[Chain Game] Coin Controller ~~ easy to play, provably fair!

[SlickTheNick]

Anyone have any suggestions for features, things to change or improve on for next version?

You forgot to revisit your "provably fair" method (good that you also used quotes for that, as it is false). There are two points that definitively defeat the fairness, and another one that does too but after clarification might be fine.

You still have not made any mention as to how exactly it isnt provably fair... and for the record I do plan on revisiting it anyways, but like most people, I also have to work, plus I have several projects on the go. Only so many hours in the day my friend

[SlickTheNick]

Brought an additional dev onto the team, working on some major updates as we speak! Stay tuned and lets keep the money flowing

[birkomester]

Great site, already won some btc.

[SlickTheNick]

Great site, already won some btc.

Great to hear!

We will be adding 3 additional coins to buy, as well as adjusting the increase rate and reset chance values for the existing coins. So there will be several levels of play, and more chances to win!

[moderate]

Since there is no effort in understanding why this is not provably fair, here is the first place where it fails:


A random number between 0 and 1000 (known as a "nonce")


This is also the first step of your method.

To the owner: before you reply saying this is false and doesn't make it not provably fair, take at least some minutes to think about it.

[SlickTheNick]

Since there is no effort in understanding why this is not provably fair, here is the first place where it fails:


A random number between 0 and 1000 (known as a "nonce")


This is also the first step of your method.

To the owner: before you reply saying this is false and doesn't make it not provably fair, take at least some minutes to think about it.

not entirely sure why you seem to be trying to start an argument here.. I said it was provably fair, but I didnt say that your claim that it wasnt is false. I just asked how you came to that conclusion. I have been putting thought into it, I just havnt posted about it yet.

Here is what im thinking for updating the provably fair scheme:

• Use the first 5 characters or something of the bet transaction ID as the nonce, rather than a simple server side generated random number
• Changing the "coin flip" (decide wether target is high or low) to be based on something not controlled by the server... not sure what  yet though
• Hashing the client seed on the client side, before its sent to the server

What do you think?

[moderate]

Since there is no effort in understanding why this is not provably fair, here is the first place where it fails:


A random number between 0 and 1000 (known as a "nonce")


This is also the first step of your method.

To the owner: before you reply saying this is false and doesn't make it not provably fair, take at least some minutes to think about it.

not entirely sure why you seem to be trying to start an argument here.. I said it was provably fair, but I didnt say that your claim that it wasnt is false. I just asked how you came to that conclusion. I have been putting thought into it, I just havnt posted about it yet.

Here is what im thinking for updating the provably fair scheme:

• Use the first 5 characters or something of the bet transaction ID as the nonce, rather than a simple server side generated random number
• Changing the "coin flip" (decide wether target is high or low) to be based on something not controlled by the server... not sure what  yet though
• Hashing the client seed on the client side, before its sent to the server

What do you think?

Good that you pointed the target being high or low, as that is another problem. The final problem, that requires clarification, is defining very clearly how you pick the unix timestamp of time of purchase.

So we agree that currently you have 3 flaws, so it is not provably fair. Right ?

You should just check out what Satoshi Dice does (the legacy version) and base on that.

[SlickTheNick]

defining very clearly how you pick the unix timestamp

the time() function...? what else would you suggest? Actually the timestamp recorded in the bet transaction could work

[moderate]

defining very clearly how you pick the unix timestamp

the time() function...? what else would you suggest? Actually the timestamp recorded in the bet transaction could work

If you are using time() (or any other OS-related function) then that confirmed my suspicion, that is not fair in any way, even if you tried to. So yes, you need a timestamp that is publicly recorded if you want to continue using it. The previous suggestion stands.

[SlickTheNick]

defining very clearly how you pick the unix timestamp

the time() function...? what else would you suggest? Actually the timestamp recorded in the bet transaction could work

If you are using time() (or any other OS-related function) then that confirmed my suspicion, that is not fair in any way, even if you tried to. So yes, you need a timestamp that is publicly recorded if you want to continue using it. The previous suggestion stands.

duly noted.

[moderate]

defining very clearly how you pick the unix timestamp

the time() function...? what else would you suggest? Actually the timestamp recorded in the bet transaction could work

If you are using time() (or any other OS-related function) then that confirmed my suspicion, that is not fair in any way, even if you tried to. So yes, you need a timestamp that is publicly recorded if you want to continue using it. The previous suggestion stands.

duly noted.

Hopefully not in this manner: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=duly%20noted&defid=7088701

[SlickTheNick]

defining very clearly how you pick the unix timestamp

the time() function...? what else would you suggest? Actually the timestamp recorded in the bet transaction could work

If you are using time() (or any other OS-related function) then that confirmed my suspicion, that is not fair in any way, even if you tried to. So yes, you need a timestamp that is publicly recorded if you want to continue using it. The previous suggestion stands.

duly noted.

Hopefully not in this manner: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=duly%20noted&defid=7088701

A phrase meaning "to understand".
"Kim I love your shirt, but it looks a little small on you."
"Duly noted."

[SlickTheNick]

Added 3 additional coins to purchase, and adjusted the coin values so there are several levels of play. From 1 BTC all the way down to 0.000055 BTC, and 75% to 99% chance to get your money back plus profit. Going to release a design/front end update within the next few days, and also update/improve the provably fair scheme over the weekend.

Great first week!

[Stake]

I like the idea I think it could work better.

I think this will be successful.

Good job.

[SlickTheNick]

I like the idea I think it could work better.

I think this will be successful.

Good job.

Thanks, any suggestions in particular?

[SlickTheNick]

Just updated the site! Another update coming probably sometime tomorrow which will tweak some things, add the timer back in and add some other effects.

Great weekend so far!

Here are the changes:

• update game design, much less 'scrolly' now, looks a little nicer
• Fixed some issues with the mobile version, purchase form is now actually usable when on a phone
• Updated the reset/increase values for each of the coins. added an experimental "magic" coin where you can double your money each turn
• Improved the provably fair scheme to be more fair... timestamp is now taken from your bitcoin transaction, nonce is taken from your transaction ID, and the "coin flip" is determined by the time your transaction was included in the blockchain (blocktime). See how-to-play for more details

More updates still on the way, stay tuned. Any feedback is appreciated.

[tim13n]

Nice website!

Tested and Aprouved !

[Malongo]

Something is wrong there..

When i open the Website...this happens all the time

http://abload.de/thumb/coincontrollervhjjj.jpg

I can't close the window or anything else...it stays just like that

[tim13n]

Works perfectly form me ! now !

[Malongo]

YEP ! No probs anymore! Don't know, if it was sth here or there..whatever..Works perfect