Bitcoin Pyramid [Beta] - the oldest working pyramid? [OLD THREAD]

[codler]

I have a suggestion, how about limit the withdrawn so you max can withdraw 2X of what you deposited? If you maxed the withdraw it will go to some random untill you deposit again. This will result more people getting profits and more money getting deposit.

[1713483709]

1713483709

[1713483709]

1713483709

[1713483709]

1713483709

[1713483709]

1713483709

[arsenische]

Well it makes sense, but in some cases, like mine, when you make small deposit to try how it's all working, and refered someone who deposited much more, you will earn too small amount.

I refered person who is now in hall of fame, but received even less then my inicial deposit. I think it's not fair)))

But you still benefit from being her/his sponsor, since s/he is likely to receive a lot of random payments and when his/her balance hits the threshold, you will receive your cut.

New rules protect the interests of active members who deposited money or advertized Bitcoin Pyramid.

Just imagine that rules didn't change and member #255 spent few minutes to create the chain of 10 zero deposit accounts before depositing 5 btc. In that case s/he would withdraw almost half of the deposited amount immediately and increase his/her future income. And your income would be less than 0.01 btc from his/her deposit and less than 0.1% from his/her future income.

Members with zero or small deposits still can earn if they invite referrals and reinvest withdrawals (I can see that it really happens, and it proves that the scheme works).

PS: thanks for your feedback and for advertizing Bitcion Pyramid

[ecurrency.ec]

Well it makes sense, but in some cases, like mine, when you make small deposit to try how it's all working, and refered someone who deposited much more, you will earn too small amount.

I refered person who is now in hall of fame, but received even less then my inicial deposit. I think it's not fair)))

But you still benefit from being her/his sponsor, since s/he is likely to receive a lot of random payments and when his/her balance hits the threshold, you will receive your cut.

New rules protect the interests of active members who deposited money or advertized Bitcoin Pyramid.

Just imagine that rules didn't change and member #255 spent few minutes to create the chain of 10 zero deposit accounts before depositing 5 btc. In that case s/he would withdraw almost half of the deposited amount immediately and increase his/her future income. And your income would be less than 0.01 btc from his/her deposit and less than 0.1% from his/her future income.

Members with zero or small deposits still can earn if they invite referrals and reinvest withdrawals (I can see that it really happens, and it proves that the scheme works).

PS: thanks for your feedback and for advertizing Bitcion Pyramid

You are welcome.

Right you are, I think more about 50% "sponsor" bonus and now can't disagree with you, new rules are more fair.

[arsenische]

I have a suggestion, how about limit the withdrawn so you max can withdraw 2X of what you deposited? If you maxed the withdraw it will go to some random untill you deposit again. This will result more people getting profits and more money getting deposit.

Thank you for your suggestion, codler. I wish I saw it before I changed the rules. But now, when people started depositing 5 btc, I am afraid to change the rules. More we change them - less trust to the system.

If successful members will always be increasing their deposits, then it might not be interesting for newcomers to compete with them for random payments. I think we could use an uniform distribution to select recepients for random payments to compensate that.

Maybe it is already worth of making the distribution uniform.  The size of the random payment is limited by recepient's deposit anyway, hence members with small deposits will get only a small fraction of randomly distributed money, whereas members with greater deposits will receive more.

So I want to know opinion of those who deposited:

1) should we limit the total sum of member's withdrawals by 2x of what s/he deposited?

2) should we use a uniform distribution to select recepients for random payments?

[Raoul Duke]

So I want to know opinion of those who deposited:

1) should we limit the total sum of member's withdrawals by 2x of what s/he deposited?

2) should we use a uniform distribution to select recepients for random payments?

1 - No

2 - Yes

[anodyne]

1. No.

2. How about uniform distribution for depositing accounts only? If it includes zero accounts, people could spam the pyramid with lots of accounts hoping to get a few bitcents... and if there's a large percentage of those accounts it will be likely that the random payment bounces over a lot of them before it reaches someone who gets more than the minimum.

[arsenische]

2. How about uniform distribution for depositing accounts only? If it includes zero accounts, people could spam the pyramid with lots of accounts hoping to get a few bitcents... and if there's a large percentage of those accounts it will be likely that the random payment bounces over a lot of them before it reaches someone who gets more than the minimum.

You are right, it is supposed that zero deposit accounts do not receive random payments (since the size of random payment is limited by sum of recepient's deposits).

[Yuusha]

I deposited 0.925 BTC on the 18th. Today, a week later, I've made back half of that (0.458 BTC) just from random sponsorships.

Looking good so far.

[Raoul Duke]

I deposited 0.925 BTC on the 18th. Today, a week later, I've made back half of that (0.458 BTC) just from random sponsorships.

Looking good so far.

Thank you for un-sanding my vagina...   LOL

Translation: I'm profiting from the Bitcoin Pyramid.

[riceberry]

I deposited 0.925 BTC on the 18th. Today, a week later, I've made back half of that (0.458 BTC) just from random sponsorships.

That's quite good..

I've deposited ~ 1.1 and gotten back 0.02 so far

But I was thrilled to get 0,02 that day~ ^^

I'm patient

[gw4tt]

I got back around 2btc from an original deposit of 1btc, so its working well.

[myhoho]

 More than 50 btc deposited for the moment. Great start. Congratulations!

[rlh]

Sweet!

I'm in:
http://bitcoinpyramid.com/r/294

[kjj]

Is it intentional that under the current rules depositing more money reduces your chances of getting selected randomly?

If you wanted it the other way around, try this:

Code:

SELECT MemberId FROM bpMember ORDER BY (fromWallet+1)*rand() DESC LIMIT 1;

[jer]

Is it intentional that under the current rules depositing more money reduces your chances of getting selected randomly?

This explains a few things! I've been depositing little bits quite regularly (have 1.5btc atm) and haven't had a single random yet...

--
Jer
http://bitcoinpyramid.com/r/91

[adalov]

The algorithm confused me at first, but I'm fairly certain it's correct provided it hasn't changed in the past week or so.

Code:

1. maximumDeposit = SELECT max(fromWallet) FROM bpMember;
2. SELECT MemberId FROM bpMember ORDER BY rand()*maximumDeposit/(1+fromWallet) limit 1;

fromWallet is the total deposit of a member (a column), where bpMember is a table of all members.

ORDER BY by default orders ascending, so in this case the smallest number would be the one picked. I currently have 2.5 deposited, and 5 is the max. So it would be rand() * 5/3.5. So My random number is multiplied times a certain amount and becomes larger. Should I deposit another 2.5, then it would be rand() * 5/6, and my random number becomes smaller. So it is correct.


Edit: And just by a quick glance at your equation, it looks like yours is just the inverse, sorting by descending.

[arsenische]

Is it intentional that under the current rules depositing more money reduces your chances of getting selected randomly?

If you wanted it the other way around, try this:

Code:

SELECT MemberId FROM bpMember ORDER BY (fromWallet+1)*rand() DESC LIMIT 1;

Both algorithms are correct and favor members who deposited more. I tried both of them 100000 times and here are the results.

Which one would you choose?

[codler]

Is it intentional that under the current rules depositing more money reduces your chances of getting selected randomly?

If you wanted it the other way around, try this:

Code:

SELECT MemberId FROM bpMember ORDER BY (fromWallet+1)*rand() DESC LIMIT 1;

Both algorithms are correct and favor members who deposited more. I tried both of them 1000 times and here are the results.

Which one would you choose?

Not fair, Im not in the list hehe

[arsenische]

Not fair, Im not in the list hehe

I ran a bigger test to see you there (updated the link)

[Raoul Duke]

Both algorithms are correct and favor members who deposited more. I tried both of them 100000 times and here are the results.

Which one would you choose?

If you asked me:
The second one on the pastebin, as it distributes the earnings between more members.
I guess that one is yours lol