bustabit – The original crash game

[TwitchySeal]

As far as the change in price relative to some fiat currency I simply do not respect the topic even being brought up.

Ok.

The cost for the "license" was 2 bitcoins per site (Almost $140k as I am posting right now)

[slydexic]

I tried to cover all of the questions, if I missed anything please ask me it again, it was a lot going on there and I'm just waking up now...

I think you missed the question I asked: When did you buy the license, and when did you become unhappy with it?

I still don't know the exact purchase date, and I didn't miss the question, I asked if providing the exact purchase date would be good use of my time. I'm already getting made fun of for mistakes that I made in what I've posted while being angry about this whole thing, so I don't even feel like beginning to try to explain what mistakes I made in the past translate in to having difficulty with locating the exact date for you now.

I thought I was clear, I became unhappy with the purchase when I went to sell the business and the broker informed me a .txt file posted on a website stating that a copy of source code had been purchased in no way qualifies as as software license. It doesn't even say that a license was purchased... It says source code was purchased. I didn't get the license, and then become unhappy with the license like you're wording the question as. There was never a license provided.

I've tried to post back a few times in the last couple of days, but just keep ranting stupidly about it. I don't know if I'll ever log in here again... I don't know if I'll let a lawyer run with it on contingency either... My blood pressure has been entirely too high for my own good, and I need to walk away from this. There's no good reason I'm as pissed as what I am expect for probably my own personal pride having been hurt (Talking up what I had to offer, stating I was licensed by Bustabit, and feeling like an idiot when I had nothing to back up my claims and looking like a complete dumbass on a video conference relating to this)

[hopenotlate]

I need some clarification about withdrawal process: I see you apply a dynamic w/d fee linked to current network fees which is also displayed in w/d interface, that's crystal clear.
But I also see a "unpaid deposit fee " showing me zero ( maybe because I did not make a deposit in a long time now) which I don't understand what it is connected to (perhaps to the network fees at the time the deposit is made) and therefore I can't imagine what order of magnitude it is:  is it comparable to the classic w/d fee mentioned above or what?

Also, if I make different withdrawals do they come from the same address or will a brand new address be used for every transaction?

[leomedina]

I need some clarification about withdrawal process: I see you apply a dynamic w/d fee linked to current network fees which is also displayed in w/d interface, that's crystal clear.
But I also see a "unpaid deposit fee " showing me zero ( maybe because I did not make a deposit in a long time now) which I don't understand what it is connected to (perhaps to the network fees at the time the deposit is made) and therefore I can't imagine what order of magnitude it is:  is it comparable to the classic w/d fee mentioned above or what?

No, the unpaid deposit fee is generally a lot smaller and depends on 1) how expensive Bitcoin transactions are at the time you withdraw or tip another player, and 2) how many deposits you've made since you last withdrew or tipped someone. For example, say you made 20 deposits and now want to withdraw your profits. You'd have to pay the normal withdrawal fee, and what it costs to consolidate all the deposits you made:

Code:

total fee = withdrawal fee + (20 * consolidation fee)

So, making a lot of deposits will only incur additional costs for you, not for other players (and that's one of the reasons we can offer really cheap withdrawals).

Also, if I make different withdrawals do they come from the same address or will a brand new address be used for every transaction?

We wouldn't be able to send from an address that hasn't received funds (i.e. doesn't have any outputs associated with it), but we don't consolidate deposits into a single address, if that's what you mean.

[hopenotlate]

-snip-

Also, if I make different withdrawals do they come from the same address or will a brand new address be used for every transaction?

We wouldn't be able to send from an address that hasn't received funds (i.e. doesn't have any outputs associated with it), but we don't consolidate deposits into a single address, if that's what you mean.

Thanks for your prompt answer.

Actually what I wanted to know is : if I will make several withdrawals from my account will they all be sent from the same address or will the sending address be different each time? And if it's the second case could these addresses be linked each other in some way with chain analysis tools?

Maybe your sentence I quoted already answers my questions but  my limited technical knowledge prevents me from understanding it properly.

[leomedina]

Actually what I wanted to know is : if I will make several withdrawals from my account will they all be sent from the same address or will the sending address be different each time? And if it's the second case could these addresses be linked each other in some way with chain analysis tools?

When you make multiple withdrawals from your account, the sending addresses will typically be different each time. This is because each withdrawal transaction consumes different unspent outputs (UTXOs) as inputs, and each UTXO is usually associated with a different address. Bustabit generates a new deposit address for each deposit, but if you reuse the old ones you will be more likely to receive transactions associated with those same addresses (which can potentially make it easier for someone to analyze your transaction history). As long as you don't reuse addresses, you should be able to benefit from all of our hot wallet privacy features.

[Justinca]

I didn't come here from the bad beats or from venting or for the need to keep re deposit to watch more fails and complain etc.

If you have been a pretty loyal Bab player from the past then you already know what I'm talking about. The new guy is clearly a con. All I'm doing is suggesting if you think about playing here. Just watch the rolls and pay attention to chat before you do. Literally no one wins.

Leo. Before you were doing the takeover you told everyone Moneypot wasn't cutting it and not making ends meet so you ended up buying bab. What's funny about that is you as in your own words. "Tweeked" the code before restarting the casino. If you have a super hard time getting players over to MP with that bs. Why would you think people would stay for it on bab? Also the verifier that is your own coding and the only one that works to check rolls no matter like you said it is open source. Hmm.

I can give countless facts to state claims but all you need to do is watch the site for a little bit and see what I'm saying. Med is constantly 1.4-1.7. Only time it shows above is when you look at thousands of rolls together.

Buyer beware. This guy also kept taking the max profit down claiming it was messing with the house edge of .1% He did it four times that I know of.

He also stated he couldn't see the rolls until after it started rolling just like everyone else. Then he told everyone he could see the rolls right before they started.

He constantly switched his story.

Like I said I'm not trying to get everyone wearing the conspiracy hat. Just before you deposit,  make sure you look at chat because 90% of people say this has gone to trash.

[leomedina]

I can give countless facts to state claims but all you need to do is watch the site for a little bit and see what I'm saying. Med is constantly 1.4-1.7. Only time it shows above is when you look at thousands of rolls together.

I'm not going to try to convince you because that's what our provably fair system is for. It offers strong guarantees so that players don't have to blindly trust the operator. Unfortunately, by "watching the site for a little bit" you won't be able to check if you are actually being cheated. What you can (and should) do is verify your games, or if you can't, ask someone you trust. And if you have specific questions, I'm also happy to answer them for you.

For the curious ones, with Daniel's seed 8,535,716 hashes were used, and we've already played through approximately 248,000 hashes with the new one. The overall median for both games #1 through #8,535,716, and #10,000,001 through #10,248,000, is 1.97x. However, in the previous seed, 49.97% of all played games were green, whereas currently, we've "only" seen 49.84% greens

[KloNEM]

Something happened with the actuallyfair.com ? When I'm going e.g. this URL :

https://actuallyfair.com/apps/bustabit/vx/summary/567a98370fb7545137ddb53687723cf0b8a1f5e93b1f76f4a1da29416930fa59/10000001#he=1


I got, instead of result of game #10000001, this error message : Application error: a server-side exception has occurred (see the server logs for more information).

Digest: 555073511

Sometimes it works, but slowly. I'm observing this behaviour for several days (I saw the first error ~ 9-10 days back, or something like this).

[husseinhere]

Something happened with the actuallyfair.com ?

Sorry about that, there's a problem with actuallyfair where it's having some networking issue when connecting to the server that is privately hosted for bustabit. I have a permeant fix for that, and plan on deploying it today in a few hours

[deepoz]

Something happened with the actuallyfair.com ?

Sorry about that, there's a problem with actuallyfair where it's having some networking issue when connecting to the server that is privately hosted for bustabit. I have a permeant fix for that, and plan on deploying it today in a few hours

Update on this? Is it fixed?

[leomedina]

Something happened with the actuallyfair.com ?

Sorry about that, there's a problem with actuallyfair where it's having some networking issue when connecting to the server that is privately hosted for bustabit. I have a permeant fix for that, and plan on deploying it today in a few hours

Update on this? Is it fixed?

Yeah, it was fixed shortly after Hussein posted. If you go to any game page, e.g. https://bustabit.com/game/10297069, and click on "Verify game result", you should be able to verify that game's outcome on ActuallyFair.com. Aditionally, our open-source verifier is also available for you.

[hopenotlate]

I was wondering about the the functioning of the bankroll: is it possible to keep track of investments/divestments in/from the bankroll by taking as reference two distinct moments, t1 and t2 for example, and comparing the difference (bankroll_t2 - bankroll_t1) with the difference (investors profit_t2 - investors' profit_t1), in the sense that in the absence of investments-divestments the differences mentioned above should coincide? or are there other variables at play?

[leomedina]

I was wondering about the the functioning of the bankroll: is it possible to keep track of investments/divestments in/from the bankroll by taking as reference two distinct moments, t1 and t2 for example, and comparing the difference (bankroll_t2 - bankroll_t1) with the difference (investors profit_t2 - investors' profit_t1), in the sense that in the absence of investments-divestments the differences mentioned above should coincide? or are there other variables at play?

Assuming I understand your question right, yes. If there are no investments or divestments, then the change in the bankroll should match the change in investors' profit. For what it's worth and in case you didn't know, you can find detailed information on bustabit’s bankroll balance, investors' profit and more at https://dicesites.com/bustabit.

[hopenotlate]

I was wondering about the the functioning of the bankroll: is it possible to keep track of investments/divestments in/from the bankroll by taking as reference two distinct moments, t1 and t2 for example, and comparing the difference (bankroll_t2 - bankroll_t1) with the difference (investors profit_t2 - investors' profit_t1), in the sense that in the absence of investments-divestments the differences mentioned above should coincide? or are there other variables at play?

Assuming I understand your question right, yes. If there are no investments or divestments, then the change in the bankroll should match the change in investors' profit. For what it's worth and in case you didn't know, you can find detailed information on bustabit’s bankroll balance, investors' profit and more at https://dicesites.com/bustabit.

Yes thanks, that's what I was asking.
Also thanks for reminding me about dicesites, I thought is wasn't run anymore because NLNico is not active anymore here and forgot about his site: glad to see it is still up providing those uptated infos.

[xxjumperxx]

Surprised nothing is being said about this:

Important: verification required for new investments

   
Mon, Jul 8, 5:21 PM
   
Dear investor,

To comply with securities law, we will only accept new bankroll investments from verified investors going forward. If you wish to add more money to the bankroll, we will need to confirm your age and your citizenship/residency. If you choose not to go through the verification process, you will not be able to make new investments. However, you will still be able to divest and withdraw your funds as usual.

If you would like to continue investing, please reply to this email or submit a new support request using the form at https://bustabit.com/help/contact to begin the verification process.

Thank you for your understanding, Leo

Why was this never an issue with Daniel and now is an issue with the new owner?

[leomedina]

Why was this never an issue with Daniel and now is an issue with the new owner?

Hey, we made KYC mandatory based on our lawyers' advice, and Daniel had a different legal team. Rest assured, your personal information is only used to ensure you're eligible to invest in the bankroll and won't be passed on to third parties.

[yahoo62278]

Surprised nothing is being said about this:

Important: verification required for new investments

   
Mon, Jul 8, 5:21 PM
   
Dear investor,

To comply with securities law, we will only accept new bankroll investments from verified investors going forward. If you wish to add more money to the bankroll, we will need to confirm your age and your citizenship/residency. If you choose not to go through the verification process, you will not be able to make new investments. However, you will still be able to divest and withdraw your funds as usual.

If you would like to continue investing, please reply to this email or submit a new support request using the form at https://bustabit.com/help/contact to begin the verification process.

Thank you for your understanding, Leo

Why was this never an issue with Daniel and now is an issue with the new owner?

Different times, different rules when it comes to money and online sites. This could be part of the reason Daniel decided to sell the site and walk away. If Leo is being told to do KYC, I'm sure he has good reason and isn't out to screw people over. Just protecting himself and the site.

[virasog]

Why was this never an issue with Daniel and now is an issue with the new owner?

I don't think it is an issue with the owners but it is the pressure by the authorities to have the KYC implemented (as with many other gambling sites) and in most cases, the owners does not have much choice and not everyone is willing to go against the law and eventually face the legal issues in operating the site.

The real test will be how many users continue to gamble at bustabit and how many decide to leave because of the KYC ?

[TheUltraElite]

The real test will be how many users continue to gamble at bustabit and how many decide to leave because of the KYC ?

Read carefully, the need to KYC is currently only applicable to "new" investors, not existing investors, not players, only those who change their investment or newly invest.

So players can continue as they were playing.

We can assume things may change in future, but for the time being, its not.