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

[Rannasha]

other than trusting that it says "lose", how can i double check these

You can check it using the hash of server seed, server seed, client seed and nonce.
Here is a verifier: click.

This verifier uses the old roll-generation algorithm. Dooglus changed it a while ago.

Really? Oh, well, could you link another one then?

I just updated the one you linked with the new implementation detailed in the "Fair?" tab of JD: http://jsfiddle.net/KWAnw/1/

It correctly verifies the rolls VolcanicEruptor posted.

Alright. I am going to safe that one then

There's also a more fancy verifier linked in the bottom of the Fair? tab on JD which is also up-to-date.

[Mitchell]

There's also a more fancy verifier linked in the bottom of the Fair? tab on JD which is also up-to-date.

Yeah, I know that one, but I prefer JSFiddle's so I can see what it does, without having to checkout the source.

[Dabs]

other than trusting that it says "lose", how can i double check these

You can check it using the hash of server seed, server seed, client seed and nonce.
Here is a verifier: click.

I hope someone finds a way to destroy JD

Why do you even gamble somewhere when you don't understand the provably fair mechanism?

You don't need to understand anything in order to gamble. That's why it's called gambling.

[Timetwister]

I love this business model. I have invested a bit and will probably invest more. I'd like to make some suggestions:

1. Maximum bet should be whatever gives the highest return to Just-Dice (following the Kelly Criterion). Not only it increases our expected profit, but it attracts more people looking to hit the jackpot. And people hitting a gigantic jackpot is also great for marketing. If some risk adverse investors prefer to have lower returns and volatility, they can simple divest a portion of their actual share. Another option, if it's cheap enough to implement, would be letting investors choose how much they are willing to risk in a single bet.

2. Customers should be treated with much more respect. Stop calling them "whales" and that kind of things. You are doing exactly the opposite of what "serious" casinos do, specially brick and mortar ones. Customers must feel comfortable betting at Just Dice. We have to try to make them feel good even when they lose, so it's more likely that they come back. People don't like feeling stupid.

3. I don't get why some of you complain so much when some customers make a lot of money. Don't you understand that they are losing in the long run? I wish we had thousands of high rollers gambling all day. They win sometimes, it's inevitable, they wouldn't be willing to participate if they couldn't win. Every time they bet, we win 0.01 of that amount, that's the only thing that matters. There's no winning strategy, each bet has the same negative expected value. The only thing that we must care about is people being able to bet profitably, by knowing what the dice result will be.

4. We should give more options to customers. For example, whether the next dice roll will be odd or not. Or whether it will finish with a 5. There are lots of possible options. I know they can be "made" by defining the chance you want to have for the next bet, but there's people that prefers to bet on something else than higher/lower than X. Or, even better, add more casino games, using the same bankroll.

[qxzn]

I love this business model. I have invested a bit and will probably invest more. I'd like to make some suggestions:

1. Maximum bet should be whatever gives the highest return to Just-Dice (following the Kelly Criterion). Not only it increases our expected profit, but it attracts more people looking to hit the jackpot. And people hitting a gigantic jackpot is also great for marketing. If some risk adverse investors prefer to have lower returns and volatility, they can simple divest a portion of their actual share.

I agree with this (though to be technical, the proper term is "maximum profit", not "maximum bet"). The reason it was reduced was because of massive house losses in the early Nakowa days. Investors were panicking, hollering at dooglus to make this change or that change. As steward of investor funds, I would have felt a lot of pressure to do *something*, so I'm not surprised Doog decided to lower the max.

In reality the underlying problem was that too many investors were overinvested for their own comfort levels. Or at least the vocal, panicky ones were. They didn't understand the volatility risk they were assuming. Kudos to Rampion for owning up to this.

The problem with the solution of lowering the max profit is that it reduces the expectancy for everyone, particularly those investors who didn't or wouldn't lose their lunch after a 20% loss. Also, like you say, it potentially turns away some customers who would otherwise patronize.

Another option, if it's cheap enough to implement, would be letting investors choose how much they are willing to risk in a single bet.

I don't particularly like this idea, because it adds complexity and it's basically unnecessary.

2. Customers should be treated with much more respect. Stop calling them "whales" and that kind of things. You are doing exactly the opposite of what "serious" casinos do, specially brick and mortar ones. Customers must feel comfortable betting at Just Dice. We have to try to make them feel good even when they lose, so it's more likely that they come back. People don't like feeling stupid.

3. I don't get why some of you complain so much when some customers make a lot of money. Don't you understand that they are losing in the long run? I wish we had thousands of high rollers gambling all day. They win sometimes, it's inevitable, they wouldn't be willing to participate if they couldn't win. Every time they bet, we win 0.01 of that amount, that's the only thing that matters. There's no winning strategy, each bet has the same negative expected value. The only thing that we must care about is people being able to bet profitably, by knowing what the dice result will be.

I don't think the term "whale" is particularly derogatory. There's a bit of status associated with earning that title.

It's an uphill battle to influence what random people are going to write on this thread or in the just dice chatbox.

[SebastianJu]

I love this business model. I have invested a bit and will probably invest more. I'd like to make some suggestions:

1. Maximum bet should be whatever gives the highest return to Just-Dice (following the Kelly Criterion). Not only it increases our expected profit, but it attracts more people looking to hit the jackpot. And people hitting a gigantic jackpot is also great for marketing. If some risk adverse investors prefer to have lower returns and volatility, they can simple divest a portion of their actual share. Another option, if it's cheap enough to implement, would be letting investors choose how much they are willing to risk in a single bet.

2. Customers should be treated with much more respect. Stop calling them "whales" and that kind of things. You are doing exactly the opposite of what "serious" casinos do, specially brick and mortar ones. Customers must feel comfortable betting at Just Dice. We have to try to make them feel good even when they lose, so it's more likely that they come back. People don't like feeling stupid.

3. I don't get why some of you complain so much when some customers make a lot of money. Don't you understand that they are losing in the long run? I wish we had thousands of high rollers gambling all day. They win sometimes, it's inevitable, they wouldn't be willing to participate if they couldn't win. Every time they bet, we win 0.01 of that amount, that's the only thing that matters. There's no winning strategy, each bet has the same negative expected value. The only thing that we must care about is people being able to bet profitably, by knowing what the dice result will be.

4. We should give more options to customers. For example, whether the next dice roll will be odd or not. Or whether it will finish with a 5. There are lots of possible options. I know they can be "made" by defining the chance you want to have for the next bet, but there's people that prefers to bet on something else than higher/lower than X. Or, even better, add more casino games, using the same bankroll.

Even though im new too... your points are something i really support. The behaviour has to change. If the risk or thrill is too much for someone then either dont invest or maybe JD might give a changeable investor risk option (I even would like to see kelly > 1%).

And a more interesting player experience is the root of attracting more players... which at the end is the power running that website.

I can imagine... if there is a $-Value beneath the max profit... it will work wonders in the brains of players... i mean even with the current exchange price of 630USD the 170.83BTC would translate to 107,622.90 USD. Thats really something dont you think?


I have read wikipedia about kelly criterion but i dont really get how much bigger the risk is when using kelly 2% instead 1%. I mean doesnt it mean for JD that at kelly 1% 1% of the house can be won. I see JD is only at 0.5% what is even below the optimum kelly describes. But even with 2%... its a percent value... the house cant really be beaten this way or am i wrong? It can go down very much but each new bet with max win of the house 2% means the house will be less than before... so the max win will be less then. If it would be a fixed value then of course... at 2% the house could be beaten in 50 wins. Which sounds like it will happen very rare. But its not even a fixed value. Its a percent value. That means you cant win back the losses as fast as you could with fixed values but the same goes with the losses. They will slow down. I dont see yet why 2% should be so much worse than 1%.

By the way... i really would like to see the optimum kelly criterion at JD again. I mean if someone calculates whats the optimum value then i dont see why a scary investor should be able to change this. Dooglus changed it at the end but as far as i read someone convinced him who was feared of whales and the more. I really would like an alternative here. First the optimum kelly 1% is calculated and proved so it should be used as standard. And secondly... each investor should be able to set his own risk level.

I might donate something for this feature being implemented and i guess others would too. Because that way scared investors and bullish investors could play this to the fullest.

[wolverine.ks]

2. Customers should be treated with much more respect. Stop calling them "whales" and that kind of things. You are doing exactly the opposite of what "serious" casinos do, specially brick and mortar ones. Customers must feel comfortable betting at Just Dice. We have to try to make them feel good even when they lose, so it's more likely that they come back. People don't like feeling stupid.

this could be addressed somewhat with separate chats. one for investors only, one for big gamblers, one for anyone, who knows what else.

[Timetwister]

2. Customers should be treated with much more respect. Stop calling them "whales" and that kind of things. You are doing exactly the opposite of what "serious" casinos do, specially brick and mortar ones. Customers must feel comfortable betting at Just Dice. We have to try to make them feel good even when they lose, so it's more likely that they come back. People don't like feeling stupid.

this could be addressed somewhat with separate chats. one for investors only, one for big gamblers, one for anyone, who knows what else.

I was also thinking about that, as I thought that players and investors interests were completely opposite, but it seems like there are investors that play and players that invest, so I'm not sure whether it's a good a idea to have different chats. Anyway, treating well our customers is just common sense, and it's free

[wolverine.ks]

if the site wishes to cater more to large gamblers, then make an invite only room. it would require very little moderation.

let the trolls stick to the trollbox.

let the investors talk to other large investors.

no chat setup is going to eliminate the need for mods. but if you can add functionality and/or decrease noise without requiring more mods, I cal that success.

[mprep]

if the site wishes to cater more to large gamblers, then make an invite only room. it would require very little moderation.

let the trolls stick to the trollbox.

let the investors talk to other large investors.

no chat setup is going to eliminate the need for mods. but if you can add functionality and/or decrease noise without requiring more mods, I cal that success.

The customized chatroom seems like a nice addition. Would clean up the current system as well as add more topics to talk about and those who are interested in them.

[TheNuts23]

Why is there not a calculated expected value stat?

[Timetwister]

Why is there not a calculated expected value stat?

Expected value is always 1% of whatever players bet.

[Timetwister]

History tab and deposit button aren't working for me, I click and nothing happens.

[Rannasha]

History tab and deposit button aren't working for me, I click and nothing happens.

I have that problem with Firefox. Chrome works okay.

[Timetwister]

History tab and deposit button aren't working for me, I click and nothing happens.

I have that problem with Firefox. Chrome works okay.

Thank you, I was using Firefox also, with Chrome it works.

[Timetwister]

We would get both more action and free marketing, because of giving big prizes (which leads to more action and more free marketing), by just doing 2 things:

1. Increase the maximum profit to 1%. People already betting for the max profit, will be able to bet more, and it'll also attract people that aren't playing because they consider max profit too low.

2. Create a jackpot using the once in a million "chance:min" kind of bet. I can only think of doing this with a fixed bet amount, but maybe someone can figure out a formula to apply it to different bet amounts.

I'd add this option to the existing ones. So, instead of giving 990 000 times the bet amount, once per 1 million rolls, we would give for example 500 000 times what is bet, and the rest would go to the jackpot. In that case, our EV would be 0.5 (as we give 500 000 instead of 1 000 000 each of those times that they win), so we would add 0.49 to the jackpot and keep 0.01 for us, and the next player could win 500 000.49, the next one 500 000.98, etc. While this seems less attractive to those that start building the jackpot, you have to consider that:

a) Even with a 99% payout, it's still negative EV to play, but they still do, because they are trying to get a gigantic amount of money in comparison to what they risk. 500 000 is still a very big amount. Lotteries usually give much much less than that, as they both keep a much bigger edge and distribute some smaller prizes.
b) Right now, our max profit is so low that people can't really make this kind of bets unless they bet a very small amount (less than 0.0002BTC right now). By decreasing the starting payout and having a jackpot, players can bet bigger amounts (which would be fixed), without the need of investors putting more money (the max profit would be partially made by the jackpot).

[SebastianJu]

2. Customers should be treated with much more respect. Stop calling them "whales" and that kind of things. You are doing exactly the opposite of what "serious" casinos do, specially brick and mortar ones. Customers must feel comfortable betting at Just Dice. We have to try to make them feel good even when they lose, so it's more likely that they come back. People don't like feeling stupid.

this could be addressed somewhat with separate chats. one for investors only, one for big gamblers, one for anyone, who knows what else.

Exactly. Look at a normal casino. The owners discussing with the players about the investments? An owner asking a sheikh not to play anymore because he fears he could win too much? Thats so completely stupid.

Investors and players has to be divided. It has to be a player experience for players and an investors experience for investors. That really shouldnt be discussed in one thread or chat. The more when some scary investors are able to crush the investment for all investors because they are, sorry, stupid enough to tell players to stop playing and even can convince the site owner to set the website to mathematically suboptimal settings.
Such things REALLY shouldnt happen. That has to change.

[qxzn]

2. Customers should be treated with much more respect. Stop calling them "whales" and that kind of things. You are doing exactly the opposite of what "serious" casinos do, specially brick and mortar ones. Customers must feel comfortable betting at Just Dice. We have to try to make them feel good even when they lose, so it's more likely that they come back. People don't like feeling stupid.

this could be addressed somewhat with separate chats. one for investors only, one for big gamblers, one for anyone, who knows what else.

Exactly. Look at a normal casino. The owners discussing with the players about the investments? An owner asking a sheikh not to play anymore because he fears he could win too much? Thats so completely stupid.

Investors and players has to be divided. It has to be a player experience for players and an investors experience for investors. That really shouldnt be discussed in one thread or chat. The more when some scary investors are able to crush the investment for all investors because they are, sorry, stupid enough to tell players to stop playing and even can convince the site owner to set the website to mathematically suboptimal settings.
Such things REALLY shouldnt happen. That has to change.

I think it's a mistake to compare just-dice to a normal casino. Just-dice is more transparent than any normal casino, and that is an attractive feature. The fact that investors and players intermingle is really cool IMO, and makes for some great camraderie and interesting chats. Not to mention the fact that many of the biggest players are investors and vice versa.

[wolverine.ks]

multiple chats does not preclude them from mingling. it just allows them to not mingle if they don't want.to.

[petrescuerz]

A player on the site asked me to post this on his behalf.

Hi All,

I have an unfortunate request to ask of you.  I recently opened an account on Bitstamp to manage some funds for friends, family, and to show the viability of Bitcoin to a non-profit that I'm interested in working for. I believe that Bitcoin represents a viable way to generate long-term revenue for non-profits particularly because it sidesteps traditional ways of collecting donated monies (credit cards, EFT's, etc.) and because it dramatically reduces the time until funds are received (many non-profits have to wait months to receive any sort of commitment - credit cards don't offer a much better alternative either due to their transaction costs and several day wait time for them to clear).

My brother happened into town last week (from the 18th-21st) and naturally we entered into a discussion about bitcoins (seems that's all I talk about these days). He was eager to learn about how I traded, what websites I used, etc.  Normally I delight in teaching people about cool things but here's where I made two grievous errors.  First, I showed him how to access my Bitstamp address (in passing, just to show him what it looks like).  Second, I mentioned that I had lost a little bit over at Just Dice in the past.

My brother has had some difficulty with gambling issues over the last couple years. In retrospect it was an extremely poor decision to link those two things together (my Bitstamp account and Just Dice) and I thought nothing of it at the time.

Apparently he accessed my Bitstamp account (by using my secured, though not secured enough, passwords) and sent several funds to Just Dice where he subsequently lost most of them. 

I've spent the last day trying to determine the best course of action and to try and preserve what assets we have left. I can hardly turn him in to the authorities (he is my brother after all) but I owe most of those funds to other parties.  It's a true predicament. 

Here's the blockchain.info:

https://blockchain.info/address/1DFNMGP4MoSmwtBfxXNT6vjATJHEEHyu6R

You'll see that he moved just under 14 BTC.  I currently count about 2.4 BTC worth in my Bitstamp account (which has since been turned back into fiat due to some dramatic price fluctuations over the last day).  He wouldn't tell me how much he lost but I assume it to be about 10 BTC.

I've discussed the matter with the staff over at Just Dice and they were kind enough to post this message for me on your forum.  They said that they can't refund the losses, which seems fair but that some of you might be willing to help out given the situation and past experiences.  Honestly, I doubt that we'll recover anything by doing this.  But if you can find it in your heart to donate a small amount, I know my family and friends would all be much obliged.  Furthermore, because it seems appropriate given the circumstances, I'm going to donate 10% of anything we receive to a gambling addiction group, though it's been hard for me to find one that accepts bitcoin (as I mentioned above, bitcoins are really an as yet untapped resource by many nonprofits... truly a pity).   If you'd like you can send your donations to:

1DQUU757jYhayznM2zc5DfZztjazb2B6am

Merry Christmas.