Should online casino games be open source?

[viljy]

But I am interested more if gambler would be qualified enough to see, find, examine, analyse casinos software.

I suppose not. I also already mentioned this point above in the thread. Let's assume, hypothetically, that proponents of open source gambling, who cite open source as an important argument, would have to substantiate their thesis with statistical data on the proportion of programmers among gamblers. Even if such statistics are available, I believe that less than one percent of programmers are there. Then open source code as a means of control is simply ineffective, since it is incomprehensible to most non-specialists. Open source code on GitHub is effective for collaborative development, because 99.9% of users there are programmers. But a casino is not a GitHub.

[bangjoe]

This idea may seem at first glance like an act of transparency on the part of the casino. Allowing anyone to review the software to ensure the games are fair and not manipulated, or contribute improvements and new ideas, gives users added confidence.

However, there are extremely negative aspects such as the intellectual property of exclusive games, the possibility of malicious individuals modifying the code to create fraudulent versions of the games, and the impact on the compliance with laws and regulations to which casinos are subject.

What is your opinion?

I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed here before; if so, I apologize in advance.

The fear is that it can be modified and resold by certain individuals, I once read an article that there are some game scripts that are illegal and can be controlled by the buyers from who wins and loses when someone wants to play there while with licensed and regulated games tend to be expensive but it can be fairer than the illegal ones currently circulating they can set the API and modify the management of the game.

Of course I support this, because it can be seen publicly, whether it is because of luck that someone can get a win and or is a setting from the casino itself.

[EarnOnVictor]

This idea may seem at first glance like an act of transparency on the part of the casino. Allowing anyone to review the software to ensure the games are fair and not manipulated, or contribute improvements and new ideas, gives users added confidence.

This is a good thought and I've also thought of it many times. We all know these days that the so-called provably fair is not fair or provably anymore, they are simply a cover-up in most cases. However, as we are thinking about fairness, casinos will be thinking about how exposed they could be in their manipulations and how possibly the system could be exploited against them in the name of an open source.

By virtue, it is a high risk for any serious casino, so we should perish that idea, it will not happen in this current atmosphere.

[passwordnow]

By virtue, it is a high risk for any serious casino, so we should perish that idea, it will not happen in this current atmosphere.

It remains as an idea and we all know that the established casinos won't do that. They're also putting their business at risk with this since they're established to make a business and they've got still some ways to verify their fairness. If it's all about being fair, they do it but there's a heavier side of them being on the business side. It's understandable and that's how it goes, there were some attempts in the past about it to become decentralized and be an open source but those attempts were the one that perished.

[Solosanz]

It would good if they want to show the source, but it high unlikely to happen except newly poor casino who create their game from scratch. If you expect gambling providers to show their source, I'm sure it will not gonna happen sooner or later because other people can easily copy their source and casinos don't need to rent from them.

Also it's need big demand from the gamblers to force the casino to release the source, while most gamblers don't care with that at all.

[shogun47]

That would actually be good as it would give us a chance to test if the casino is actually working as intended or ripping their customers off. Come to think of, I think I have never heard of a casino like that. The casino owners would say that they didn’t want to share their secret sauce but then they don’t have to provide the full code maybe? Only share the actual algorithm that decides the winner and that would be enough to test the behavior of the casino.

That’s a brilliant suggestion op.

*pats on the back

That is what the excuse usually looks like and I am sure there is common sense on that question among all casino game developers.

What I have always asked myself is when these casinos use slot games from well known casino games developing companies (iGaming), is there any way for those casinos that buy let's say some slot machines, to tamper with the code afterwards? Are the casinos provides with options to tamper around with the RTP rate or can they limit jackpots somehow or do they have to accept the way those slot machines are built by the software companies the casinos obtain those games from?

[bakasabo]

I think that people overestimate meaning of open source. I believe that whenever people see open source somewhere, the immediately start to think that someone has already evaluated software, checked its code, found errors or weak points, and developers have all that fixed. Kind of "100% legit tag". So without hesitation they trust funds and personal data to that software. So to speak, they shift responsibility onto others. If casinos would become open source, nothing will be changed much, casinos possibly get more trust, but that can also have a negative effect, as scam casinos would add "open source" to their name and wait for gullible users.

[AbuBhakar]

I think that people overestimate meaning of open source. I believe that whenever people see open source somewhere, the immediately start to think that someone has already evaluated software, checked its code, found errors or weak points, and developers have all that fixed. Kind of "100% legit tag". So without hesitation they trust funds and personal data to that software. So to speak, they shift responsibility onto others. If casinos would become open source, nothing will be changed much, casinos possibly get more trust, but that can also have a negative effect, as scam casinos would add "open source" to their name and wait for gullible users.

Actually, most of the casino owned games are open source. Most of the close source game comes from the 3rd party game provider which casino doesn’t have control already. Also, we doesn’t need the casino itself to become open source unlike what you described.

Being open source on the game is good as player since we can guarantee that the game is transparent but on the casino perspective it’s dangerous since anyone can copy their games easily while they spend money to develop it on there own.

[Salahmu]

This idea may seem at first glance like an act of transparency on the part of the casino. Allowing anyone to review the software to ensure the games are fair and not manipulated, or contribute improvements and new ideas, gives users added confidence.

However, there are extremely negative aspects such as the intellectual property of exclusive games, the possibility of malicious individuals modifying the code to create fraudulent versions of the games, and the impact on the compliance with laws and regulations to which casinos are subject.

What is your opinion?

I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed here before; if so, I apologize in advance.

There is no need for casinos to be more open source than they already are, actually if open source is by showing everybody how transparency they are they would be the ones using their hands to pull their business down because completely making themselves an open source is another way of nakeding themselves and we all understand how someone who is naked looks, everybody will see every parts and components both big and small, from there they have already given a call for scammers to duplicate everything about them either using it against them or using it against others, so actually since apart from soccer and few others no other games are open source, so no need for them to prove anything.

[coin-investor]

It depends on the casino operators, but they can gain the respect of the gambling community if they make it open source so players can verify the fairness of the games, and bug hunters and software developers can add or recommend additional features and security.
The gambling industry is a game of trust among casino operators, and by having an open-source casino, they enjoy the respect and the trust of the gambling and gaming community.

[bettercrypto]

But I am interested more if gambler would be qualified enough to see, find, examine, analyse casinos software.

I suppose not. I also already mentioned this point above in the thread. Let's assume, hypothetically, that proponents of open source gambling, who cite open source as an important argument, would have to substantiate their thesis with statistical data on the proportion of programmers among gamblers. Even if such statistics are available, I believe that less than one percent of programmers are there. Then open source code as a means of control is simply ineffective, since it is incomprehensible to most non-specialists. Open source code on GitHub is effective for collaborative development, because 99.9% of users there are programmers. But a casino is not a GitHub.

Since what you are saying is just a hypothetical, it is hard to say that this will happen since I have not seen any online casino games that are open source. Why is that?
maybe at one point you said it is ineffective.

Then I don't think it is necessary for an online gambling casino to do this. And besides, gamblers will not notice it either in my opinion.

[Findingnemo]

Casinos have a system called provable fairness which is used to verify the randomness which means the users don't have to blindly trust the reputation of the casino for fair results so I guess that is more than enough for an average gambler to get the satisfaction of the games are not being rigged. Making it open source will lead to less investment for the game development from the casino side cause anyone can use the codes so there's no margin for their investments here.

[traderethereum]

This idea may seem at first glance like an act of transparency on the part of the casino. Allowing anyone to review the software to ensure the games are fair and not manipulated, or contribute improvements and new ideas, gives users added confidence.

However, there are extremely negative aspects such as the intellectual property of exclusive games, the possibility of malicious individuals modifying the code to create fraudulent versions of the games, and the impact on the compliance with laws and regulations to which casinos are subject.

What is your opinion?

I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed here before; if so, I apologize in advance.

There is no need for casinos to be more open source than they already are, actually if open source is by showing everybody how transparency they are they would be the ones using their hands to pull their business down because completely making themselves an open source is another way of nakeding themselves and we all understand how someone who is naked looks, everybody will see every parts and components both big and small, from there they have already given a call for scammers to duplicate everything about them either using it against them or using it against others, so actually since apart from soccer and few others no other games are open source, so no need for them to prove anything.

So that will be too risky if casinos become open source because their competitor will their weakness and crashing their business. What casino needs to do is just gives satisfying to their members with so many things that can makes their members back to their casino. Becoming open source will makes all people can see inside of the casino so casino will not allow it because that will related to their business and how they can profit from that. Casino can show how transparent their business by showing honestly and fairness to their members and makes them satisfy with their best services. Their loyal members will not leave casino because they can comfortable playing gambling on that casino.

[mcdouglasx]

So that will be too risky if casinos become open source because their competitor will their weakness and crashing their business.

If that were the case, Bitcoin would be doomed because it's open-source, as malicious actors would exploit its vulnerabilities... wait a moment, which ones?.
Well-structured software doesn't necessarily have to be vulnerable.

There is no need for casinos to be more open source than they already are, actually if open source is by showing everybody how transparency they are they would be the ones using their hands to pull their business down because completely making themselves an open source is another way of nakeding themselves and we all understand how someone who is naked looks

If you boast about having huge genitals, there is no better way to show it than by getting naked.

I think that people overestimate meaning of open source. I believe that whenever people see open source somewhere, the immediately start to think that someone has already evaluated software, checked its code, found errors or weak points, and developers have all that fixed. Kind of "100% legit tag".

No, open source has a reputation that precedes it due to expert evaluation.

I suppose not. I also already mentioned this point above in the thread. Let's assume, hypothetically, that proponents of open source gambling, who cite open source as an important argument, would have to substantiate their thesis with statistical data on the proportion of programmers among gamblers. Even if such statistics are available, I believe that less than one percent of programmers are there. Then open source code as a means of control is simply ineffective, since it is incomprehensible to most non-specialists. Open source code on GitHub is effective for collaborative development, because 99.9% of users there are programmers. But a casino is not a GitHub.

Saying most users are not programmers is a very vague concept. Not everyone has to be a particle physicist to trust that quantum mechanics is real. To be 100% reliable, something must be carefully studied by impartial experts in the field.

[stompix]

I think Binance should also make their trading code open-source, right?
Oh, and Tiktok should make their algorithm open-source! Oh wait!

These things cost money, a ton of money, that's why pragmatic is raking in millions, do you think after pouring millions I creating them they would allow anyone to have a copy of them or to build on top of them with just a few lines so they avoid a lawsuit and there you have it, a new game provider 100x cheaper run by a guy in his basement? 

If that were the case, Bitcoin would be doomed because it's open-source, as malicious actors would exploit its vulnerabilities... wait a moment, which ones?.

Value overflow? The 180 billion Bitcoin? You think open source is bullet proof just because everyone can look at it?

No, open source has a reputation that precedes it due to expert evaluation.

Open source is meaningless if the guys looking at the code are dumber than the ones in a company with closed-source software, electrum is open source, that didn't help much before 4.2.1

[mcdouglasx]

I think Binance should also make their trading code open-source, right?
Oh, and Tiktok should make their algorithm open-source! Oh wait!

These things cost money, a ton of money, that's why pragmatic is raking in millions, do you think after pouring millions I creating them they would allow anyone to have a copy of them or to build on top of them with just a few lines so they avoid a lawsuit and there you have it, a new game provider 100x cheaper run by a guy in his basement? 

I'm not saying open source is good or bad, I'm just saying it has pros and cons in the context of casinos.
No, Binance doesn't need to be open source, the blockchain is already transparent enough and TikTok has nothing to do with chance, but it still sees the problem in the United States for reasons of security and privacy.

If that were the case, Bitcoin would be doomed because it's open-source, as malicious actors would exploit its vulnerabilities... wait a moment, which ones?.

Value overflow? The 180 billion Bitcoin? You think open source is bullet proof just because everyone can look at it?

Yes, because by being subjected to expert testing we can have more confidence, although this does not free it from possible errors, it is the closest to the truth.

No, open source has a reputation that precedes it due to expert evaluation.

Open source is meaningless if the guys looking at the code are dumber than the ones in a company with closed-source software, electrum is open source, that didn't help much before 4.2.1

That's the good thing, the rapid ability to manage vulnerabilities, nothing is exempt from failure, but these failures are resolved faster in open source than in closed source.

[viljy]

Casinos have a system called provable fairness which is used to verify the randomness which means the users don't have to blindly trust the reputation of the casino for fair results so I guess that is more than enough for an average gambler to get the satisfaction of the games are not being rigged. Making it open source will lead to less investment for the game development from the casino side cause anyone can use the codes so there's no margin for their investments here.

Did you know that not every player will be able to understand at least something in this provably fair? Moreover, for most players, these proofs are as incomprehensible as inscriptions in ancient languages. After all, this proof arose precisely because of the distrust of the players, and the distrust is quite justified, because when the code is closed, the game is not fully verifiable. In general, for the closeness of the code, in addition to the economic reasons listed earlier in the thread, there may be another most obvious reason - does that mean there is something that needs to be hidden?

[Findingnemo]

Casinos have a system called provable fairness which is used to verify the randomness which means the users don't have to blindly trust the reputation of the casino for fair results so I guess that is more than enough for an average gambler to get the satisfaction of the games are not being rigged. Making it open source will lead to less investment for the game development from the casino side cause anyone can use the codes so there's no margin for their investments here.

Did you know that not every player will be able to understand at least something in this provably fair? Moreover, for most players, these proofs are as incomprehensible as inscriptions in ancient languages. After all, this proof arose precisely because of the distrust of the players, and the distrust is quite justified, because when the code is closed, the game is not fully verifiable. In general, for the closeness of the code, in addition to the economic reasons listed earlier in the thread, there may be another most obvious reason - does that mean there is something that needs to be hidden?

Verifying the randomness of results via seeds is baby science versus understanding the code and find any issues in it so anyone can verify the provable fairness but to read and understand code it needs special knowledge as well as experience. I am comfortable with this because I can't read codes so even if the codes are publicly available I can't verify it by myself so that I have to rely on someone's words for that so it doesn't really make any difference

[Salahmu]

There is no need for casinos to be more open source than they already are, actually if open source is by showing everybody how transparency they are they would be the ones using their hands to pull their business down because completely making themselves an open source is another way of nakeding themselves and we all understand how someone who is naked looks, everybody will see every parts and components both big and small, from there they have already given a call for scammers to duplicate everything about them either using it against them or using it against others, so actually since apart from soccer and few others no other games are open source, so no need for them to prove anything.

So that will be too risky if casinos become open source because their competitor will their weakness and crashing their business. What casino needs to do is just gives satisfying to their members with so many things that can makes their members back to their casino.

Do you think their weakness can be taken advantage of in that regard by competitors?, though I have not seen how their competitors will do that against them because this is just like a club against each other, the only thing they would see among themselves is having the same eleven players on the field, so actually what other casinos can only see is just the games and nothing too much importance for them because even if they saw all the users they don't have the power to convert them on there own casinos if they choose to patronize other casinos instead, so the security system is just were the problem lies.

[Zoomic]

This idea may seem at first glance like an act of transparency on the part of the casino. Allowing anyone to review the software to ensure the games are fair and not manipulated, or contribute improvements and new ideas, gives users added confidence.

However, there are extremely negative aspects such as the intellectual property of exclusive games, the possibility of malicious individuals modifying the code to create fraudulent versions of the games, and the impact on the compliance with laws and regulations to which casinos are subject.

What is your opinion?

I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed here before; if so, I apologize in advance.

Making online casinos open source is like giving the gamblers and competitors an edge over the casino. This is a good idea, but it will not be favourable to the casinos. Competitors that get to know alot about a casino, including the casino's codes can use that against the casino to their own advantage.

This will raise lots of security concerns for the casino too as some malicious individuals would also want to manipulate outcomes of games or even hack the system. Which will definitely destroy the casino's reputation and finances.

This level of transparency we so desire will not be favourable to a competitive industry like the gambling industry. There are lots of negative implications involved. Casinos should just stick to the usual Provably Fair Systems to avoid shooting themselves in the foot.