magician (OP)
Member
 Offline
Activity: 113
Merit: 10
Chancecoin developer
|
 |
April 07, 2014, 01:52:48 AM |
|
Just restarted everything, and it looks the same still.
Logfile:
WARNING:root:Status: Reparsing all transactions.
WARNING:root:Status: NEW DATABASE
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1496
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1104
Also balance query: Your balance is 1377.16126543 CHA.
Yeah, it looks like a bug in the binary client. I'll look into it and get back to you. Hopefully we'll get the new bitcoinj version out soon. Thanks for testing stuff out! No problem, I like to help where I can. I have some problems understanding what exactely is happening when betting or placing orders. Could you help me figuring it out? This is a bet, where I placed a 0.01 CHA bet: https://blockchain.info/tx/dd768e799afffc44a06eacb976c4a050bccc8c706232499d186bbad6a0657088?show_adv=trueThere are 3 outputs: - 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Back to my own account.
What exactely happens here? Do you even get the BTC back from the Escrow addresses? The strange thing is , that blockchain.info shows those funds in the escrow addresses still as balance of my main address. What intrests me most is, if the transaction costs me 0.0001 BTC for fee, or 0.0001BTC fee and two times 0.0001086 for escrow? Thank you ( I know that I can be annoying  ) PS: Are there plans to lower the house edge? 1 % would be better in my opinion, as most BTC-Dice casinos use 1 % houseedge. The transaction does indeed cost you 0.0001 BTC for the fee plus 0.0001086*2 for the escrow. The escrow addresses are what the Chancecoin protocol reads from to interpret the bet. This is a bit of information that we'll have to document somewhere. Since people are burning under the assumption that the house edge will be 2%, we can't change it easily, but it's something the community could discuss in the future. |
♠ ChanceCoin ♠ Decentralized Casino - You are the player AND the owner ! | 1EyHoCsDucQzWghwnMkeDHpn195EMkezFY ♠ |
|
|
TwinWinNerD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001
CEO Bitpanda.com
|
|
April 07, 2014, 02:01:51 AM |
|
Just restarted everything, and it looks the same still.
Logfile:
WARNING:root:Status: Reparsing all transactions.
WARNING:root:Status: NEW DATABASE
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1496
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1104
Also balance query: Your balance is 1377.16126543 CHA.
Yeah, it looks like a bug in the binary client. I'll look into it and get back to you. Hopefully we'll get the new bitcoinj version out soon. Thanks for testing stuff out! No problem, I like to help where I can. I have some problems understanding what exactely is happening when betting or placing orders. Could you help me figuring it out? This is a bet, where I placed a 0.01 CHA bet: https://blockchain.info/tx/dd768e799afffc44a06eacb976c4a050bccc8c706232499d186bbad6a0657088?show_adv=trueThere are 3 outputs: - 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Back to my own account.
What exactely happens here? Do you even get the BTC back from the Escrow addresses? The strange thing is , that blockchain.info shows those funds in the escrow addresses still as balance of my main address. What intrests me most is, if the transaction costs me 0.0001 BTC for fee, or 0.0001BTC fee and two times 0.0001086 for escrow? Thank you ( I know that I can be annoying ) PS: Are there plans to lower the house edge? 1 % would be better in my opinion, as most BTC-Dice casinos use 1 % houseedge. The transaction does indeed cost you 0.0001 BTC for the fee plus 0.0001086*2 for the escrow. The escrow addresses are what the Chancecoin protocol reads from to interpret the bet. This is a bit of information that we'll have to document somewhere. Since people are burning under the assumption that the house edge will be 2%, we can't change it easily, but it's something the community could discuss in the future. Thank you for the information. Right now the risk for the "site bankroll" is 1/2 kelly kriterion. If we would change the house edge to 1% we could then keep the kelly criterion constant at 1/2 Kelly by setting the max profit to 0.5% site bankroll. How do you propose do we ask the community? because i'd rather change this soooner than later. |
|
|
|
magician (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 113
Merit: 10
Chancecoin developer
|
|
April 07, 2014, 02:13:58 AM |
|
Just restarted everything, and it looks the same still.
Logfile:
WARNING:root:Status: Reparsing all transactions.
WARNING:root:Status: NEW DATABASE
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1496
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1104
Also balance query: Your balance is 1377.16126543 CHA.
Yeah, it looks like a bug in the binary client. I'll look into it and get back to you. Hopefully we'll get the new bitcoinj version out soon. Thanks for testing stuff out! No problem, I like to help where I can. I have some problems understanding what exactely is happening when betting or placing orders. Could you help me figuring it out? This is a bet, where I placed a 0.01 CHA bet: https://blockchain.info/tx/dd768e799afffc44a06eacb976c4a050bccc8c706232499d186bbad6a0657088?show_adv=trueThere are 3 outputs: - 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Back to my own account.
What exactely happens here? Do you even get the BTC back from the Escrow addresses? The strange thing is , that blockchain.info shows those funds in the escrow addresses still as balance of my main address. What intrests me most is, if the transaction costs me 0.0001 BTC for fee, or 0.0001BTC fee and two times 0.0001086 for escrow? Thank you ( I know that I can be annoying ) PS: Are there plans to lower the house edge? 1 % would be better in my opinion, as most BTC-Dice casinos use 1 % houseedge. The transaction does indeed cost you 0.0001 BTC for the fee plus 0.0001086*2 for the escrow. The escrow addresses are what the Chancecoin protocol reads from to interpret the bet. This is a bit of information that we'll have to document somewhere. Since people are burning under the assumption that the house edge will be 2%, we can't change it easily, but it's something the community could discuss in the future. Thank you for the information. Right now the risk for the "site bankroll" is 1/2 kelly kriterion. If we would change the house edge to 1% we could then keep the kelly criterion constant at 1/2 Kelly by setting the max profit to 0.5% site bankroll. How do you propose do we ask the community? because i'd rather change this soooner than later. I'm glad we're thinking in Kelly terms.  What does everyone think? I would consider any discussion we have here preliminary. If people want to change the house edge, we'll have to structure some kind of vote in the protocol. |
♠ ChanceCoin ♠ Decentralized Casino - You are the player AND the owner ! | 1EyHoCsDucQzWghwnMkeDHpn195EMkezFY ♠ |
|
|
TwinWinNerD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001
CEO Bitpanda.com
|
|
April 07, 2014, 03:01:00 AM |
|
Another question. There is no way to make betting cheaper? Is 0.0001086 set in stone? Is there a way to maybe only use one escrow address?
It is not clear to me how the system actually works, sorry if those questions are retarded!
|
|
|
|
|
reader31
|
|
April 07, 2014, 06:19:20 AM |
|
I have burnt a few bitcoins from a blockchain.info address. How do I verify that CHA got credited to my address as expected?
I know some of you have been having trouble verifying balances with the wallet binaries. While we're working hard on the new bitcoinj version of the software, I published a list of balances: http://chancecoin.com/balances. I will update this list periodically. Even if you already know your balance, this is a pretty interesting list to look at! Great. Thx for this! |
|
|
|
|
Omnivion
|
|
April 07, 2014, 09:13:01 AM |
|
So what's the total cost for every bet in total? Somewhere between .0001 and .0003172? Would be unfortunate if low-rollers are locked out of the action (since in addition to their bets they spread the word to other players.)
I think I'd also agree that I like 1% better than 2% to keep the rate competitive, should make up the difference in volume (and increased popularity itself would increase the coin's value as well.)
|
Blockchain for Apps | Blockchain for Business | Blockchain for Future |
|
|
|
symboler
|
|
April 07, 2014, 09:29:01 AM |
|
when get balance "ERROR:tornado.access:500 GET / (127.0.0.1) 0.00ms"
help me
|
|
|
|
|
weichao
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 29
Merit: 0
|
|
April 07, 2014, 02:23:15 PM |
|
Just restarted everything, and it looks the same still.
Logfile:
WARNING:root:Status: Reparsing all transactions.
WARNING:root:Status: NEW DATABASE
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1496
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1104
Also balance query: Your balance is 1377.16126543 CHA.
Yeah, it looks like a bug in the binary client. I'll look into it and get back to you. Hopefully we'll get the new bitcoinj version out soon. Thanks for testing stuff out! No problem, I like to help where I can. I have some problems understanding what exactely is happening when betting or placing orders. Could you help me figuring it out? This is a bet, where I placed a 0.01 CHA bet: https://blockchain.info/tx/dd768e799afffc44a06eacb976c4a050bccc8c706232499d186bbad6a0657088?show_adv=trueThere are 3 outputs: - 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Back to my own account.
What exactely happens here? Do you even get the BTC back from the Escrow addresses? The strange thing is , that blockchain.info shows those funds in the escrow addresses still as balance of my main address. What intrests me most is, if the transaction costs me 0.0001 BTC for fee, or 0.0001BTC fee and two times 0.0001086 for escrow? Thank you ( I know that I can be annoying ) PS: Are there plans to lower the house edge? 1 % would be better in my opinion, as most BTC-Dice casinos use 1 % houseedge. The transaction does indeed cost you 0.0001 BTC for the fee plus 0.0001086*2 for the escrow. The escrow addresses are what the Chancecoin protocol reads from to interpret the bet. This is a bit of information that we'll have to document somewhere. Since people are burning under the assumption that the house edge will be 2%, we can't change it easily, but it's something the community could discuss in the future. Thank you for the information. Right now the risk for the "site bankroll" is 1/2 kelly kriterion. If we would change the house edge to 1% we could then keep the kelly criterion constant at 1/2 Kelly by setting the max profit to 0.5% site bankroll. How do you propose do we ask the community? because i'd rather change this soooner than later. I'm glad we're thinking in Kelly terms. What does everyone think? I would consider any discussion we have here preliminary. If people want to change the house edge, we'll have to structure some kind of vote in the protocol. Is this coin only focused on bet? any other usage or plan? The wallet looks complicated as it requires Bitcoin wallet installed. |
|
|
|
|
TwinWinNerD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001
CEO Bitpanda.com
|
|
April 07, 2014, 02:30:12 PM |
|
Just restarted everything, and it looks the same still.
Logfile:
WARNING:root:Status: Reparsing all transactions.
WARNING:root:Status: NEW DATABASE
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1496
ERROR:tornado.application:Exception in callback None
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python33\lib\site-packages\tornado\ioloop.py", line 688, in start
KeyError: 1104
Also balance query: Your balance is 1377.16126543 CHA.
Yeah, it looks like a bug in the binary client. I'll look into it and get back to you. Hopefully we'll get the new bitcoinj version out soon. Thanks for testing stuff out! No problem, I like to help where I can. I have some problems understanding what exactely is happening when betting or placing orders. Could you help me figuring it out? This is a bet, where I placed a 0.01 CHA bet: https://blockchain.info/tx/dd768e799afffc44a06eacb976c4a050bccc8c706232499d186bbad6a0657088?show_adv=trueThere are 3 outputs: - 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Escrow
- 0.0001086 BTC Back to my own account.
What exactely happens here? Do you even get the BTC back from the Escrow addresses? The strange thing is , that blockchain.info shows those funds in the escrow addresses still as balance of my main address. What intrests me most is, if the transaction costs me 0.0001 BTC for fee, or 0.0001BTC fee and two times 0.0001086 for escrow? Thank you ( I know that I can be annoying ) PS: Are there plans to lower the house edge? 1 % would be better in my opinion, as most BTC-Dice casinos use 1 % houseedge. The transaction does indeed cost you 0.0001 BTC for the fee plus 0.0001086*2 for the escrow. The escrow addresses are what the Chancecoin protocol reads from to interpret the bet. This is a bit of information that we'll have to document somewhere. Since people are burning under the assumption that the house edge will be 2%, we can't change it easily, but it's something the community could discuss in the future. Thank you for the information. Right now the risk for the "site bankroll" is 1/2 kelly kriterion. If we would change the house edge to 1% we could then keep the kelly criterion constant at 1/2 Kelly by setting the max profit to 0.5% site bankroll. How do you propose do we ask the community? because i'd rather change this soooner than later. I'm glad we're thinking in Kelly terms. What does everyone think? I would consider any discussion we have here preliminary. If people want to change the house edge, we'll have to structure some kind of vote in the protocol. Is this coin only focused on bet? any other usage or plan? The wallet looks complicated as it requires Bitcoin wallet installed. Yes, this coin focuses on rolling the dice , and in investing in the house bankroll. As of now, it is a bit complicated, but the devs are working on a bitcoinj implementation, this is a java based wallet, that runs without having to download the total blockchain. Way faster and easier. Lateron, i hope we will have a webwallet like counterparty! |
|
|
|
|
|
bingjiw
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 37
Merit: 0
|
|
April 08, 2014, 01:08:15 AM |
|
Right now the risk for the "site bankroll" is 1/2 kelly kriterion. If we would change the house edge to 1% we could then keep the kelly criterion constant at 1/2 Kelly by setting the max profit to 0.5% site bankroll.
How do you propose do we ask the community? because i'd rather change this soooner than later.
Do you know that Just-dice.com is 1% house-edge and 1% max profit? But some big whales winned a lot and make the house lose a lot. It's a disaster for a dice site run with 1% house-edge and 1% max profit. But as I re-think about it. The difference is that the house of Chancecoin won't lose a bit when the player wins, because only the player's balance changes. So, It is more safe for Chancecoin to run 1% house-edge than Just-dice.com. |
|
|
|
|
nilangerxing
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 36
Merit: 0
|
|
April 08, 2014, 01:14:13 AM |
|
So...at a technical level, how exactly will someone be able to obtain CHA by simply sending BTC to your burn address by simply "using Bitcoin wallet software"? Is that really all that is required? Or is the protocol actually more rigid (as it was with Counterparty), and do individuals casually sending BTC to your burn address risk losing their hard-earned BTC if they fail to meet that protocol's format requirements? !
|
|
|
|
|
magician (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 113
Merit: 10
Chancecoin developer
|
|
April 08, 2014, 01:20:08 AM |
|
So...at a technical level, how exactly will someone be able to obtain CHA by simply sending BTC to your burn address by simply "using Bitcoin wallet software"? Is that really all that is required? Or is the protocol actually more rigid (as it was with Counterparty), and do individuals casually sending BTC to your burn address risk losing their hard-earned BTC if they fail to meet that protocol's format requirements? !
That's really all that is required. For interpreting burns, Chancecoin is less rigid in that it will credit CHA to the first input address as long as one of the output addresses is the burn address. So you can burn BTC into CHA using any wallet software without worrying about losing your hard-earned BTC. |
♠ ChanceCoin ♠ Decentralized Casino - You are the player AND the owner ! | 1EyHoCsDucQzWghwnMkeDHpn195EMkezFY ♠ |
|
|
Venetian
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
|
|
April 08, 2014, 01:28:41 AM
Last edit: April 08, 2014, 02:02:57 AM by Venetian |
|
That's good. The more people help us spread the word the better! Are there any forums out there similar to bitcointalk that you guys can post about chancecoin? |
|
|
|
|
TwinWinNerD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001
CEO Bitpanda.com
|
|
April 08, 2014, 02:03:16 PM |
|
Right now the risk for the "site bankroll" is 1/2 kelly kriterion. If we would change the house edge to 1% we could then keep the kelly criterion constant at 1/2 Kelly by setting the max profit to 0.5% site bankroll.
How do you propose do we ask the community? because i'd rather change this soooner than later.
Do you know that Just-dice.com is 1% house-edge and 1% max profit? But some big whales winned a lot and make the house lose a lot. It's a disaster for a dice site run with 1% house-edge and 1% max profit. But as I re-think about it. The difference is that the house of Chancecoin won't lose a bit when the player wins, because only the player's balance changes. So, It is more safe for Chancecoin to run 1% house-edge than Just-dice.com. Just-dice DID run on 1%/1%. now it is also 1%/0.5% , like i am proposing for this coin. 2%/1% is just too expensive to be competitive. |
|
|
|
TwinWinNerD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001
CEO Bitpanda.com
|
|
April 08, 2014, 08:55:28 PM |
|
Two questions:
Is there a fix yet for the not resolving bets bug?
Also my 100 CHA sell offer is gone now. How long does an offer stay active per default?
|
|
|
|
bingjiw
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 37
Merit: 0
|
|
April 08, 2014, 11:35:36 PM |
|
Out of those 15G blockchain data downloaded by Bitcoin-Qt, I think only the part from the start of Chancecoin burning block ( less than 1% ) is used by Chancecoin.
Can we just download blockchain data only from the Chancecoin Burning date ?
So we can have our Chancecoin initializing(download blocks) progress very fast after installation.
|
|
|
|
|
bingjiw
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 37
Merit: 0
|
|
April 08, 2014, 11:37:28 PM |
|
Right now the risk for the "site bankroll" is 1/2 kelly kriterion. If we would change the house edge to 1% we could then keep the kelly criterion constant at 1/2 Kelly by setting the max profit to 0.5% site bankroll.
How do you propose do we ask the community? because i'd rather change this soooner than later.
Do you know that Just-dice.com is 1% house-edge and 1% max profit? But some big whales winned a lot and make the house lose a lot. It's a disaster for a dice site run with 1% house-edge and 1% max profit. But as I re-think about it. The difference is that the house of Chancecoin won't lose a bit when the player wins, because only the player's balance changes. So, It is more safe for Chancecoin to run 1% house-edge than Just-dice.com. Just-dice DID run on 1%/1%. now it is also 1%/0.5% , like i am proposing for this coin. 2%/1% is just too expensive to be competitive. Maybe we can setup 2 house pools with different house-edge for Chancecoin. |
|
|
|
|
TwinWinNerD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001
CEO Bitpanda.com
|
|
April 08, 2014, 11:42:32 PM |
|
Right now the risk for the "site bankroll" is 1/2 kelly kriterion. If we would change the house edge to 1% we could then keep the kelly criterion constant at 1/2 Kelly by setting the max profit to 0.5% site bankroll.
How do you propose do we ask the community? because i'd rather change this soooner than later.
Do you know that Just-dice.com is 1% house-edge and 1% max profit? But some big whales winned a lot and make the house lose a lot. It's a disaster for a dice site run with 1% house-edge and 1% max profit. But as I re-think about it. The difference is that the house of Chancecoin won't lose a bit when the player wins, because only the player's balance changes. So, It is more safe for Chancecoin to run 1% house-edge than Just-dice.com. Just-dice DID run on 1%/1%. now it is also 1%/0.5% , like i am proposing for this coin. 2%/1% is just too expensive to be competitive. Maybe we can setup 2 house pools with different house-edge for Chancecoin. This not possible because of the design of this coin. There is no "real" bankroll, but the absolute number of coins changes, so that each coin loses/gains value. |
|
|
|
TwinWinNerD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001
CEO Bitpanda.com
|
|
April 08, 2014, 11:42:58 PM |
|
Out of those 15G blockchain data downloaded by Bitcoin-Qt, I think only the part from the start of Chancecoin burning block ( less than 1% ) is used by Chancecoin.
Can we just download blockchain data only from the Chancecoin Burning date ?
So we can have our Chancecoin initializing(download blocks) progress very fast after installation.
They are currently working an a bitcoinj implementation, that is exactely doing that! |
|
|
|
|
