Thanks everyone for the thoughtful replies - this is exactly the scrutiny I want. Let me hit the big
themes, and especially the "why should I trust it" question, since that's the whole point of the design.
You don't have to trust me - you can verify all of it yourself:
- On-chain: the escrow contract is public on Base. Read it on Basescan and you'll see stakes are locked
in the contract and paid out by it - never held on my server. Nothing about the money is hidden.
- Provably fair, independently: before each game I publish SHA256(serverSeed); each player adds their own
clientSeed; the roll is HMAC-SHA256(serverSeed, clientSeeds:nonce); serverSeed is revealed afterwards.
Standard algorithm - recompute any roll with any HMAC-SHA256 tool (not mine) and check it against the
committed hash and the on-chain payout. My verify page is just convenience; the proof doesn't need it.
- Watch with no wallet: open any live game read-only - no wallet, no sign-in - and watch it play in real
time. See it work before risking a cent.
- Try it for ~1 USDC: buy-ins go low, so you can run the whole flow - deposit, play, claim, verify - with
pocket change before putting real money in.
And here's the whole flow on video, start to finish - create a table, play it out, claim, and the
fairness verification at the end:
https://youtu.be/qfP_mDcsTDA(Apologies for the rough quality - it's a quick, no-frills capture I threw together just to show it
genuinely works and is fair; a proper polished version with audio is on the way and will look much nicer.)
Why USDC, not BTC (@Cointxz @adultcrypto @buwaytress): deliberate. A stablecoin means your stake is worth
the same at the start and end of a hand - no volatility on money you've put in play. On Base the gas is
cents, and deposits are gasless (you sign, a relayer pays the gas - you don't even need ETH). BTC isn't
native to an EVM L2; using it would mean wrapped/bridged BTC, which adds back exactly the custody and trust
I'm removing. Stable + native + verifiable is the whole thesis. (And yes, that's why the thread's on altcoins.)
On regulatory risk (@buwaytress - good point): the PF sites that got shut down were mostly custodial and/or
KYC'd - they held user funds and identities. I hold neither: funds sit in the contract, no KYC, and I
geo-block the regulated markets (Germany, France, etc.). Non-custodial is exactly the move to keep that
exposure low - it's not the coin that matters there, it's who holds the money.
Why 2% instead of a sub-1% house edge (@buwaytress): there's no house here. DiceMoon is player-vs-player -
dice tables and Sit&Go poker - so you're betting against the other players, not me. The 2% is a flat rake on
the pot (poker-style), not a per-bet edge I hold against you: in poker skill can put you ahead, and in dice
it's a fair draw among the players minus the rake. It also covers the gas I pay for you (deposits AND
withdrawals are gasless). Totally fair to weigh against a 1% HE site - it's just a different model, and the
rake can come down as volume grows.
Where it goes next - and where it deliberately doesn't (@Agbe @Cointxz @adultcrypto @Perfectbaby):
I'm not building another slots casino or a sportsbook. There are a thousand of those and they're all
house-vs-player. DiceMoon is the opposite by design - non-custodial, provably fair, and player-vs-player,
so the house is never your opponent. It grows by adding more games where you play other people, not the
house: dice and Sit&Go poker today, and I'd love to add skill/PvP games next - think a chess-for-crypto,
that kind of thing. Yes, a sportsbook would pull a bigger crowd (@Perfectbaby, fair point), but that's a
custodial, heavily-regulated, house-vs-player world that's deliberately not where I'm headed. A different
crowd than a slots site - on purpose.
UI (@Agbe): fair - tell me exactly what felt clunky and I'll fix it. The watch-with-no-wallet flow above
should already make it easier to just see what the site does.
Appreciate you all taking the time. Keep the hard questions coming.
