An open discussion on Provably Fair

[kleineaap]

I am being accused by RGBKey for being a shill for LN while trying to discuss the current provably fair system.

I never claimed that Lucky Number is provably fair.
My point is that the provably fair systems implemented in all dice websites don't protect the user 100% when it comes to fairness.

We need a new system.

I stick to my opinion and if you don't agree I would prefer you leaving me alone instead of calling me an idiot and leaving me negative trust.

[RGBKey]

I am being accused by RGBKey for being a shill for LN while trying to discuss the current provably fair system.

I never claimed that Lucky Number is provably fair.
My point is that the provably fair systems implemented in all dice websites don't protect the user 100% when it comes to fairness.

We need a new system.

I stick to my opinion and if you don't agree I would prefer you leaving me alone instead of calling me an idiot and leaving me negative trust.

There is no room for opinions here, only facts. Give facts as to how primedice and just-dice could scam their users if the users take the necessary steps.

[kleineaap]

There is no room for opinions in "An open discussion on Provably Fair" ?

If the users take the necessary steps no manipulation could take place, of course. What I said is that the system is not perfect and I agree with stunna that it's in its infancy.

Enforcing a provable result could be a good step.

I have also stated that I do not believe that PD or JD would ever manipulate anything.

I fully agree with the points you brought up. Provably fair is dangerous to gamblers as it gives them a truly false sense of security. I still feel there isn't a strong enough provably fair method for off-chain sites, the only site I feel is very provably fair is Satoshidice and I've heard of potential ways for them to game their system as well (I don't believe they ever have or would).


Ultimately even the strongest provably fair relies on the operator/website to not be a bad actor as virtually anything can be deleted or changed to enforce a "provable result". This all goes without saying that 90%+ of players do not even check the fairness of their rolls or only check them once.

I share this opinion.

[RGBKey]

There is no room for opinions in "An open discussion on Provably Fair" ?

If the users take the necessary steps no manipulation could take place, of course. What I said is that the system is not perfect and I agree with stunna that it's in its infancy.

Enforcing a provable result could be a good step.

I have also stated that I do not believe that PD or JD would ever manipulate anything.

I fully agree with the points you brought up. Provably fair is dangerous to gamblers as it gives them a truly false sense of security. I still feel there isn't a strong enough provably fair method for off-chain sites, the only site I feel is very provably fair is Satoshidice and I've heard of potential ways for them to game their system as well (I don't believe they ever have or would).


Ultimately even the strongest provably fair relies on the operator/website to not be a bad actor as virtually anything can be deleted or changed to enforce a "provable result". This all goes without saying that 90%+ of players do not even check the fairness of their rolls or only check them once.

I share this opinion.

In that case, maybe we can agree to help create a new way to do provable fairness.

[elm]

why did this thread die?

[m19]

I'd like to use this thread to discuss something.

Why do most sites, ie. PrimeDice, Dice.ninja, Dicebitco.in all loop through 5 hex characters (so a 0-1048575 number) of the hash and if it's lower than 1 million divide by 10,000 to get a 0-100 number, if not go to next 5 characters. Why not just divide by 10485.75 right away?

[BRE]

provably fair ...yea but lot of site use " Probably Fair " not provably fair 

[BigMac]

I'd like to use this thread to discuss something.

Why do most sites, ie. PrimeDice, Dice.ninja, Dicebitco.in all loop through 5 hex characters (so a 0-1048575 number) of the hash and if it's lower than 1 million divide by 10,000 to get a 0-100 number, if not go to next 5 characters. Why not just divide by 10485.75 right away?

If the sites divide the number 0 - 1048575 by 10485.75 and round off the number, the chance of having a roll "<0.01" will be 104/1048576 = 0.00991821289% rather than 0.01%.

[m19]

I'd like to use this thread to discuss something.

Why do most sites, ie. PrimeDice, Dice.ninja, Dicebitco.in all loop through 5 hex characters (so a 0-1048575 number) of the hash and if it's lower than 1 million divide by 10,000 to get a 0-100 number, if not go to next 5 characters. Why not just divide by 10485.75 right away?

If the sites divide the number 0 - 1048575 by 10485.75 and round off the number, the chance of having a roll "<0.01" will be 104/1048576 = 0.00991821289% rather than 0.01%.

What if you don't round off and just take the amount of decimals you want? It seems I'm missing some basic math knowledge today

edit:

Hmm that doesn't seem to be right either.  Only 1048575 would yield 100.00 then while 0-104 would yield 0.00

edit2:

Of course for 0.01% chance I should do >99.98 or <0.01. Without rounding exactly 104 different numbers would yield a number 99.98 and exactly 104 numbers would be <0.01

So it's still provably fair if you don't round the numbers.

[Shogen]

I'd like to use this thread to discuss something.

Why do most sites, ie. PrimeDice, Dice.ninja, Dicebitco.in all loop through 5 hex characters (so a 0-1048575 number) of the hash and if it's lower than 1 million divide by 10,000 to get a 0-100 number, if not go to next 5 characters. Why not just divide by 10485.75 right away?

If the sites divide the number 0 - 1048575 by 10485.75 and round off the number, the chance of having a roll "<0.01" will be 104/1048576 = 0.00991821289% rather than 0.01%.

What if you don't round off and just take the amount of decimals you want? It seems I'm missing some basic math knowledge today

edit:

Hmm that doesn't seem to be right either.  Only 1048575 would yield 100.00 then while 0-104 would yield 0.00

edit2:

Of course for 0.01% chance I should do >99.98 or <0.01. Without rounding exactly 104 different numbers would yield a number 99.98 and exactly 104 numbers would be <0.01

So it's still provably fair if you don't round the numbers.

The problem is that the win chance will be slightly lower, or equivalently the house edge will be slightly higher than the advertised value.

[Tetraplay Casino]

Tetraplay is pleased to introduce 3 new Hash Tables Games https://tetraplay.com/category/hash-games/

Blackjack 3D https://tetraplay.com/blackjack-3d-game?funMode=true

Blackjack Surrender 3D https://tetraplay.com/blackjack-surrender-3d-game?funMode=true

Baccarat 3D https://tetraplay.com/all-games/baccarat-3d-game/?funMode=true

With our JS Fiddle Script http://jsfiddle.net/tetraplay/3k1Lw757/ you can check that we didn't change the Card Deck after the game started depending on your bets or decisions during the game. We use SHA256 Encryption, to change the current Game Hash please refresh the page

Let's take an example with Blackjack Surrender 3D https://tetraplay.com/blackjack-surrender-3d-game?funMode=true


Every game we provide you with a different Game Hash



At the end of the Game we provide you this the current Hash Game and Game Deck and the next Hash Game.



You can then check that the Game Card correspond to the Game Hash provided before the game started.

Feel free to try (it also works in Fun mode   ) and leave your comments and suggestions.

We will be soon introducing a Hash Roulette Game with an additional client seed.
Tetraplay Casino https://tetraplay.com