Just-Dice is not provably fair to gamblers

[zolace]

It basically boils down to this:

Any provably fair site can cheat its users if the users don't take the steps required to verify the fairness.

At Just-Dice, those steps are:

1) make a note of the server seed hash
2) set your own (unpredicable) client seed
3) play as much as you like, making a note of your rolls
4) verify the rolled numbers

doesn't step 2 require at least 100 rolls?
if i understand you right doesnt that mean that you can cheat the first 100 rolls of every user?

btw i am not concerned. i did choose just-dice because i do trust dooglus. i would never gamble anywhere where i do not trust the operator - even if they claim to be provable fair and has lots of trust of others and i did check the code.

You trust to easily then, just cause others do.  You will jump off the bridge just cause they do.

Trust and judgement belongs to me and no one else.

[1714686886]

1714686886

[1714686886]

1714686886

[1714686886]

1714686886

[dooglus]

Plenty of warning was given, including on the 'Fair?' tab which describes the algorithm:

Yes now, but not before. Not in October, November or December. The algorithm was changed without prior announcement, only a mention in a thread at the end of September.

You need to get your facts straight.  The 'Fair?' tab was updated *before* the algorithm changed.  Otherwise that's not "plenty of warning", is it...  It was updated in September.  October, November and December all happened after September, and so the new algorithm was described on the 'Fair?' tab in those months too.

The above algorithm was much less profitable than the current algorithm for you, Just compare the profits.

Both algorithms have caused the profit chart to very closely follow expectation, except for a couple of occasions when nakowa played.

I agree to play with the above algorithm, not the current and initially only asked that, something reasonable following your logic. I promised that would take this to court and I will. I have not forgotten.

The old algorithm is no longer available.  Both algorithms effectively give you random rolls.

[MRKLYE]

Dooglus also change the algorithm without warning in September and arbitrarily, causing losses to many users, the only way to solve this is in court but he has hidden in his anonymity to avoid starting a legal process. But the day will come.

The old algorithm and the new algorithm both cause many losses.  When users play the 10% game they lose around 90% of the time!

If you think that the change to the algorithm somehow "made" people lose, I don't know what to tell you.

Plenty of warning was given, including on the 'Fair?' tab which describes the algorithm:

Yes now, but not before. Not in October, November or December. The algorithm was changed without prior announcement, only a mention in a thread at the end of September.
The above algorithm was much less profitable than the current algorithm for you, Just compare the profits. I agree to play with the above algorithm, not the current and initially only asked that, something reasonable following your logic. I promised that would take this to court and I will. I have not forgotten.

As dooglus's attorney and advisor I ask you remove your head from your ass, Quick crying over things that aren't broken.. and fuck your hat.

Any further harassment towards my client and I will fuck you with the long dick of the law.

Have a good day,

KLYE

[dooglus]

As dooglus's attorney and advisor I ask you remove your head from your ass,

Yeah, it probably doesn't need saying, but Kyle doesn't represent me in any capacity.

Please feel free to leave your head wherever it is.

[zolace]

Oh thats not nice Doogie!!!!!



But Yeah This site is legitimate the algorithm is changed every day.

[Kaligulax]

Well you never can win a house...  1 from 10000 will "win" something.... i try play for few satoshi and i can say nothing... but 5 miss strike on 91%... well probability for that is 1:95848388234728472882426378462387432.... and i have 3 5xstrikes in 2 hours...

[dooglus]

Well you never can win a house...  1 from 10000 will "win" something.... i try play for few satoshi and i can say nothing... but 5 miss strike on 91%... well probability for that is 1:95848388234728472882426378462387432.... and i have 3 5xstrikes in 2 hours...

I think there's a problem with your calculation there.

You lose a 91% bet with more than 1 in 10 chance.
So you lose 5 in a row with more than 1 in 100,000 chance.

"in 2 hours" doesn't tell us much when we don't know how fast you're playing.

If you tell me your account number I can give some real statistics and we can see how unlucky you really were.

[zolace]

DOOG come on my threads and support me now!!!!!!!   

[jmumich]

By default its not provably fair, perhaps should put this on your site:

This game is provably fair*

*At Just-Dice, those steps are:
1) make a note of the server seed hash
2) set your own (unpredicable) client seed
3) play as much as you like, making a note of your rolls
4) verify the rolled numbers

No, by default the game is provably fair.  Provable is an adjective, it means that something is capable of being proven.  Just-dice can be proven to be fair.  As Doog explained, the user just has to take certain steps to do that.  And, as far as I know, of those who did take those steps, just-dice has been proven fair 100% of the time.  

Every user has the ability to prove that the game that they just played is fair.  It sounds like you just want the site to make it easier for users to prove that the game is fair.  Doog's position appears to be that the benefits of that, if any, are outweighed by the negative impact those changes would have on user experience.  If anyone disagrees, I'm sure there are other dice sites that make it easier to prove fairness, and if not, create one!  Maybe you're right, Doog is wrong, and users do prefer the steps to prove fairness to be easier, even if it requires changes that may be a detriment to the user experience.  Maybe there's some room for innovation there, and it can be done with little to no cost to the user experience.  

The point is, the game is fair, and with some effort that can be proven by anyone playing it if they follow Doog's instructions.  Just-dice is provably fair to gamblers.

The potential for anyone in Doog's position to do something dishonest (walk away with investor money, cheat his own site, switch the game with a different game that is unfair) has nothing to do with the fairness of the game.  That potential exists whenever someone must place their trust in someone else.  You can never prove that there is a 100% chance of honesty.  But you can make a rational, informed judgment, and all things considered this seems to be a pretty safe one considering the various incentives, at least in this context (I know little about and can't comment on whether the site is safe from hackers, for example, though it is a pretty big target and as far as I know other than a manual payout mistake early on, not much of any has been lost).

[Kaligulax]

Well you never can win a house...  1 from 10000 will "win" something.... i try play for few satoshi and i can say nothing... but 5 miss strike on 91%... well probability for that is 1:95848388234728472882426378462387432.... and i have 3 5xstrikes in 2 hours...

I think there's a problem with your calculation there.

You lose a 91% bet with more than 1 in 10 chance.
So you lose 5 in a row with more than 1 in 100,000 chance.

"in 2 hours" doesn't tell us much when we don't know how fast you're playing.

If you tell me your account number I can give some real statistics and we can see how unlucky you really were.

dooglus do not be mad... probability that i wrote is to hight, and your "1 in 100,000 chance" its way to low from the right number....

how you see my "" after my sentence.. it means that I do not blame your site because of my lost... i just blame the fact that I'm addicted to gambling... hehehe...

In one word: i love just-dice...  ...hmmm this is not one word...

[Kaligulax]

Well you never can win a house...  1 from 10000 will "win" something.... i try play for few satoshi and i can say nothing... but 5 miss strike on 91%... well probability for that is 1:95848388234728472882426378462387432.... and i have 3 5xstrikes in 2 hours...

I think there's a problem with your calculation there.

You lose a 91% bet with more than 1 in 10 chance.
So you lose 5 in a row with more than 1 in 100,000 chance.

"in 2 hours" doesn't tell us much when we don't know how fast you're playing.

If you tell me your account number I can give some real statistics and we can see how unlucky you really were.

dooglus do not be mad... probability that i wrote is to hight, and your "1 in 100,000 chance" its way to low from the right number....

how you see my "" after my sentence.. it means that I do not blame your site because of my lost... i just blame the fact that I'm addicted to gambling... hehehe...

In one word: i love just-dice...  ...hmmm this is not one word...

in the matter a fact i wrote about your site on my site...
http://bitcoinadvice.bugs3.com/btc-and-doge-betting/
and i didnt ask nothing for advertising 
p.s.
I count on your good heart
hehehehe

[feedthedogs]

By default its not provably fair, perhaps should put this on your site:

This game is provably fair*

*At Just-Dice, those steps are:
1) make a note of the server seed hash
2) set your own (unpredicable) client seed
3) play as much as you like, making a note of your rolls
4) verify the rolled numbers

No, by default the game is provably fair.  Provable is an adjective, it means that something is capable of being proven.  Just-dice can be proven to be fair.  As Doog explained, the user just has to take certain steps to do that.  And, as far as I know, of those who did take those steps, just-dice has been proven fair 100% of the time.  

Every user has the ability to prove that the game that they just played is fair.  It sounds like you just want the site to make it easier for users to prove that the game is fair.  Doog's position appears to be that the benefits of that, if any, are outweighed by the negative impact those changes would have on user experience.  If anyone disagrees, I'm sure there are other dice sites that make it easier to prove fairness, and if not, create one!  Maybe you're right, Doog is wrong, and users do prefer the steps to prove fairness to be easier, even if it requires changes that may be a detriment to the user experience.  Maybe there's some room for innovation there, and it can be done with little to no cost to the user experience.  

The point is, the game is fair, and with some effort that can be proven by anyone playing it if they follow Doog's instructions.  Just-dice is provably fair to gamblers.

The potential for anyone in Doog's position to do something dishonest (walk away with investor money, cheat his own site, switch the game with a different game that is unfair) has nothing to do with the fairness of the game.  That potential exists whenever someone must place their trust in someone else.  You can never prove that there is a 100% chance of honesty.  But you can make a rational, informed judgment, and all things considered this seems to be a pretty safe one considering the various incentives, at least in this context (I know little about and can't comment on whether the site is safe from hackers, for example, though it is a pretty big target and as far as I know other than a manual payout mistake early on, not much of any has been lost).

I agree with you that the site can be provably fair, and that has to be balanced with the user experience. 

My main point of the post is it is not provably fair by default.
If you visit the site for the first time, the client and server seeds are provided by the server, yes you can verify they rolled as expected, but it is also possible those client and server seeds were pre-prepared.

I am over the issue now, I am not going to do a crusade, I'll let the gamblers make their decisions.

[dooglus]

Well you never can win a house...  1 from 10000 will "win" something.... i try play for few satoshi and i can say nothing... but 5 miss strike on 91%... well probability for that is 1:95848388234728472882426378462387432.... and i have 3 5xstrikes in 2 hours...

I think there's a problem with your calculation there.

You lose a 91% bet with more than 1 in 10 chance.
So you lose 5 in a row with more than 1 in 100,000 chance.

"in 2 hours" doesn't tell us much when we don't know how fast you're playing.

If you tell me your account number I can give some real statistics and we can see how unlucky you really were.

dooglus do not be mad... probability that i wrote is to hight, and your "1 in 100,000 chance" its way to low from the right number....

I wasn't mad.  I saw you make a mathematical error and pointed it out.

If you like, I can be more accurate with my numbers:

The probability of losing a 91% bet is 0.09.
The probability of losing N of them in a row is 0.09^N
So the probability of losing 5 in a row is 0.09^N = 0.0000059049
That's 1 in 169,350.878

Huh.  Well what do you know, I was wrong!  lol

Not sure what I was thinking when I wrote "You lose a 91% bet with more than 1 in 10 chance" - you lose a 91% bet 9% of the time, or about 1 in 11.1111.  1 in 11 is less than 1 in 10.  Huh.

But still, I was a little closer than you.  169,350 is closer to 100,000 than 95848388234728472882426378462387432 is.

[dooglus]

in the matter a fact i wrote about your site on my site...
http://bitcoinadvice.bugs3.com/btc-and-doge-betting/
and i didnt ask nothing for advertising 
p.s.
I count on your good heart
hehehehe

Thanks for the review.  I hadn't seen that before.

This made me smile:

> meaning that support is almost excellent and easy to acquire on Just-Dice

"almost excellent"

I can't find anything substantial to complain about... so I'll just mention that the "which can be seen at the Bitcoin address 14o7zMMUJkG6De24r3JkJ6USgChq7iWF86." line is badly formatted on my screen.  The address is too long, making the right-justified text on the previous line far too spaced out.  Maybe use a link to the blockchain.info page for the address and say "which can be seen [here]".

[b!z]

in the matter a fact i wrote about your site on my site...
http://bitcoinadvice.bugs3.com/btc-and-doge-betting/
and i didnt ask nothing for advertising  
p.s.
I count on your good heart
hehehehe

Thanks for the review.  I hadn't seen that before.

This made me smile:

> meaning that support is almost excellent and easy to acquire on Just-Dice

"almost excellent"

I can't find anything substantial to complain about... so I'll just mention that the "which can be seen at the Bitcoin address 14o7zMMUJkG6De24r3JkJ6USgChq7iWF86." line is badly formatted on my screen.  The address is too long, making the right-justified text on the previous line far too spaced out.  Maybe use a link to the blockchain.info page for the address and say "which can be seen [here]".

Actually, it's copied directly from Bitcoin Reviewer, and he didn't write any of it. 

I did update the review though. http://bitcoinreviewer.com/just-dice-review/

[kgo]

I agree with you that the site can be provably fair, and that has to be balanced with the user experience. 

My main point of the post is it is not provably fair by default.
If you visit the site for the first time, the client and server seeds are provided by the server, yes you can verify they rolled as expected, but it is also possible those client and server seeds were pre-prepared.

I am over the issue now, I am not going to do a crusade, I'll let the gamblers make their decisions.

So what? Unless dooglus has psychic powers, he can't tell how you're going to bet.  Are you betting high? Low? 49.5%? 20%? 10%? Martingale? Progressive strategy? Bet 0.1 but 1.0 every tenth bet?  He doesn't know.  Therefore he can't create a seed that will give you unlucky numbers for your particular betting strategy.

[dooglus]

So what? Unless dooglus has psychic powers, he can't tell how you're going to bet.  Are you betting high? Low? 49.5%? 20%? 10%? Martingale? Progressive strategy? Bet 0.1 but 1.0 every tenth bet?  He doesn't know.  Therefore he can't create a seed that will give you unlucky numbers for your particular betting strategy.

He did address this earlier.  Lots of players play martingale, so as long as I make sure there's a long streak of very high rolls and a long streak of very low numbers early on, most players will bust early (so long as they stick to all hi, or all lo).

I you think I'm searching for seed pairs with those properties, make sure you click 'randomize', make a note of the server seed hash, and set your own client seed before you play.

If I was doing something despicable like that, I expect the site's profit would be a little higher than the current 0.28% of turnover however.

[vit1988]

Therefore he can't create a seed that will give you unlucky numbers for your particular betting strategy.

Even if he could, cheating that way would not be very wise cause as soon as someone would find out the unfair pattern he could abuse it for his own profit.

[dooglus]

Even if he could, cheating that way would not be very wise cause as soon as someone would find out the unfair pattern he could abuse it for his own profit.

Very good point. It If I always put a streak of 10 high rolls and another streak of 10 low rolls in the first 100, you could spot them quite easily and take advantage.

The best sequence of rolls from the site's point of view is a random sequence, because then the player can't work out the pattern and use it to his advantage.

[feedthedogs]

I agree with you that the site can be provably fair, and that has to be balanced with the user experience. 

My main point of the post is it is not provably fair by default.
If you visit the site for the first time, the client and server seeds are provided by the server, yes you can verify they rolled as expected, but it is also possible those client and server seeds were pre-prepared.

I am over the issue now, I am not going to do a crusade, I'll let the gamblers make their decisions.

So what? Unless dooglus has psychic powers, he can't tell how you're going to bet.  Are you betting high? Low? 49.5%? 20%? 10%? Martingale? Progressive strategy? Bet 0.1 but 1.0 every tenth bet?  He doesn't know.  Therefore he can't create a seed that will give you unlucky numbers for your particular betting strategy.

Don't forget the second point I made earlier that he can actually change the seeds anytime he wants during your betting, so he can figure out your pattern and then choose the corresponding client/seed hash, yes it would be more risky for him to do this incase someone actually wrote down their hashes, but really who does?

If he wanted he could remove his ability to change your seeds on the fly with a simple if statement, I have raised this with him and now the community, no one cares, then let it be.