustadice – Next Generation Dice

[RHavar]

I also wonder the same thing. Maybe browsers should be doing more from an UI/UX perspective in protecting the user from his carelessness and gullibility.

Honestly, browsers (and ICANN) have really dropped the ball. The amount of homograph domain attacks I've seen is absolutely absurd to the point of turning the URL bar virtually useless. I've almost been phished myself by a site, whose domain rendered virtually perfectly -- the only way I realized something was amiss was my password manager was not filling the result. Literally the only way to see the domain wasn't what i was expecting, was running it through a unicode decoder.

And another common attack-vector is enabled by Google being almost (?) semi-complicit by allowing people to bid for ads for $BRANDNAME when it's clear people are just googling (often via url bar) for $BRANDNAME

And of course it's also sad that passwordless logins have not got more traction -- as I think the whole idea of a password as a shared secret is just fundamentally bad.


But yeah, there's also some shit you just can't sanely prevent -- like people tricked into running malware

[joksim299]

Brandname advertisemets are in most cases phishing or other social engineering they are doing nothing to prevent it

[adaseb]

I also wonder the same thing. Maybe browsers should be doing more from an UI/UX perspective in protecting the user from his carelessness and gullibility.

Honestly, browsers (and ICANN) have really dropped the ball. The amount of homograph domain attacks I've seen is absolutely absurd to the point of turning the URL bar virtually useless. I've almost been phished myself by a site, whose domain rendered virtually perfectly -- the only way I realized something was amiss was my password manager was not filling the result. Literally the only way to see the domain wasn't what i was expecting, was running it through a unicode decoder.

And another common attack-vector is enabled by Google being almost (?) semi-complicit by allowing people to bid for ads for $BRANDNAME when it's clear people are just googling (often via url bar) for $BRANDNAME

And of course it's also sad that passwordless logins have not got more traction -- as I think the whole idea of a password as a shared secret is just fundamentally bad.


But yeah, there's also some shit you just can't sanely prevent -- like people tricked into running malware

This is probably the reason why many websites especially exchanges usually require a confirmation by email if there is a withdraw attempt. I agree some types of phishing attacks are pretty easy to miss and if you are one of the unlucky ones to actually send your username, password, and 2FA code to a phishing site then its the email confirmation that can actually save you.

I actually found it odd why Bitfinex asks for a different 2FA code when you attempt a legit withdraw. Basically you can't login with 2FA and in less than 120 seconds attempt a withdraw because the 2FA code will be a repeat and it will ask you to wait for a new 2FA code before doing a withdraw. Then I realized it was to prevent a phishing attack because even if you accidently send your username, password and initial 2FA code why would you wait 2 minutes and enter another 2FA code? Most likely you would know something was up and immediately stop and investigate, and even if you sent the second 2FA code most likely you would get an email confirmation that you would halt.

Its pretty crazy how elaborate some of these scams have gotten on casinos and exchanges.

[Findingnemo]

Brandname advertisemets are in most cases phishing or other social engineering they are doing nothing to prevent it

Internet users should have to educate themselves to avoid these phishing attacks if they don't want to lose their money.

It is not possible to remove the fake advertisements on internet because these scammers simply use other fake domain if someone reported currently using.

[CaptainZohan]

Could you please clarify investment terms? What happens when a player wins his bet? Does it decrease my investment part in the bankroll and how?

[xandry]

Could you please clarify investment terms? What happens when a player wins his bet? Does it decrease my investment part in the bankroll and how?

What terms do you need to be clarified? I think that this post can help you to understand what it is and what for:

Congratulations on the launch!

I'm obviously pretty biased (as a partial owner), but I am really excited about this site and it's future. I know dicesites are a dime-a-dozen, but I think bustadice goes a few steps beyond. Things I think are really special:

*  Insane coin-selection optimizations, for both privacy and fees. We'll need real data to know exactly how well it works, but in something like 50-85% of the time (in simulations) it can avoid creating change (which is both expensive and extensively to cluster bitcoin transactions).   And users will enjoy *by far* the lowest fees of any bitcoin service. This alone was 3 months of solid work.


* An advanced "offsite" investor system, that allows investors to not just leverage but say exactly how much they want to invest without having to risk it all to a counter-party. Most investment schemes don't even offer leverage, but when they do they tend to use something like multipliers (e.g. 5x) which means when you lose, you're under utilizing your money and when you're up you're over-leveraging. The offsite system keeps it perfect all the time.


 * A really powerful provably fair system, that gives investors (and everyone) significantly improved guarantees. I tried to create a high level technical overview of how it works: https://gist.github.com/RHavar/285c295f7906e03369cd66580a1b5f45

[CaptainZohan]

You didn't understand me actually. My question is quite concrete: if I have 10B of 100B bankroll (which means I have 10% of the bankroll) and a lucky player wins 1B, so how will it affect my investing part?

[RHavar]

You didn't understand me actually. My question is quite concrete: if I have 10B of 100B bankroll (which means I have 10% of the bankroll) and a lucky player wins 1B, so how will it affect my investing part?

When players win (or lose) your % of the bankroll remains unchanged (it only changes when you or other investors invest/divest).

So hypothetically, if you have 10 BTC of a 100 BTC bankroll -- you own 10% of the bankroll.  Now if a lucky player wins 1 BTC, they win it from the bankroll. So that means the bankroll is now 99 BTC but you still own 10% of it (In other words your stake is now worth 9.9 BTC, but the % ownership is unchanged)

[CaptainZohan]

Thank you for the answer!
But seems like mathematically it's unprofitable, because when a player loses - I as investor get only 50% of my profit taking into account the casino's fee, but if the player wins - I share all the risks with the casino on an equal basis. It means that my investment part will constantly decrease until it'll disappear at all.

[imstillthebest]

seems like mathematically it's unprofitable, because when a player loses - I as investor get only 50% of my profit taking into account the casino's fee, but if the player wins - I share all the risks with the casino on an equal basis. It means that my investment part will constantly decrease until it'll disappear at all.

of course . for what its called a gambling ? not talking on the actual gambling itself but investing is also considered as a gambling because you are risking your money for the hopes of some return .

 thier system for investors sounds like a literal gambling too because of the fee which act as a house edge  . on an actual gambling there was a house too that limits your ability to get maximum profit but once you loose you will loose all what you bet

[CaptainZohan]

But what's the purpose? With gambling at least you have an entertainment, while with such investments you just gradually lose your money. No fun, no chance to win - day by day you just see, how your  investments are melting. Who are these people for whom it's okay?

[rexxarofmoknathal]

Could you please clarify investment terms? What happens when a player wins his bet? Does it decrease my investment part in the bankroll and how?

Of course, you are equally liable to lose your investment as the house is. Otherwise, why would they need you?

Over time, because of the house edge your investment should return to profit.

[dooglus]

But seems like mathematically it's unprofitable, because when a player loses - I as investor get only 50% of my profit taking into account the casino's fee, but if the player wins - I share all the risks with the casino on an equal basis. It means that my investment part will constantly decrease until it'll disappear at all.

From the FAQ:

For example, say the bankroll's all-time high profit is 100 BTC, its current profit is 99 BTC and players combined lose a total of 4 BTC in a round. 3 BTC of that is net profit (exceeding the previous all-time high), so bustabit would receive 1.5 BTC and the remaining 2.5 BTC would go to the bankroll.

It sounds like they are only taking their 50% profit on new net profits. So when the profit goes up 4 from 99 to 103 and the previous highest was 100, only 3 of the 4 is subject to commission. It's like the site remembers the high water mark, and only charges commission when that high water mark moves up.

I think that makes a difference to the mathematical expectation, leaving it positive.

[RHavar]

^ What dooglus said. Busta only takes a commission on profit that is passed the previous all-time-high profit (which is shown on https://www.bustadice.com/statistics ). So right now the current investor profit is: 1253.38261259 BTC but the all-time-high is 1291.52367665 BTC which means that the next 38.14 BTC of profit is going to be commission free.

It's a poor argument, but the only reason investors have made so much money is because it's mathematically profitable.


--

Also one kind of weird thing to keep in mind, is that the busta doesn't track individual investor profit but investor profit as a group. I think there's no good reason for that other than to make the implementation fast and simple.

[JollyGood]

How did the bankroll investment for Bustabit and Bustadice start? Raising that much funds for the bankroll from scratch (I presume) could not have been an easy task.

Were funds raised by asking here in the forum or by other means?

[joksim299]

How did the bankroll investment for Bustabit and Bustadice start? Raising that much funds for the bankroll from scratch (I presume) could not have been an easy task.

Were funds raised by asking here in the forum or by other means?

Daniel and RHavar private bankroll at first then other investors joined because they both are trusted

[RHavar]

How did the bankroll investment for Bustabit and Bustadice start? Raising that much funds for the bankroll from scratch (I presume) could not have been an easy task.

Were funds raised by asking here in the forum or by other means?

Bustadice was able to quickly raise a bankroll for two reasons (imho): they implemented the auditable provably fair system and made me auditor, which gave me the confidence to be an early investor (although worth noting, that I invested on the same terms as anyone else, I just had the ability to audit rolls).

And the second reason was due to the offsite system they implemented they were able to have a high effective bankroll while having a smaller physical bankroll. This allowed them to take on larger bets/players than otherwise would be feasible, and allow them to quickly grow to the point they could start to phase out the offsite.

I think raising a crowd funded bankroll on bustabit on the other hand would've been way easier, it was already a massively popular and profitable business when Daniel bought it, and he already had established himself as a trustworthy person.

[JollyGood]

How did the Bustabit bankroll start through? Granted Daniel purchased it when was already a successful, established and profitable business but when and how was the bankroll open to investors? I know very little about that part of the Bustabit history so am curious.

I think raising a crowd funded bankroll on bustabit on the other hand would've been way easier, it was already a massively popular and profitable business when Daniel bought it, and he already had established himself as a trustworthy person.

[RHavar]

How did the Bustabit bankroll start through? Granted Daniel purchased it when was already a successful, established and profitable business but when and how was the bankroll open to investors? I know very little about that part of the Bustabit history so am curious.

It was privately bankrolled before Daniel took over. Only BaBv2 (i.e. when Daniel took over and released the new version) was a crowd funded bankroll introduced, but by that time bustabit was pretty well-established

[JollyGood]

Thank you for the explanation. I always wondered how so many investors funded so many BTC in the first place now I understand it better.

It was privately bankrolled before Daniel took over. Only BaBv2 (i.e. when Daniel took over and released the new version) was a crowd funded bankroll introduced, but by that time bustabit was pretty well-established