Just-Dice.com : now with added CLAMs : Play or Invest

[MICRO]

By personal wallet u mean CLAMs software wallet ?

I didnt rly get into clams as coins , didnt know i can stake them and earn that way.

I have all my clams invested into JD without offset and so far it made me 37 clams from about 100 which is not so bad .

All CLAMs are in the CLAM client software wallet. The question is whether to have yours in JD's copy of that wallet or in your own personal copy of the wallet.

I was suggesting that people keep most of their coins in their own local copy of the wallet so that they control their own private keys and get to keep 100% of the block reward for the blocks they stake locally. Send a small percentage to JD, invest it, and use the /offsite command to declare that you want the site to risk more of your coins, as if you had deposited your local coins as well.

I made an account on December 12th, invested some CLAM in it, and haven't touched it since. As of right now it has made 38.4% profit. So your 37 CLAM profit is entirely consistent with that. Everyone investing on December 12th and leaving their investment alone will have made the same return.

Yeah i invested couple of days after jd reopened.

I will probably just keep it this way since im pretty happy with it, till clam is at 0.009 or so and then i will just sell all to get nice profit.

[galbros]

I know this is going to be like asking the fox about eggs in the hen-house, but I wanted to ask you anyway:

Do you think it's better to stake CLAMS in a personal wallet or do you think the return would be better by an invest in JD?

CLAMs in JD seem to earn a little less than twice as much as CLAMs in a personal wallet, on average.

I would recommend putting 10% of your CLAMs on JD, 90% in a personal wallet, and using the /offsite command (see "offsite investing" in the JD FAQ tab) to tell the site that you also want to consider your other 90% invested.

That way you get the full benefit of being invested while only risking have 10% of your eggs eaten by the fox. You avoid paying commission on 90% of your staking rewards that way too.

I don't understand your advice here dooglus.  If CLAMS in the JD wallet earn almost twice as much as CLAMS in a personal wallet a user would come out way ahead staking with you even after paying your 10% commission.

I agree they run the risk of having the fox eat their eggs, but if the fox was not inclined to feast on millions of dollars of bitcoin, I don't see him being too tempted by 400,000 USD of CLAM.

Am I missing something?

Thanks for a great site!

[unamis76]

Not really getting the offsite investment option. Is it just basically a way to increase risk/benefit?

[chriswen]

I know this is going to be like asking the fox about eggs in the hen-house, but I wanted to ask you anyway:

Do you think it's better to stake CLAMS in a personal wallet or do you think the return would be better by an invest in JD?

CLAMs in JD seem to earn a little less than twice as much as CLAMs in a personal wallet, on average.

I would recommend putting 10% of your CLAMs on JD, 90% in a personal wallet, and using the /offsite command (see "offsite investing" in the JD FAQ tab) to tell the site that you also want to consider your other 90% invested.

That way you get the full benefit of being invested while only risking have 10% of your eggs eaten by the fox. You avoid paying commission on 90% of your staking rewards that way too.

I don't understand your advice here dooglus.  If CLAMS in the JD wallet earn almost twice as much as CLAMS in a personal wallet a user would come out way ahead staking with you even after paying your 10% commission.

I agree they run the risk of having the fox eat their eggs, but if the fox was not inclined to feast on millions of dollars of bitcoin, I don't see him being too tempted by 400,000 USD of CLAM.

Am I missing something?

Thanks for a great site!

It might be a slight exaggeration.  I think it's more like 1.5x

[galbros]

Not really getting the offsite investment option. Is it just basically a way to increase risk/benefit?

Exactly, you can set it to whatever you want up to x100.  The average right now is around 40.  Note that most people don't actually have the coins offsite, (in fact, at the time of writing, the investors claim more CLAMS than can exist) they just want bigger returns from winning.  Note that losses will be bigger too if betters get lucky.  So far, betters have not done so well....

Good Luck.

chriswen even at x1.5 still better off staking on site.

[dooglus]

I don't understand your advice here dooglus.  If CLAMS in the JD wallet earn almost twice as much as CLAMS in a personal wallet a user would come out way ahead staking with you even after paying your 10% commission.

I agree they run the risk of having the fox eat their eggs, but if the fox was not inclined to feast on millions of dollars of bitcoin, I don't see him being too tempted by 400,000 USD of CLAM.

Am I missing something?

When I say that CLAMs in JD earn roughly twice as much as coins in a local wallet, I mean that the earnings from players losing are roughly equal to the earnings from staking. In fact we've staked 65k and won 46k, so chriswen is closer to the truth. It's more like 1.5x than 2x.

However, by using the /offsite command, you can tell JD that you want to have it consider your local coins as part of the bankroll too. That way you get the benefit of having them onsite without the risk of theft or other mishap.

Of course, if you're already using the maximum 100x multiplier this advice isn't of any use.

[dooglus]

chriswen even at x1.5 still better off staking on site.

OK, so suppose you have 1000 CLAMs.

You could:
a) deposit them all on JD and invest them
b) deposit 100 of them on JD, invest them, tell the site "/offsite 900", and stake the other 900 locally

In both cases your effective investment is the same. You get the same share of the profits and losses that players make.

In the first case you're paying 10% commission on the staking rewards for your full 1000 CLAM.

In the second case you're only paying 10% commission on the staking rewards from the 100 coins on the site. You get the full 100% of the rewards from the other 900 CLAM. You're paying 10 times less commission on your staking rewards.

So the second case saves you some commission, and largely reduces your counterparty risk.

Alternatively, you could:
c) deposit all the coins, and "/offsite 99000".

Your risk per roll is 100 times higher than before. You stand to win or lose much more. If someone wins the maximum profit just twice you go bust.

[galbros]

When I say that CLAMs in JD earn roughly twice as much as coins in a local wallet, I mean that the earnings from players losing are roughly equal to the earnings from staking. In fact we've staked 65k and won 46k, so chriswen is closer to the truth. It's more like 1.5x than 2x.

Okay, thanks for explaining.  I was misinterpreting the initial question.  It seemed to be about staking, is there any advantage to staking with JD given that you have 70% or so of all dug CLAMS are on site?  Granted you can't stake and not invest, but that was what confused me.  So by staking with JD you reduce your expected value due to the commission but lower your variance on staking returns due to it effectively serving as a staking pool.

Thanks again.

[dooglus]

Okay, thanks for explaining.  I was misinterpreting the initial question.  It seemed to be about staking, is there any advantage to staking with JD given that you have 70% or so of all dug CLAMS are on site?

Actually there is. JD blocks get orphaned less than other blocks, because we're the one staking most of the blocks, so we're the ones doing most of the orphaning, and we never orphan our own blocks.

I'm not sure how much of an advantage that works out as, or whether it overcomes the 10% commission fee.

[ranlo]

Okay, thanks for explaining.  I was misinterpreting the initial question.  It seemed to be about staking, is there any advantage to staking with JD given that you have 70% or so of all dug CLAMS are on site?

Actually there is. JD blocks get orphaned less than other blocks, because we're the one staking most of the blocks, so we're the ones doing most of the orphaning, and we never orphan our own blocks.

I'm not sure how much of an advantage that works out as, or whether it overcomes the 10% commission fee.

I would say that most likely, it would be better to stake solo instead, with the difference being that you're facing more variance that way. Pretty much it's like solo mining BTC vs joining a pool.

[mailmansDOGE]

i was just wondering that how many coins does jd stake/day?
On the clam network is there anyone else that stakes clams?
i sometimes feel that its just jd who can stake clams.

[dooglus]

i was just wondering that how many coins does jd stake/day?

About 1100. See https://just-dice.com/wagered.txt for the actual numbers.

On the clam network is there anyone else that stakes clams?

Yes. Something like 1440 blocks are staked per day.

i sometimes feel that its just jd who can stake clams.

I'm not sure what to do about that.

[picolo]

i was just wondering that how many coins does jd stake/day?

About 1100. See https://just-dice.com/wagered.txt for the actual numbers.

On the clam network is there anyone else that stakes clams?

Yes. Something like 1440 blocks are staked per day.

i sometimes feel that its just jd who can stake clams.

I'm not sure what to do about that.

Profit is table at 47 125 so the investors mostly gain from the stacking these days.

[romerun]

I just clicked the randomize button for the first time since site switched to clam

It's strange that my first bet started at the 2nd nounce.

http://imgur.com/a/CS660

So I made some more bets and clicked the randomize one more time, then it started at the 1st nounce as what it should be

[Nixsy]

I just clicked the randomize button for the first time since site switched to clam

It's strange that my first bet started at the 2nd nounce.

http://imgur.com/a/CS660

So I made some more bets and clicked the randomize one more time, then it started at the 1st nounce as what it should be

What happened to the bet id's? also all your image shows is that you did not screenshot the bet with nonce #1

[dooglus]

I just clicked the randomize button for the first time since site switched to clam

It's strange that my first bet started at the 2nd nounce.

http://imgur.com/a/CS660

So I made some more bets and clicked the randomize one more time, then it started at the 1st nounce as what it should be

We recently hired a new employee, told him we would pay him a share of the profits, and immediately gave him commit access to the source code...

Just kidding.

I didn't reset seeds when launching for CLAM. You have the same client and server seed as you had before. Your rolls carried on exactly where you left off with BTC. Your last bet for BTC had nonce 1, so your first bet for CLAM had nonce 2.

There's only one user whose seeds I did randomize before launching for CLAM, and that's because I told him how long his current losing streak would have ended up being. He could have used that information to win huge bets, and so I reset his seeds.

I'm searching old JD logs to try to find your last bet there, but it's taking too long, so I'll just post this for now and update later with details.

Edit: I found it. You only made one bet on JD on that account:

2013-09-23 00:49:55 bet #136404735: 40 BTC  @ 98%   hi: lucky:388747 profit:0.40816320 n:1
2014-12-12 06:00:43 bet #xxxxxx:    17 CLAM @ 96.5% hi: lucky:883579 profit:0.44041458 n:2

So that's where the nonce=1 bet rolling 38.8747 happened...

[picolo]

Profits steady at 47 000 CLAM

[ranlo]

There's only one user whose seeds I did randomize before launching for CLAM, and that's because I told him how long his current losing streak would have ended up being. He could have used that information to win huge bets, and so I reset his seeds.

You're actually able to see this? I thought it was all randomized.

[Swordsoffreedom]

Profits steady at 47 000 CLAM

Got to keep clamming and staking on 
Also its nice to have a steady profit

[dooglus]

There's only one user whose seeds I did randomize before launching for CLAM, and that's because I told him how long his current losing streak would have ended up being. He could have used that information to win huge bets, and so I reset his seeds.

You're actually able to see this? I thought it was all randomized.

It's like this:

1) the server picks a random "server seed" for your account
2) the server tells you the hash of the server seed, and you make a note of it
3) you pick a "client seed"
4) you make a bunch of bets - each roll is the result of hashing the two seeds (server and client) together with a nonce which is 1 for the first bet you make, and goes up by 1 for each subsequent bet you make
5) you click 'randomize'; the server publishes your server seed
6) go to 1

a) You then compare the hash of the server seed from (5) with the hash given in (2) to make sure that the seed you were given after you played matches the hash you were given before you played. That proves to you that the site committed to a particular server seed before you picked your client seed.

b) Then you use the server seed (5) and the client seed (3) to regenerate all the rolls you made. You can compare them with the rolls the site actually gave you.

Since the site provably picked the server seed before you played and before you told it your client seed (a), and since the site used those two seeds to generate all your rolls (b), there's no way the site could have cheated you.

So in a sense the rolls are random, since they depend on the server seed, which is random.

But in another sense the rolls are predetermined once you've picked your client seed, since the pair of seeds uniquely and completely determines all your future rolls.

Since you pick the client seed *after* we pick the server seed, we can't pick what numbers you are going to roll. The client seed has the final say on that, and that's entirely your decision.

If each roll was truly random, there would be no way for you to check whether the site was cheating. You play "less than 98", we pick "99". You lose. Did we cheat? We went to random.org and it told us 99. Honest! There's no way you can be sure we went to random.org and didn't just pick a number bigger than 98 to make you lose. So that's why we do it how we do - so that there's no way we can cheat the players.

On the other hand, we *can* cheat the investors. I can see what my next roll is going to be (it's 98.3610), and so I can be sure of winning it if I want to. That's the same with any provably fair site - you have to trust that the operator isn't going to play with knowledge of his upcoming rolls.

Here are the first 3 rolls I made with my current seed pair:



and here's my "prediction" of the 4th roll:



This is why, if I'm going to play against the investors for more than small amounts, I go to great lengths to prove that it's legit. For example:
  http://www.reddit.com/r/justdice/comments/1vbo1p/justdice_owner_plays_his_own_game_and_wins/

Edit: I made that 4th roll: