Freebitco.in SCAMMING LOST $1000

[TheQuin]

I've always wanted to know if they really pay $271.37 on average for 10000 rolls. And if so, why don't they just pay $0.027 for each roll? They'd have the highest paying faucet, while it would cost them the same amount in total.

Yes, we do. Check the stats page and work out what 5% of our daily turnover is. The reason we do it this way should be obvious after 8 years. It's far more interesting as a game than a regular faucet that pays the same every time and that has brought in a huge number of customers. It's also a way of introducing many people to the game of dice which is where the site's income comes from.

Interesting. It would be interesting to hear statement from wetsuit or TheQuin.

I find it interesting that for years they haven't responded here.

I find it interesting that the last time you said that I told you that I have responded many times before but it comes pointless responding over and over again.

To this day all accusations of scamming freebitco.in have turned out to be false, from cheaters.

There's no hard evidence because they created their system so that you don't have any evidence:

Most of them are fine, but 2 times happened that, after the roll, server seed hash was REPLACED with a new one, while nonce and client seed where still the same. This completely break their fairness, since replacing the server seed hash means that they are replacing the server seed and therefore they are changing our rolled number.

We didn't create the provably fair system, we used the same system that was already in place on every other Bitcoin dice site at the time. It was created to allow you to verify your own rolls. It gives you the evidence. What it doesn't do is give me the ability to prove that we didn't cheat. That's what makes responding to these threads so pointless. Most of them are just using stats to prove that variance exists and the few that say we changed the servers seed just become arguments of he said we did cheaT, I say we didn't cheat, repeat until fade.

[StelioKontos]

...
Based on the odds, I would expect one $200 winner for every 2 $20 winners.
I did a (manual) count on pages 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, and 50 on Big wins at FreeBitco.in:
I just won $20 at FreeBitco.in! 116 times
I just won $200 at FreeBitco.in! 2 times
...

You assume every top winner will inform the world of his winning roll in that thread, but that can't be given for granted.
Out of all my top winning rolls I never wrote in that thread myself for example for laziness and/or not being interested in doing so - I never rolled out the top-tier $200 tho lol.

[LoyceV]

I've always wanted to know if they really pay $271.37 on average for 10000 rolls. And if so, why don't they just pay $0.027 for each roll? They'd have the highest paying faucet, while it would cost them the same amount in total.

Yes, we do. Check the stats page

Link?

Interesting. It would be interesting to hear statement from wetsuit or TheQuin.

I find it interesting that for years they haven't responded here.

I find it interesting that the last time you said that I told you that I have responded many times before but it comes pointless responding over and over again.

So complaints from users are ignored because you think it's "pointless"? I bet the users disagree! You didn't even respond to Neraxis while you posted in his own scam accusation topic.

It was created to allow you to verify your own rolls. It gives you the evidence.

The user can't verify the roll when server seed hashes are replaced:

Most of them are fine, but 2 times happened that, after the roll, server seed hash was REPLACED with a new one, while nonce and client seed where still the same. This completely break their fairness, since replacing the server seed hash means that they are replacing the server seed and therefore they are changing our rolled number.

What it doesn't do is give me the ability to prove that we didn't cheat.

That is exactly what provably fairness is meant to do. If the user can't use it to prove cheating and you can't use it to prove being honest, the "provably fair" system is "provably worthless".

Most of them are just using stats to prove that variance exists

Can you provide stats on how many freerolls have been played since the site was created, and how often each number came up?

I just won $20 at FreeBitco.in! 116 times
I just won $200 at FreeBitco.in! 2 times

You assume every top winner will inform the world of his winning roll in that thread, but that can't be given for granted.

No, I assume the odds of a faucet players (who usually gets $0.002) posting for an additional $5 is the same when he wins $20 as when he wins $200.

[TheQuin]

Link?

The site is in JavaScript so the link is the same as the rest of the site: https://freebitco.in/?op=home#
Click MORE and STATS is the last item.

There are several graphs showing information for the last 10 days including amount wagered.

So complaints from users are ignored because you think it's "pointless"? I bet the users disagree!

That's not what I said. I said it is pointless repeating the same thing over and over.

You didn't even respond to Neraxis while you posted in his own scam accusation topic.

That's because I had already responded to their PM on the 4th of November and I was only made aware of this thread on the 7th.^*

The user can't verify the roll when server seed hashes are replaced:

What it doesn't do is give me the ability to prove that we didn't cheat.

That is exactly what provably fairness is meant to do. If the user can't use it to prove cheating and you can't use it to prove being honest, the "provably fair" system is "provably worthless".

This is probably the source of your misunderstanding. This goes for all provably fair systems and is not in any way unique to Freebitco.in. Provably fair allows every user to verify to themselves if they were cheated on any individual roll. That's all it does but that isn't worthless.

You have options.

1) You can use a fiat gambling site licensed by an authority that specifies they have to use an approved RNG. You have no way of knowing if they actually used that RNG on any individual bet. If someone says they were cheated by that site you have no way of knowing if they are telling the truth or not.

2) You can use a provably fair crypto site that gives you the tools to prove to yourself if you were cheated on every individual roll if you make the effort to do so. If someone says they were cheated by that site you have no way of knowing if they are telling the truth or not.

3) You can just form an opinion based on what you read on the internet. If a few people start throwing mud at a site you can decide that you think some of it sticks. You can even join in and throw your own mud when you have no idea if what you read is true or not.

Provably Fair wasn't created to be a tool for The Forum Police. It lets customers find out if they are cheated. Even if all they can do with that information is decide not to use that site again it's still vastly superior to options 1 and 3.

Can you provide stats on how many freerolls have been played since the site was created, and how often each number came up?

It might surprise you to find out that we didn't keep all 130 billion rolls in a database. Even if we did and I was able to get those stats would you believe me? I don't believe the stats that some trolls have posted on this forum because I can see their real stats. That's what all this comes down to in the end. Without actually verifying your own rolls it's just a case of who you choose to believe.

That's simply because freebitco.in has a great reputation on the forum and you do not.

They have great marketing on the forum, which isn't the same as having a great reputation.
I don't trust them one bit,~

The forum is a collection of individuals and both of you are stating your opinions. That isn't the same thing "our reputation". From my dealings on the forum, I'd hazard a guess that far more people have a positive view of us than have a negative view.  
I'll take the first part of your statement as a compliment. Thanks.


* Edit:

You have stated a couple of times that one of the reasons you don't trust us is because I chose not to get involved in that thread you quoted. That was nearly 3 years ago but this has just reminded me of the reasons. As was the case with this thread I had already discussed it by PM before I knew about the thread. When someone did post about it in one of our threads and ask me to reply I saw that the thread had already been hijacked by a particularly vexatious troll with an agenda.
He was making money from referral commissions by conning people that his can't lose dice script was 'raping", his words, not mine, the big bad evil freebitco.in. His schtick was to repeatedly tell lies about us and use it as a way of getting more referrals. He would make some bullshit claim like we were stuffing the lottery file with fake users. So I would point out that would just increase the prize pool so it would be net-zero to us and pointless to do. He'd make another false claim, I'd answer that and so on until he just went back to the beginning and repeated the same claims as if I hadn't already answered him. I hadn't been doing this for long then but I had worked out that replying, feeding the troll, was counterproductive. It just gave him an excuse to keep repeating the same lies.
That post you gave him his 5 merit for was my first clue that he might be hacking his referrals. I couldn't be certain because he was just making those numbers up and it was later he said something else that made me put a warning on his trust wall that his bot might be malicious.
It turned out to be true https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5213523.msg53475361#msg53475361


 

[okorieemmanuel]

Please can we not digress from the topic. From my observation, I think some people in the gambling business are trying to bring down a reputation of a good site. How does this particular comment relate to Neraxis accusations? Some people are even trying to get little flaws from a probably fair algorithm . This is sad!!!
Freebitco.in gives 1 free lucky spin a day to users like me but you don't say it. How many online casino dealing on bitcoin do such? How many online casino have a good reward system with multiple options to choose like freebitco.in . . . Let me not even chat about the payout proofs or have we all forgotten the way coinpot did???  Please we should at least thank them. Freebitco.in is the best!  

[TheQuin]

~From my observation, I think some people in the gambling business are trying to bring down a reputation of a good site.

We get attacked all the time. I don't know who are they are. A combination of competitors, bad losers, abusers that have been banned I guess. DDoS attacks, negative SEO attacks etc. Some of them cost money to do but slinging mud on forums is cheap and easy and there's usually a few well meaning people who allow themselves to get duped into being the bad guy's useful idiot by amplifying it.

[Poker Player]

They have great marketing on the forum, which isn't the same as having a great reputation.

Thank you for your comments. It's always good to be skeptical. I'm not going to get into the technical debate between you and TheQuin, but a couple of points:

I've always wanted to know if they really pay $271.37 on average for 10000 rolls. And if so, why don't they just pay $0.027 for each roll?

Come on! I understand you live in Europe. Why does Euromillions have a €104M jackpot for the next draw, instead of distributing more money among the smaller jackpots?

Based on the odds, I would expect one $200 winner for every 2 $20 winners.
I did a (manual) count on pages 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, and 50 on Big wins at FreeBitco.in:
I just won $20 at FreeBitco.in! 116 times
I just won $200 at FreeBitco.in! 2 times
I probably miscounted a bit, but let's round it down: winning $200 is 50 times less likely than winning $20, and that makes the difference 25 12.5 times larger than it should be.

The truth is that I find it hard to believe that you wrote this. It's obvious that not everyone has a bitcointalk account and not everyone who gets the prize is going to post in that thread. Also, that difference can perfectly be due to variance.

I was playing in Freebitco.in during ~3 years. These are my achivements on the sceenshot below. Free rolls played = 10467. The biggest numbers I rolled are:
9993 - 1 time
9992 - 2 times
9990 - 1 time
9989 - 2 times

and never bigger than 9993.

Really? I don't get into the other more technical stuff you mention but that may be due to simple and pure variance. Are you seriously skeptical based on one person's statistical sample?

My results in freebitco.in are also below average, but as I have been playing poker regularly I am used to the fact that the most normal thing is to have results well above or below average.

See a graph of a winning player in poker tournaments. If he plays every day, he spends most of the year losing and can make a year's worth of profit in less than a month.

I edit to say one thing I forgot: my biggest reason to believe in the honesty of freebitco.in, apart from the time they have been around, is that with the userbase they have they already make enough money by running an honest business without getting in trouble and ruining their reputation by cheating.

If someone shows me proof that they are cheating, I will believe it, but until then, if I have to choose between believing them or a newbie, I will believe them.

[TheQuin]

They have great marketing on the forum, which isn't the same as having a great reputation.

Thank you for your comments. It's always good to be skeptical. I'm not going to get into the technical debate between you and TheQuin, but a couple of points:

It's not really a technical debate. LoyceV thinks provably fair is worthless because it wasn't made to do what he wants to use it for. It's not to help the Great and Good of the forum to decide which casinos are the goodies and the baddies. It's for each individual customer to use to find out for themselves. It circumvents the need to rely on people like LoyceV's judgment.

I edit to say one thing I forgot: my biggest reason to believe in the honesty of freebitco.in, apart from the time they have been around, is that with the userbase they have they already make enough money by running an honest business without getting in trouble and ruining their reputation by cheating.

If someone shows me proof that they are cheating, I will believe it, but until then, if I have to choose between believing them or a newbie, I will believe them.

As I was trying to point out here it's really not about reputation, that's in the eye of the beholder.

Provably Fair wasn't created to be a tool for The Forum Police. It lets customers find out if they are cheated. Even if all they can do with that information is decide not to use that site again it's still vastly superior to options 1 and 3.

If any provably fair site started cheating they wouldn't have any customers left in a very short time.

[LoyceV]

The site is in JavaScript so the link is the same as the rest of the site: https://freebitco.in/?op=home#
Click MORE and STATS is the last item.

I guess I'd need an account to view it.

I was playing in Freebitco.in during ~3 years. These are my achivements on the sceenshot below. Free rolls played = 10467. The biggest numbers I rolled are:
9993 - 1 time
9992 - 2 times
9990 - 1 time
9989 - 2 times

and never bigger than 9993.

Really? I don't get into the other more technical stuff you mention but that may be due to simple and pure variance. Are you seriously skeptical based on one person's statistical sample?

I've seen similar results before. Back in the days, I also rolled a couple thousand freerolls myself, and found similar results. But since I only had maybe 3000 rolls, I assumed it was because of variance. However, with 10467 rolls that's not very likely (far less than 0.1% chance). Add the fact that not all rolls completed, and this statement doesn't seem too far fetched:

server seed hash was REPLACED with a new one

Unfortunately, I don't have the dedication to do 30,000 freerolls myself, but if anyone else wants to do it I'd love to see the results.

As a test, I created 100 sets of 10,467 random numbers (0-9999) on my PC. 70 of the sets have the number 9999 at least once, and 66 have 9998 at least once. There's only 1 set in which 9995 is the highest. That means 99% has at least hit 9995. now this is the variance I expected.

LoyceV thinks provably fair is worthless because it wasn't made to do what he wants to use it for.

Would it be possible to adjust it in such a way the user can prove when server seeds get changed, so that he could still verify "missed" rolls? That would clear cases like pangolier88's.
I like how Bustabit for instance does it: all rolls can be verified completely, but I get that it can't be used in dice.

If any provably fair site started cheating they wouldn't have any customers left in a very short time.

Especially with selective cheating, it's hard to detect for a user. And many users won't even bother to verify their rolls, especially if they need to check hashes before each roll. That's why for instance 999Dice could cheat users for years.

A thought just occurred to me: if pangolier88 is right, TheQuin would probably not even know it, right? I take it you don't have access to that level on the server that would need to be verified.

[TheQuin]

I guess I'd need an account to view it.

Yes. That is the very first step anyone who wants to find out if a provably fair site is cheating needs to take.

Unfortunately, I don't have the dedication to do 30,000 freerolls myself, but if anyone else wants to do it I'd love to see the results.

We already know you would love that. We also know that you would love to use them as mud to sling at us without even knowing if the person you are quoting just made them up. Would you even care if it was one of our competitors and you were being used?

A thought just occurred to me: if pangolier88 is right, TheQuin would probably not even know it, right? I take it you don't have access to that level on the server that would need to be verified.

You have a very good way of completely missing the point I have made. It doesn't matter what I have access to. Provably fair is between a site and every single one of its customers. It is there for them to use and make their own decisions. It makes the likes of you giving your opinions on sites you have never even used irrelevant. I explained to you the three options. You have chosen option 3. Just to believe anything you read and then go around repeating it. In this business people who choose that option aren't taken seriously.

This isn't the first time you have tried to tarnish our reputation by taking an unrelated allegation off-topic by regurgitating other people's smears. You started off by saying that you don't think we have a good reputation here. I'll tell you how confident I am that your opinion is way out of line with the majority of the forum. I sometimes get support emails from new customers asking how they can trust us. I always reply with a link to this forum and tell them to check out our reputation for themselves.

Reputation is important to all casinos. With fiat licensed casinos reputation is the only thing people have to judge if a site is fair so the market tends to be dominated by big household names. With provably fair people understand that fairness is for them to check themselves so they are more interested in whether a site is going to payout or not. Is it stable and safe to leave funds there etc? That's why I don't even need to bother replying again every time someone repeats bogus allegations of cheating. Provably fair supersedes reputation when your customers can see themselves that allegations on the internet are false. That's why all your efforts to paint us as baddies are futile.

Edit.

One thing I'm curious about. How long is going to take you to work out that nobody cares if you trust us or not because you based that opinion solely on information you have no idea about the validity of?

[KiritoX]

I've done a few test free rolls today , and I've noticed  that :    client seed , aswell as server seed gets randomized after each roll.      Even though I don't have the option to randomize   the client seed before each roll active.  
https://s3.amazonaws.com/roll-verifier/verify.html?server_seed=c2dc5c8828fcc15e85c60ffc7c28e009b3a4a725b3132e20382d35d1d9b67390&client_seed=MyMmHiu8FAMqsZoH&server_seed_hash=8d1ce1f831110aabbc7d8b2662b6affca05548621dd8a57de5580aaa5c23dc8a&nonce=513506

https://s3.amazonaws.com/roll-verifier/verify.html?server_seed=32138790bb5fb38efe5fd283fb7a4308f91bac06c72650ed44173439ee6236c4&client_seed=keTstARu9UylFaXk&server_seed_hash=045719aa2db13c180218b71efa2c64d0dd0e5bcef543984bd70165e3c4715ff8&nonce=513509
https://s3.amazonaws.com/roll-verifier/verify.html?server_seed=ccf6db3096bc11eedeffe6b26640120e5e1b6d7b2423ef5b53dbb1bee3192251&client_seed=7utw3tpyg2pkk7riory1f&server_seed_hash=972b8a131465700974602bda7400b8bb2a0625d980e70babfc9abe94acc71f67&nonce=513508



How exactly is this provably fair ? When theoretically the system can spit out any client seed + server seed combo so that the higher payouts don't pop-up as often as they should.


Quinn do you even know the concept of provably fair ?

This is no longer provably fair ,  you're simply asking users to "trust" you that you're not scamming them ,  "cause you have a lot of clients" ,     I find it funny that one of the most trusted dice sites here on bitcointalk ,    isn't actually provably fair verifiable. 

[TheQuin]

I've done a few test free rolls today , and I've noticed  that :    client seed , aswell as server seed gets randomized after each roll.      Even though I don't have the option to randomize   the client seed before each roll active.

I have noticed that you are wrong. The option to randomise the client seed is here:


When you reaload the page the JavaScript calls the RAND function in your OS to create a new one. If you really want to use the same one you can just save it and change it back.

How exactly is this provably fair ? When theoretically the system can spit out any client seed + server seed combo so that the higher payouts don't pop-up as often as they should.

So this theoretical situation is impossible because our system doesn't spit out client seeds your OS does and because it is in JavaScript you can see the source code to verify that's true.

Quinn do you even know the concept of provably fair ?

Yes. I have to correct customers misunderstandings on the issue regularly.

This is no longer provably fair ,  you're simply asking users to "trust" you that you're not scamming them ,  "cause you have a lot of clients" ,     I find it funny that one of the most trusted dice sites here on bitcointalk ,    isn't actually provably fair verifiable.

I do hope you now understand that you were mistaken because I would hate you to have to rely on trust. People relying on that can be easily fooled into believing trusted members of the forum who have been hoodwinked into doing the bad guys' work for them. You should never blindly believe what other people say when you can verify it yourself. You might end up believing someone who formed an opinion by making a judgement on how believable they think other people are.

[Csmiami]

Would it be possible to adjust it in such a way the user can prove when server seeds get changed, so that he could still verify "missed" rolls? That would clear cases like pangolier88's.

I'm sorry I'm late to the party, but I'm just reading this now. There is one thing that Freebitco.in could do to actually get this: reset the nonce.

I've never understood why the nonce remains unchanged even when client and server seeds get changed, but it's the way they've been doing things since the very beginning. It's actually the only questinable thing I would point out so far in the few years I've been using the site, and believe me when I say I've seen many changes happen over time.

[TheQuin]

I'm sorry I'm late to the party, but I'm just reading this now. There is one thing that Freebitco.in could do to actually get this: reset the nonce.

I've never understood why the nonce remains unchanged even when client and server seeds get changed, but it's the way they've been doing things since the very beginning. It's actually the only questinable thing I would point out so far in the few years I've been using the site, and believe me when I say I've seen many changes happen over time.

I don't understand what you are saying because the nonce can't remain unchanged. The nonce is a sequential roll number that starts as zero for an account's first roll and increases by one for every roll.

Edit. This reminded me of a conversation explaining nonces in our thread:

Well in the auto-bet if you don't click on randomize client seed, the client seed doesn't change, it stays the same during all the session.

Congratulations, you've discovered the power of nonces. All rolls from one to infinity are predetermined but randomized based on the nonces (and both seeds of course). If you're going to accuse a site of rigging provably fair, please know what you're talking about before making stupid claims. It's clearly too much effort to do your research before signature spamming though  

(LOL it's better to do it by insulting people?   BTW I was not talking to you... but he was talking to me)
Nonces are not random values, after 1 there is always 2...

I don't mind attacking spammers. It's been pretty painful reading your posts in this thread recently 

You are right that nonces aren't random. This is a good thing - having the seeds allows you to verify all of your bets in sequential order, and you aren't trusting possibly malicious javascript to generate a random number that could benefit the dice site. When the nonce is combined with the client seed, you can then get a randomized value. NLNico has an excellent explanation on DiceSites.com about nonce based provably fair systems that I would highly recommend you read before making any more unsubstantiated claims.

[Csmiami]

----

Most PF games I've checked/analized/call it however you want, on different casinos, change the server seed and nonce after the client seed is changed.

All rolls/bets are made using the same client and server seed, with just changing the nonce. The moment the client seed is changed, a new server seed is generated and the nonce reset.

If the casino is skipping rolls, this is easily verifiable because the nonce will also skip numbers. If the casino decides to change the server seed, it will be easy to catch; since the nonce would have reset and the hashed server seed (and seed, ofc) won't match the previous ones.

Not sure I made myself more clear with this now. And although I understand what Darkstar explained on the quoted post, I don't see how it relates to the point I was trying to make

[TheQuin]

Most PF games I've checked/analized/call it however you want, on different casinos, change the server seed and nonce after the client seed is changed.

All rolls/bets are made using the same client and server seed, with just changing the nonce. The moment the client seed is changed, a new server seed is generated and the nonce reset.

If the casino is skipping rolls, this is easily verifiable because the nonce will also skip numbers. If the casino decides to change the server seed, it will be easy to catch; since the nonce would have reset and the hashed server seed (and seed, ofc) won't match the previous ones.

Not sure I made myself more clear with this now. And although I understand what Darkstar explained on the quoted post, I don't see how it relates to the point I was trying to make

That you are wrong about how other sites work affects your ability to verify is why I couldn't understand the point you were making. Please take a moment to read the description on that link _DarkStar gave.

He says "Although there are several implementations of the provably fair method, we will describe the most common one."

If you then read NLNico's description you'll find it describes exactly how ours works. We haven't done anything different that could make it possible to think that our system was somehow suspicious.  

Edit. Just to add some more.

The only other implementation I have seen is static server seeds. I have had a couple of requests to change our system to that. Some people prefer it because they think it is easier to use. Other people don't like it because they can't verify each roll as they go along but instead have to wait until they reveal the server seed and then go back and verify them all together.
Whether or not the nonce is reset to zero after revealing the server seed or is continued in sequence has no consequence because both sides know what the next nonce is going to be. All systems make spotting if a casino is skipping a roll verifiable because all nonce based systems allow you to see if they don't follow the sequence. Resetting the nonce makes absolutely no difference to that.

Example
Site A uses static server seeds. A user makes 20 rolls nonce 0 to 19 and then decides to verify those rolls and reveals the server seed. The site doesn't reset nonces so both parties know in advance that the next roll is nonce 20 so the site can't skip the next roll.
Site B uses static server seeds. A user makes 20 rolls nonce 0 to 19 and then decides to verify those rolls and reveals the server seed. The site resets nonces so both parties know in advance that the next roll is nonce 0 so the site can't skip the next roll.
Site C uses the plain vanilla implementation with a fresh server seed for each roll. A user makes 20 rolls nonce 0 to 19 and is able to verify each roll after they make it. Both parties know in advance that the next roll is nonce 20 so the site can't skip the next roll.

Tell me how any of those systems are more or less provably fair than the others?

[Csmiami]

----

Ah! But I was not trying to explain how yours worked, just how adding the static server seed you described could render all those "you've changed my server seed before the roll" claims invalid.

I agree that reseting the nonce is just a choice and that it would "not" really have an influence, since in both cases it must be sequential.

Both systems are PF, following the principle that the result can be verified. It may just be a perception bias, but I'd be more inclined to trust a static server seed that resets after getting changed, because it won't only prevent results from being skipped (both systems do that), but if there's a change on the seeds, I'd know when it happened.

[TheQuin]

Ah! But I was not trying to explain how yours worked, just how adding the static server seed you described could render all those "you've changed my server seed before the roll" claims invalid.

I agree that reseting the nonce is just a choice and that it would "not" really have an influence, since in both cases it must be sequential.

That wasn't what you originally said. You said

I'm sorry I'm late to the party, but I'm just reading this now. There is one thing that Freebitco.in could do to actually get this: reset the nonce.

That's why I couldn't understand what you were getting at.

Both systems are PF, following the principle that the result can be verified. It may just be a perception bias, but I'd be more inclined to trust a static server seed that resets after getting changed, because it won't only prevent results from being skipped (both systems do that), but if there's a change on the seeds, I'd know when it happened.

I think it's just a personal preference thing. Some people prefer one system over the other. In the 4 years I've been doing this I've only had 3 people from memory requesting we change it. I would guess if we did I might get 3 people over the next 4 years asking us to change it back. It's also a very big change. It would mean rewriting the whole thing from the ground up.

Edit to fix accidentally duplicating the last paragraph.
 

[Csmiami]

That wasn't what you originally said. You said

Yeah, I see where the confusion came from; Loyce was talking about pangolier88's complaint; which consisted on the server seed changing rather than skipping rolls:

Would it be possible to adjust it in such a way the user can prove when server seeds get changed, so that he could still verify "missed" rolls? That would clear cases like pangolier88's.

I quoted the whole sentence and well, it did look like I was talking about something else.

I think it's just a personal preference thing. Some people prefer one system over the other. In the 4 years I've been doing this I've only had 3 people from memory requesting we change it. I would guess if we did I might get 3 people over the next 4 years asking us to change it back. It's also a very big change. It would mean rewriting the whole thing from the ground up.

I guess we could never know; unless someone comes with some clear data/evidence that a system is better than the other one. I also suppose it'd be too much work to allow both systems to work at users' choice, so there's that too

[TheQuin]

I think it's just a personal preference thing. Some people prefer one system over the other. In the 4 years I've been doing this I've only had 3 people from memory requesting we change it. I would guess if we did I might get 3 people over the next 4 years asking us to change it back. It's also a very big change. It would mean rewriting the whole thing from the ground up.

I guess we could never know; unless someone comes with some clear data/evidence that a system is better than the other one. I also suppose it'd be too much work to allow both systems to work at users' choice, so there's that too

What I was getting at is how unimportant it is. Out of all the tens of thousands of emails I have dealt with and thousands of posts about us on the forum only 3 people care about this enough to request it.

The conversation above yours got me to think about a lot of things. When I was trying to make the comparison with fiat licenced casinos that can't use provably fair I thought about what would happen in a parallel universe where provably fair had never been invented. Gaming would still have been one of the first things Bitcoin was used for. The casinos would have to rely on the same things the fiat casinos do to establish reputations. But actually, that isn't any different to what happens now. The principles of reputation and trust in business are universal and apply to all sectors.

When people on the forum talk about reputation it is in a very narrow forum centric sense. It bears no resemblance to what reputation means in a broader business sense of the word. This is all background noise that most people will never hear. Freebitco.in wouldn't be so successful if it didn't have a very good reputation in the sense that actually matters.