Freebitco.in provably cheating

[docthusinh]

Since acusation of the site's cheating right before 1Jan2019, the winning claim on another post popup like coming from nowhere (at least 5 nick names with $20 win). "God of luck" ilsten to you guys..lol.

Nothing changed there, there were always many users winning $20. This topic is not claiming nobody is winning, it's claiming not enough users win.

What i mean is the rate of win = as what you said or the mean of this thread's topic "not enough users win", please check back how many posts (per day) that won $20 prior to this acusation topic, and how many of them right after this topic. Only on the date 1 Jan 2019 alone (after this topic) there are multiple claims of $20 winning within the same day, you can check back days before that and count to see how many $20 are there per day to see if "win rate" is normal.

To cheat on this it is too easy, since everything is on their servers / even the s3.amazon... verifer is belong to them also, they can easily do it, i.e (if you are not IT related/coder then study first as if it can be done):

If (SiteProfit <= ExpectedProfit){
    If (UserRollResult > 9997){
         Response1 = HTTP504 --- try again later / site unavailable (damn it let just blame Cloudflare protection haha).
         Response2 = YourNextServerSeed;
         Response3 = Nonce;
         Response4 = YourPreviousServerSeed(modded);            
    }
}
else {
       GameDefault = ProvablyFairGame;
}

P/s: If they really want to have "Provably Fair", it is easy, let a third party company/trusted organization to host the verifier as well as before & after seeds from both what user received & what is on the roll server. The user can then verify by compare both the result with server & third party saved data. Too easy, unless they don't want to do so.

[1714001824]

1714001824

[broke_tradah]

P/s: If they really want to have "Provably Fair", it is easy, let a third party company/trusted organization to host the verifier as well as before & after seeds from both what user received & what is on the roll server. The user can then verify by compare both the result with server & third party saved data. Too easy, unless they don't want to do so.

It's even easier than that.  This is the crypto scene after all.  There are PLENTY of smart contract platforms capable of securing a "server seed" or a group of seeds such as server, client seed, nonce, etc such that it cant be changed.  ETH, EOS, Troll errr Tron, even BTC could be used.  Heck you dont even need to use a smart contract.  You could use a hash from any of the blockchains although it would be cooler to use a smart contract.

[coinlocket$]

I have made over 18 000 faucet claims in 3 years and I haven't rolled 9994 and higher numbers.

This is still a low number.
You can still roll under 10000 for millions of rolls! If you are lucky you will get 10000 on 1st try but if you are unlucky (and this is improbable) you will never get 10000, it can took even an infinite number of rolls to get the 1st 10000.
Now if we consider an infinite number of rolls we have exactly one roll=10000 every 10000 rolls, and with all these results, we can calculate when we expect to hit 10000 with a median value.
The Median value is the value where 50% of user will expect to hit 10000.
The Median value for 1/10000 is 6888 and is the number of tries where we switch from lucky to unlucky person.

The % to get the roll is the written below and I used this formula:

Code:

% = (1 - ((1 - % of the roll) ^ rolls))*100

I made this example for 10000 with OpenOffice right now.

The % to hit 10000 after x rolls is

Code:

%		        Rolls
0,0999550%		10
0,9950661%		100
4,8772954%		500
9,5167106%		1000
18,1277435%		2000
25,9192892%		3000
32,9693361%		4000
39,3484504%		5000
45,1204829%		6000
50,3432078%		7000
55,0689010%		8000
59,3448637%		9000
63,2138954%		10000
86,4678251%		20000
95,0220400%		30000
98,1688024%		40000
99,3263737%		50000
99,7521991%		60000
99,9088437%		70000
99,9664672%		80000
99,9876646%		90000
99,9954623%		100000
99,9983307%		110000
99,9993859%		120000

While the % to hit 9885-10000 is

Code:

%		Rolls
10,65205309684930000000%		10
67,57755408427540000000%		100
99,64171479701720000000%		500
99,99871631713320000000%		1000
99,99999998352160000000%		2000
99,99999999999980000000%		3000

Of course, all above considering the website is not cheating

[coinlocket$]

Adding a little, very little something



I've rolled 9983 and missing 0.00000001 BTC on the winning 

[broke_tradah]

This is still a low number.
You can still roll under 10000 for millions of rolls.... [snip useless data]

You forgot the most important part.  This isnt about 1 number.  This is about a RANGE of numbers that are not hit IN ORDER.  1 number missing isnt something unusual.  But a RANGE of numbers are HIGHLY unusual for the amount of sample size we have 18K for myself,  18K for some other guy,  10k for someone else...  We all came to the same conclusion,  the upper tier of numbers simply do not show up..... at all.  Not just SOME of the time.  But AT ALL.  None.  Notta,  golden goose egg.  This is only possible if the casino is CHEATING on it's "Provably fair" claims.  And if they are cheating here,  they are MOST LIKELY cheating in every other aspect of their casino as well and there are very credible explanations of how that can/could be done for each of their site's features.  The credibility comes from the fact that we now know the site cheats.  If the site couldnt be proven to have been cheating,  then these explanations would carry as much weight.

[coinlocket$]

You forgot the most important part.  This isnt about 1 number.  This is about a RANGE of numbers that are not hit IN ORDER.  1 number missing isnt something unusual.  But a RANGE of numbers are HIGHLY unusual for the amount of sample size we have 18K for myself,  18K for some other guy,  10k for someone else...  We all came to the same conclusion,  the upper tier of numbers simply do not show up..... at all.  Not just SOME of the time.  But AT ALL.  None.  Notta,  golden goose egg.  This is only possible if the casino is CHEATING on it's "Provably fair" claims.  And if they are cheating here,  they are MOST LIKELY cheating in every other aspect of their casino as well and there are very credible explanations of how that can/could be done for each of their site's features.  The credibility comes from the fact that we now know the site cheats.  If the site couldnt be proven to have been cheating,  then these explanations would carry as much weight.

What range of numbers? I just rolled 9983.



And I've started here 2 days ago after reading here.

[broke_tradah]

What range of numbers? I just rolled 9983.

Look very closely at my 2 screenshots.  You'll see that it shows a RANGE of numbers,  not a single number.  The ranges are 0 through 10 and 9987 though 10000.  In 0 through 10 you can clearly see that at least 95% if not more of the numbers have all been hit at least once and in some cases even hit MULTIPLE times.  0 was hit only once.  If you're a developer at all,  you can see that all I did was select ALL numbers and then sort them based on ASC (ascending) and DESC (Descending) orders.  The fact that the 9000 range showed 9987 is alarming in and of itself without any other scrutinizing.   But if you look at the upper tier numbers,  you'll notice that 9994 through 10000 are all missing from the data.  This is because they have NEVER been hit.  Ever.  The odds of all of them not being hit in order like that is so small that you couldnt store that number to represent it on modern hardware.  So 9994 - 10000 missing would be like 0 through 6 not existing at all in the lower tiers and from the data you can see how unprobable that would be.  In fact,  you could select ANY range of 6 numbers and you'd see that there wouldnt be any chance of ALL of them missing if you have this many rolls for a sample size.  The sample size we're using is greater than 30000 if you combine my own 18K with all the others that have noticed the same thing.

The casino tries to claim that it's "variance",  but variance would not explain this oddity since it's not just a single number,  it's a complete range.  The only explanation is cheating in the form of not all numbers have the same probability of being rolled.  Some have a higher chance than others.  If that were the case then what you would see is that entire ranges of numbers would show less hits than those with a higher probability and thats exactly what we've documented here.  In the data you can also see that even 9886 - 9985 has a lower chance of being hit than 0 - 9885.  It's not as noticable however because the probabilities differ based on 'tiers'.  There are 6 tiers,  each tier has it's own probability level.  This is easily codeable but VERY difficult if not impossible to prove without very large sample sizes (which we have now since the passage of time has allowed for that data to be gathered).

[coinlocket$]

~

Just looked at it, and yes is strange but not impossible, HOWEVER read below.

The below screenshots show that 9994 to 10000 are all missing.  This is simply NOT possible in this reality.

The maths show is possible but very improbable

Code:

% to roll 9993-1000        Rolls
0,6977991%		10
6,7629034%		100
29,5398270%		500
50,3536401%		1000
75,3523895%		2000
87,7633586%		3000
93,9249530%		4000
96,9839603%		5000
98,5026461%		6000
99,2566183%		7000
99,6309380%		8000
99,8167742%		9000
99,9090350%		10000
99,9548392%		11000
99,9775793%		12000
99,9888689%		13000
99,9944738%		14000
99,9972565%		15000
99,9986379%		16000
99,9993238%		17000
99,9996643%		18000
99,9998333%		19000
99,9999173%		20000

50% of users will hit the range 9993-10000 in around 1000 tries.


This seems very strange but the post I've made here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5045277.msg49125605#msg49125605 was about a site without scam

and here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5045277.msg48004767#msg48004767 this guy seems to have proven this site uses different hashes and scam their users.

I'm not saying they are not scamming since they change hases, I was talking only about the variance in a not cheating probably fair game.

[broke_tradah]

99,9999173%      20000 <----  

This is still only for 1 number.  It's not for a RANGE of numbers missing.  Imagine this and add a power of 100 to it.  Thats your probability for all the missing numbers I believe.  I'm certainly no math major but even a 0.0000827% chance of it happening.... to me and multiple people?  Within the same century?  Really?  heh  Start adding in other user's roll sample size and that number gets REALLY small.  I dont have Matlab nor know how to use it,  but I assume thats what you're using here.

EDIT:  Oh nevermind,  you're just using a spreadsheet.  Thats probably not the most accurate way to calculate the range variance,  even so it does still illustrate just how improbable the situation is yet it's obviously showing up more than it should in real world practice.

[coinlocket$]

99,9999173%      20000 <----  

This is still only for 1 number.

No, is for a range of 7 numbers and the math is:

(1-((1-7/10000)^20000))x100=99,9999173%

For 1 number is

(1-((1-1/10000)^20000))x100=86,4678251%

[broke_tradah]

Here is another way of looking at it.  Using you're own math,  you have a 0.0000827% chance that I am wrong.  Are you willing to take that bet?    You have 1 roll to win because when it comes to scams,  you only have 1 chance to get it right lol.  If I were you,  I'd also add in the sample sizes of the other people who have all had the same results as I have.  That will give you a better idea on the odds of you getting it right that freebitco isnt a scam when it comes to freerolls and who knows what else

[coinlocket$]

As said before.

This seems very strange but the post I've made here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5045277.msg49125605#msg49125605 was about a site without scam

and here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5045277.msg48004767#msg48004767 this guy seems to have proven this site uses different hashes and scam their users.

I'm not saying they are not scamming since they change hases, I was talking only about the variance in a not cheating probably fair game.

I never said they are not scamming since someone seems to have the change of hash proof.

I'm just writing what math is on one not cheating contest when someone talks about variance and luck or unluck.

[anon121]

They are fucking cheaters.....their lottery winners are always fake and relatives and free roll winners hitting high are their fathers...LMAO
Those posting also fake.

[coinlocket$]

They are fucking cheaters.....their lottery winners are always fake and relatives and free roll winners hitting high are their fathers...LMAO
Those posting also fake.

Do you have any proof for this statement? Can you proof that the winners of lotteries are fake? 

[hesido]

They are fucking cheaters.....their lottery winners are always fake and relatives and free roll winners hitting high are their fathers...LMAO
Those posting also fake.

Do you have any proof for this statement? Can you proof that the winners of lotteries are fake? 

Adding my two cents here about the lottery: They designed it in a way that they cannot cheat the winning index, that's good, but it's still not provably fair because they could dilute the lottery tickets as much as they want with bogus users (The lottery ticket list could be diluted). Not saying they are cheating the lottery, but lottery is not provably fair for that reason - it would be very hard to make it provably fair, short of something like an audit that's nearly as hard as auditing an exchange. I do automated multiply bets with validation for small amounts and haven't noticed any server seed changing. Not tracking free rolls.

[jalef15]

wanna up this thread since no response was given and the data provided is significant, when are you going to mark freebitco.in as a scam site?

[BlackRed]

Thats why I always get very high numbers every free roll

[allyouracid]

wanna up this thread since no response was given and the data provided is significant, when are you going to mark freebitco.in as a scam site?

What data? There was no data provided. Did you even read the thread? 😬

[jalef15]

wanna up this thread since no response was given and the data provided is significant, when are you going to mark freebitco.in as a scam site?

What data? There was no data provided. Did you even read the thread? 😬

idk maybe you are blind but 4+ people have stats over thousands of rolls all limiting at 9993 proving site is not fair

[AlexSimion]

Very curious if anyone from this forum , actually ever won anything in the lottery ?