Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game

[BayAreaCoins]

how do I get clams from old address

Read the FAQ at Just-dice and then come into the troll box if you need more help

[picolo]

how do I get clams from old address

Question asked many times...Go here : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623147.0 and on the just-dice FAQ.

You can import your private keys on the CLAM client (but withdraw all BTC from the addresses beforehand)
Or you can use the just-dice chat.

[SBear]

how do I get clams from old address

Read the FAQ at Just-dice and then come into the troll box if you need more help

For some reason people seem to overlook the FAQ page.

[BayAreaCoins]

how do I get clams from old address

Read the FAQ at Just-dice and then come into the troll box if you need more help

For some reason people seem to overlook the FAQ page.

I'm guilty of it too admittedly!

Few days ago I couldn't figure out how the fuck to get the leverage to work... didn't read the last line

[freedomno1]

how do I get clams from old address

Read the FAQ at Just-dice and then come into the troll box if you need more help

For some reason people seem to overlook the FAQ page.

I'm guilty of it too admittedly!

Few days ago I couldn't figure out how the fuck to get the leverage to work... didn't read the last line

I didn't notice the FAQ was updated so the trollbox helped with that
Then read the first line was like OK
Read the last line was like ah there it is
Then went back and read the middle to figure out what the max button was whistle ^^

[Keyser Soze]

We don't care whether he really has the other 90 BTC or not.  If he loses the first 10 BTC without topping it up, he gets divested.

The only downside I can see to this is that it can cause sudden changes in the available max profit.  To mitigate that, we limit the amount of leverage investors are allowed access to.

Do you think there will be a potential issue with investors using all their margin to gain a larger percentage of the smaller bets then divesting or reducing margin (manually or with a bot) when a whale comes along? I feel that if you do implement margin it will greatly inflate the bankroll as investors will try to get a larger percentage of the smaller (less volatile) bets.

Perhaps this is a non issue since it is similar to someone doing the same without margin. I suppose it could depend on how much margin you allow. As you said, it will probably cause large swings in the max profit when a whale starts betting.

Seems my old prediction played out to be true, except now (with Clams) the leveraged bankroll is so large, investors may not have to worry about whales. I assume, unless someone gets really lucky, there can only be a handful of Clam whales that could cause wide-spread margin calls. Doog could look up how much of a loss the bankroll can sustain before we see lots of margin calls.

[freedomno1]

We don't care whether he really has the other 90 BTC or not.  If he loses the first 10 BTC without topping it up, he gets divested.

The only downside I can see to this is that it can cause sudden changes in the available max profit.  To mitigate that, we limit the amount of leverage investors are allowed access to.

Do you think there will be a potential issue with investors using all their margin to gain a larger percentage of the smaller bets then divesting or reducing margin (manually or with a bot) when a whale comes along? I feel that if you do implement margin it will greatly inflate the bankroll as investors will try to get a larger percentage of the smaller (less volatile) bets.

Perhaps this is a non issue since it is similar to someone doing the same without margin. I suppose it could depend on how much margin you allow. As you said, it will probably cause large swings in the max profit when a whale starts betting.

Seems my old prediction played out to be true, except now (with Clams) the leveraged bankroll is so large, investors may not have to worry about whales. I assume, unless someone gets really lucky, there can only be a handful of Clam whales that could cause wide-spread margin calls. Doog could look up how much of a loss the bankroll can sustain before we see lots of margin calls.

I presume that is correct it is a 1% house edge and the house is at 1.94% presently due to good/bad whaling
It would not surprise me if there were some losses if there was a quick return to mean but if I presume correctly with a 100x setting and assuming most whales are using the same margin it doesn't result in too many margin calls as everyone is more less taking the same risk.

If there were a few whales who backed off while the others remained hedged then we might see some larger losses
Max profit is 30097.27
House Investment 342,600
(Some at higher leverage than others)

So a whale would need a good set of max bets to break it ^^

[picolo]

We don't care whether he really has the other 90 BTC or not.  If he loses the first 10 BTC without topping it up, he gets divested.

The only downside I can see to this is that it can cause sudden changes in the available max profit.  To mitigate that, we limit the amount of leverage investors are allowed access to.

Do you think there will be a potential issue with investors using all their margin to gain a larger percentage of the smaller bets then divesting or reducing margin (manually or with a bot) when a whale comes along? I feel that if you do implement margin it will greatly inflate the bankroll as investors will try to get a larger percentage of the smaller (less volatile) bets.

Perhaps this is a non issue since it is similar to someone doing the same without margin. I suppose it could depend on how much margin you allow. As you said, it will probably cause large swings in the max profit when a whale starts betting.

Seems my old prediction played out to be true, except now (with Clams) the leveraged bankroll is so large, investors may not have to worry about whales. I assume, unless someone gets really lucky, there can only be a handful of Clam whales that could cause wide-spread margin calls. Doog could look up how much of a loss the bankroll can sustain before we see lots of margin calls.

You could have a whale betting thousands of clam per roll, some players already play 500 or 1000 CLAM almost daily so you risk it all with a high leverage.
If someone buys 10 000 CLAM out of the exchange then 5000 CLAM on the exchanges, the price will rise and he can sell its 15 000 CLAM out of the exchange
If someone buys a large amount on the exchange then invest it on just-dice he will have make a paper profit because the price will have risen as he buys the CLAM

[ranlo]

If someone buys a large amount on the exchange then invest it on just-dice he will have make a paper profit because the price will have risen as he buys the CLAM

For a sort while until it dumps below where he bought it. The issue here is that it's easier to lower the price than boost it. If someone pumps it with a large buy, in most cases the price will drop back below where it started (as the sell train starts and shaky hands dump so they aren't left holding the bag).

[picolo]

If someone buys a large amount on the exchange then invest it on just-dice he will have make a paper profit because the price will have risen as he buys the CLAM

For a sort while until it dumps below where he bought it. The issue here is that it's easier to lower the price than boost it. If someone pumps it with a large buy, in most cases the price will drop back below where it started (as the sell train starts and shaky hands dump so they aren't left holding the bag).

The price has been staying relatively high since just-dice opened; I think each new person that buys to play or invest push the price higher because if he plays he is likely to lose and the clam will be hold in the bankroll and if he invests the clam are hold in the bankroll.

[ranlo]

If someone buys a large amount on the exchange then invest it on just-dice he will have make a paper profit because the price will have risen as he buys the CLAM

For a sort while until it dumps below where he bought it. The issue here is that it's easier to lower the price than boost it. If someone pumps it with a large buy, in most cases the price will drop back below where it started (as the sell train starts and shaky hands dump so they aren't left holding the bag).

The price has been staying relatively high since just-dice opened; I think each new person that buys to play or invest push the price higher because if he plays he is likely to lose and the clam will be hold in the bankroll and if he invests the clam are hold in the bankroll.

People will dump at some point. That or CLAM will be worth more than BTC sometime (which I wouldn't complain about, :p).

[picolo]

If someone buys a large amount on the exchange then invest it on just-dice he will have make a paper profit because the price will have risen as he buys the CLAM

For a sort while until it dumps below where he bought it. The issue here is that it's easier to lower the price than boost it. If someone pumps it with a large buy, in most cases the price will drop back below where it started (as the sell train starts and shaky hands dump so they aren't left holding the bag).

The price has been staying relatively high since just-dice opened; I think each new person that buys to play or invest push the price higher because if he plays he is likely to lose and the clam will be hold in the bankroll and if he invests the clam are hold in the bankroll.

People will dump at some point. That or CLAM will be worth more than BTC sometime (which I wouldn't complain about, :p).

If CLAM goes up to 0.1 and Bitcoin goes to 2000$ it would still be very good

[ranlo]

If someone buys a large amount on the exchange then invest it on just-dice he will have make a paper profit because the price will have risen as he buys the CLAM

For a sort while until it dumps below where he bought it. The issue here is that it's easier to lower the price than boost it. If someone pumps it with a large buy, in most cases the price will drop back below where it started (as the sell train starts and shaky hands dump so they aren't left holding the bag).

The price has been staying relatively high since just-dice opened; I think each new person that buys to play or invest push the price higher because if he plays he is likely to lose and the clam will be hold in the bankroll and if he invests the clam are hold in the bankroll.

People will dump at some point. That or CLAM will be worth more than BTC sometime (which I wouldn't complain about, :p).

If CLAM goes up to 0.1 and Bitcoin goes to 2000$ it would still be very good

TBH, if CLAM settles anywhere above 0.0042, I'm happy. That's my profit area so as long as it's above that it's all good for me.

[picolo]

If someone buys a large amount on the exchange then invest it on just-dice he will have make a paper profit because the price will have risen as he buys the CLAM

For a sort while until it dumps below where he bought it. The issue here is that it's easier to lower the price than boost it. If someone pumps it with a large buy, in most cases the price will drop back below where it started (as the sell train starts and shaky hands dump so they aren't left holding the bag).

The price has been staying relatively high since just-dice opened; I think each new person that buys to play or invest push the price higher because if he plays he is likely to lose and the clam will be hold in the bankroll and if he invests the clam are hold in the bankroll.

People will dump at some point. That or CLAM will be worth more than BTC sometime (which I wouldn't complain about, :p).

If CLAM goes up to 0.1 and Bitcoin goes to 2000$ it would still be very good

TBH, if CLAM settles anywhere above 0.0042, I'm happy. That's my profit area so as long as it's above that it's all good for me.

If you bought at 0.0042 you will still be in profit at a price under 0.0045 because you stacked and maybe profited from being in the just-dice bankroll.

[ranlo]

If someone buys a large amount on the exchange then invest it on just-dice he will have make a paper profit because the price will have risen as he buys the CLAM

For a sort while until it dumps below where he bought it. The issue here is that it's easier to lower the price than boost it. If someone pumps it with a large buy, in most cases the price will drop back below where it started (as the sell train starts and shaky hands dump so they aren't left holding the bag).

The price has been staying relatively high since just-dice opened; I think each new person that buys to play or invest push the price higher because if he plays he is likely to lose and the clam will be hold in the bankroll and if he invests the clam are hold in the bankroll.

People will dump at some point. That or CLAM will be worth more than BTC sometime (which I wouldn't complain about, :p).

If CLAM goes up to 0.1 and Bitcoin goes to 2000$ it would still be very good

TBH, if CLAM settles anywhere above 0.0042, I'm happy. That's my profit area so as long as it's above that it's all good for me.

If you bought at 0.0042 you will still be in profit at a price under 0.0045 because you stacked and maybe profited from being in the just-dice bankroll.

I keep these earnings separate from base costs. If you merge the two together when you calculate whether or not you're breaking even, you're completely negating the point of investing. Investing should bring profit, not nullified earnings.

[dooglus]

I keep these earnings separate from base costs. If you merge the two together when you calculate whether or not you're breaking even, you're completely negating the point of investing. Investing should bring profit, not nullified earnings.

In the long term shouldn't we think of staking as just keeping up with inflation rather than as making a profit?

If the market cap of CLAM is constant then you need to stake in order to maintain your share of the active supply. There will be some who don't stake, and they'll fall behind.

That's a silly 'if' of course - CLAM will either go the way of most shitcoins and have everyone lose interest in it, or it will be much more in demand than it currently is - and we can only guess which of the two it will be. I very much doubt it will "settle" at its current price though.

Edit: some site profit charts:

[ranlo]

I keep these earnings separate from base costs. If you merge the two together when you calculate whether or not you're breaking even, you're completely negating the point of investing. Investing should bring profit, not nullified earnings.

In the long term shouldn't we think of staking as just keeping up with inflation rather than as making a profit?

If the market cap of CLAM is constant then you need to stake in order to maintain your share of the active supply. There will be some who don't stake, and they'll fall behind.

That's a silly 'if' of course - CLAM will either go the way of most shitcoins and have everyone lose interest in it, or it will be much more in demand than it currently is - and we can only guess which of the two it will be. I very much doubt it will "settle" at its current price though.

The issue with taking it in as being inflation is that... it essentially means the staking is a useless feature.

There are 10 CLAMs in the world and I have 1. There are also 10 bananas. I can buy 1 banana as it's 1 CLAM: 1 banana.

Now we staked and there are 20 CLAMs. I have 2 due to stake. There are still just 10 bananas. I can buy 1 banana as it's 2 CLAM: 1 banana.

Staking, as a way of keeping up with inflation, has no purpose. My buying power will always be the same, therefore the increase in coin number means nothing. After all, we're technically dealing with 100 million portions of a coin anyways, further negating the need for increasing that number.

If we were dealing with only whole numbers, it would be a little different. In that case, you couldn't buy half a banana with half a coin, as you can't split it. In ours, though, we can buy a hundred millionth of the banana if we want.

[dooglus]

Staking, as a way of keeping up with inflation, has no purpose. My buying power will always be the same, therefore the increase in coin number means nothing.

The purpose is to secure the coin without a central authority.

Bitcoin (proof-of-work) uses mining for the same purpose at huge expense; people need to buy expensive ASICs and burn through massive amounts of electricity running them.

CLAM (proof-of-stake) replaces that with staking. The proposition is "stake your coins to keep up with inflation to help secure the network; if you don't, you'll fall behind".

Your banana example is a good one. The banana manufacturer isn't going to be any more impressed if you come to him with 2 CLAM representing 10% of a 20 CLAM supply than if you offer him 1 CLAM representing 10% of a 10 CLAM supply. If he was then whatever crypto has the biggest supply would be the most valuable (DOGE, maybe).

Because there will always be some who don't know how to stake, or can't be bothered, or who have lost their private keys and so can't stake, staking will inevitably cause your share to grow slightly compared to the people who aren't staking. Of course, with CLAM we also have the "un-dug" CLAMs - millions of piles of 4.6 CLAM just waiting to be dug up by newcomers to the coin.

[erre]

Website is down, what happened? 

[dooglus]

Website is down, what happened? 

Sorry about that. I posted in the other thread, but not this one:

I'm taking the site down, hopefully for less than an hour, for maintenance.

Don't panic!

Edit: maintenance took about 5 minutes. We're back.