Bitcoin Forum
November 13, 2018, 05:47:09 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.0 [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 [95] 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 ... 460 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"  (Read 1110749 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
J. J. Phillips
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


Islam and Nazism are belief systems, not races.


View Profile WWW
December 24, 2014, 04:10:51 PM
 #1881

Thanks for your reply. I can't respond to everything and the thread has moved on anyway. It's OK to assume I agree with everything I didn't reply to.

The concern at hand is the concentration and centralization of the CLAM network.  
Your suggested solution appears to be that there should be an alternative which does not require users to download the client.


There are multiple reasons it is desirable that users download the client.

I agree it's desirable if people who realize they have clams from the initial distribution download the client and become part of the network. I encourage people to do so.

I suspect given a choice between doing that and using the kind of quick method Just Dice allows, most people will use the quick method and probably convert to BTC as quickly as possible. If there were an alternative quick method run by someone other than dooglus, then there would be at least two independent people staking in the network and collecting lots of the clams from the initial distribution. (Three or four would be much better.) I think the concentration is partly due to Just Dice being the only quick, easy way to claim those clams.

Third, your solution appears to suggest that third-party services, in which the private key is transferred to a web-server over the wire through a browser into an opaque code system is preferable, from a security stand-point, to importing directly into the client.

Actually, I was suggesting people could sign a transaction (even offline) and never give up their private key. I probably didn't make that clear. For example, someone (Alice) could just make a big list of all the bitcoin addresses that still have clams and publish them with codes for transactions spending those clams to Alice's own clam address. Then Alice could say: "If you use some little piece of code that is only doing digital signatures to sign this transaction to my clams address, then I will send 3 mbits to your bitcoin address." Alice only needs the signed transaction to get the clams, not the private key.

Of course, the entire issue of security is nearly moot, considering that the recommended claim process, for Just-Dice OR the client, both involve emptying the private key before claiming regardless.  Empty keys have no more value than any random string of characters.

I'm guessing you've had to explain this hundreds of times. Smiley You're correct, of course, and that's what I did myself just to be on the safe side. I'm trying to suggest an alternative answer: "You don't have to give up your private key, you just have to sign one thing with it." Realistically, most people don't understand and are scared as a consequence. I'm not sure much can be done about that, but I suspect it means most people who have clams from the initial distribution will never claim them.

By the way, there is a problematic corner case with emptying addresses before claiming clams. Some bitcoins (well, tx outs) are really tokens standing for some meta-protocol (e.g., colored coins, master coin, counterparty). Care would need to be taken to move these, or they could lose their intended meaning and lose significant value as a result.

Concerning age:

The re-implementation of age would reduce the occurrence of orphans caused by "race conditions".  For that reason alone, it is likely a sensible option.  

Yes, it should reduce occurrences of "race conditions" -- as should switching 16s to 1s. How many such race conditions occur in an average day at the moment?

The only argument I have heard against the re-implementation of age concerns the incentive structure and desire to have clients staking continuously for network security.  

CLAMS already has the most sensible incentive structure is this regard, even if EXPONENTIAL age was implemented.

The fact is, we are the only proof-of-stake crypto with a reward structure that doesn't allow users to accrue reward "interest" via accruing age.  That alone is incentive to not "store" age.  Time not spent hashing, is time not spent rolling hashes for nBits.  Making CLAMS easily the crypto with the most well-aligned incentive structure regardless of age.

Ah, because the reward is fixed at 1 clam? You're right. I hadn't thought about that. With a fixed reward staking all the time provides optimal rewards. Eh, I'm OK with putting age back in.

To some extent, "age" is still in the staking algorithm now since minted coins take 510 blocks to mature (so the age goes from 0 to 1 and stays at 1). I noticed Just Dice mostly gets around this (completely legitimately) by keeping lots of transactions with approximately 4 clams as an output. (I might be doing the same thing, but I'm not telling.) This way there is the same chance of staking as if there were one big txout, but when one of the small ones stakes there are only 5 clams waiting to mature leaving the other small txouts still staking. (I'm not sure if 4 clams is optimal for this strategy. Someone should do the maths.)

Keep in mind that however age is included, stakers will (legitimately) split their clams to optimize their rewards.

I don't know the real numbers, but suppose JD has 25,000 transaction outputs staking with 4 clams on each. No matter how many of these have recently staked, most of them necessarily haven't staked recently and will have some age saved up.

I doubt there is a modification that would cause JD to stake fewer blocks. There could simply be a modification that the same *address* cannot stake twice in a row, but this has the obvious workaround that JD (and everyone else) would use different addresses for each staking output.

If Israel is destroyed, I will devote the rest of my life to the extermination of the human species. Any species that goes down this road again less than 100 years after the holocaust needs to be fucking wiped out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Affair_of_the_Gang_of_Barbarians
Ilan Halimi: tortured and murdered in France by barbarian Jew haters who'd be very comfortable here at bitcointalk.
1542088029
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542088029

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542088029
Reply with quote  #2

1542088029
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2548
Merit: 1125



View Profile
December 24, 2014, 06:27:16 PM
 #1882

Keep in mind that however age is included, stakers will (legitimately) split their clams to optimize their rewards.

I don't know the real numbers, but suppose JD has 25,000 transaction outputs staking with 4 clams on each. No matter how many of these have recently staked, most of them necessarily haven't staked recently and will have some age saved up.

I doubt there is a modification that would cause JD to stake fewer blocks. There could simply be a modification that the same *address* cannot stake twice in a row, but this has the obvious workaround that JD (and everyone else) would use different addresses for each staking output.

I can give you the numbers if you like, but pretty much we have 216k CLAM split into 54k piles of 4 CLAM each. Those 4's become 5, 6, then 7, and then 4+4 and the cycle repeats. Transaction fees get added in, and change from withdrawals too, so the actual picture is really messy.

The point of adding age back in is the following:

Suppose you have 10 CLAMs and are solo-staking. You stake for 20 days and eventually manage to stake a block. Unfortunately JD stakes a block at the same time, and goes on to orphan your block. You lose. And now you'll probably be waiting another 20 days to get another chance to try again.

With age, it will still take you 20 days on average for your first chance to stake (since all the competition is also aging), but if you get orphaned, your age doesn't get reset, and so you are likely to get your 2nd chance of staking after less than 20 more days. You will be getting to stake more and more often as your age (and thus weight) increases, and so will eventually get a block accepted.

The downside of reintroducing age is that it removes some of the incentive that currently exists for people to run their client 24/7.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2548
Merit: 1125



View Profile
December 24, 2014, 06:46:07 PM
 #1883

About a year ago the idea was floated of allowing JD 'investors' to only actually deposit a fraction of their bankroll to the site while declaring the size of their total bankroll. The site would then act as if they had deposited the whole amount, using the actual deposit as collateral in the event that they lose. This would allow people to stake the majority of their own coins in their own wallet, while still having them "work" as if they were in the JD bankroll. I hope to finally implement such a system "soon".

I think this is a great idea, but implementing it sounds like a nightmare.

I was hoping it would be relatively simple, but have just spotted a problem with it:

Currently we treat both staking rewards and player losses as "income" for the bankroll, and split it equally between those providing the bankroll. But with the proposed scheme, where you only deposit a fraction of your bankroll, and leave the rest locally, we don't want to consider the whole amount as active for staking (since it isn't). And that breaks the whole scheme (I only track the percentage of the bankroll that each user owns - I don't update their balance every time something happen, and don't want to).

I guess the solution is to treat staking rewards differently. They happen relatively rarely; the bankroll changes due to betting many times per second, and due to staking at most 4 times per minute. I can reduce the frequency at which staking rewards are credited to investors if necessary, and have them treated as a special kind of 'investment' event. This complicates things, but not too much.

As a quick fix, have you thought about running multiple copies of the client?  You would still have control of over 51% of the network, but no one client would have that power.  I have not looked at this any more then writing these words.  But I read a lot and haven't seen a technical reason you couldn't do it. 

I have tried running multiple copies of the client on different sites. I found that it really doesn't handle orphans very well. When both clients found a block at the same time, the one with the smaller weight would quickly get left behind, since its block would be orphaned. It would take up to 30 blocks before the smaller weight client realised this and did a reorg. For those 30 blocks it would see all the new blocks it received as "orphans" (which is weird, since they aren't) and would continue clinging to the hope that the single block it had staked would be accepted.

I should really have looked into this and fixed it, but instead all I did was move all the coins back to a single wallet to avoid the problem.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
Youghoor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 250



View Profile
December 24, 2014, 06:50:25 PM
 #1884

Too many wallets are not easy to manage.

                ▄▄▓▓█▓▓█▀▀▀▀█▓▓██▓▄▄
             ▄▓█▓▀                ▀▓█▓█
          ▄▓█▓      ▄▄▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▄▄▄      ▀█▓▄
        ▄▓██    ▄▓▓██████████████▓▓▄    ██▓▄
       ▓██    ▓▓████████▓▀▀██████████▓    ██▓
      ▓█░   █▓█████▓▀ ▓██  ▓██ ▀▓▓█████▓    ▓▓
     ▓█    ▓█████▀  ▄▓▓██████▓▓▓▄  ▓████▓    ██
    ▓██   █████▓ ▄▓▓  ▄██░▐███▄ ▀▓▓ ░▓███▓   ██▓
    ██    █████ █▓  ▓████░▐████▓█ █▓ ░█████   ██
    ██   ▐████ ▐█  ▓█████░▐██████░ █▌ █████   ██░
    ██   ▐████ ▐██ ▓█████░▐█████▓ █▓ ░█████   ██░
    ██    ████▓ █▓█ ▀▓▓██░▐██▓▓  █▓  ▓████    ██
    ▐█▓  ░████▓▄  ▀▓▓▄▄██░▐███▄▓▓  █▓████░   ██▌
     ▐██    ▓████▓▄▄  ▀██░▐███  ▄▓▓████▓░   ██▓
      ▐█▓    █▓██████▓▓██████▓▓████████    ▐█▓
       ▐█▓▄    ▀▓██████████████████▓▀    ▄▓██
         ▐█▓▄     ▀▀▓▓████████▓▓▀▀     ▄▓██
            ▓██▄                    ▄█▓▓▀
              ▀▓█▓▓▄▄          ▄▄▓▓█▓▀
                   ▀▀▓▓██████▓▓▀▀
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
.Together we can change
❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ the internet ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
  Social Media
▄███████████████████▄
██████████████████████▌
██████████████████████▌
████████████     █▀███▌
███   █████        ▐██▌
███               ▐███▌
███               ████▌
████             █████▌
█████▄▄         ██████▌
████         ▄████████▌
██████████████████████▌
██████████████████████▌
▄▓█████████████████████▓▓▄
▓██████████████████████████▌
███████████████████▓▓▀  ▓██▌
██████████████▓▀▀       ▓██▌
████████▓▀▀      ▄█    ▐███▌
███▓▀        ▄▄▓▀      ▓███▌
███▓▄▄▄   ▄▓█▓         ████▌
████████▓ ▓▌          ▓████▌
█████████▓    ▄       █████▌
██████████▌ ▄▓██▓▄   ▐█████▌
███████████████████▓▓██████▌
▐██████████████████████████
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.
                  ,▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
               ▄████▀▀▀▀████▄
             ▄███`  ,▄▄,   ▀██▄
            ▐██▀  ▄███████   ██▌
          ,▄███   ████████▌  ▐██▄,
      ,▄███████▄  █▄▄██▄▄█  ▄███████▄▄
     ██████████████████████████████████,
    ▐████▌   ██████████████████   ▐█████
     ▀████▄▄████████▀  "████████▄▄████▀
       `▀████████████▄▄████████████▀▀
            '▀▀▀▀▀█████████▀▀▀▀
         ▄▄                      ▄▄
        ███          ▄▄⌐         ███
       ███           ██▌          ▀██
      ███            ██▌           ▀██
                     ██▌
chilly2k
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1007
Merit: 1000


View Profile
December 24, 2014, 07:41:41 PM
 #1885

I was hoping it would be relatively simple, but have just spotted a problem with it:

Currently we treat both staking rewards and player losses as "income" for the bankroll, and split it equally between those providing the bankroll. But with the proposed scheme, where you only deposit a fraction of your bankroll, and leave the rest locally, we don't want to consider the whole amount as active for staking (since it isn't). And that breaks the whole scheme (I only track the percentage of the bankroll that each user owns - I don't update their balance every time something happen, and don't want to).

I guess the solution is to treat staking rewards differently. They happen relatively rarely; the bankroll changes due to betting many times per second, and due to staking at most 4 times per minute. I can reduce the frequency at which staking rewards are credited to investors if necessary, and have them treated as a special kind of 'investment' event. This complicates things, but not too much.


  I'm not understanding how you can only accept a portion of the bankroll and leave the rest local. Are you planning to use the time lock thingy? 

  If you required everyone to have the same percent in the active bankroll, you would be exactly where you are today.  Each persons percent would be the same.  But I'm sure you will have some people that want to have all of their clams on the JD site.  If you made those the only options, the investors stake would either be X% or X% * percent really on JD site.

  I'm not sure how the system handles investing/devesting.  Does it take a snap shot at that point and update everyones balance? 

  And what happens if the bankroll falls below a certian point?  Is there a call option?  Some way you can gaurentee you can get the funds.  I'm not worried about you or me, but there are some that would be hessitent to send in addition funds to cover losses. 
   


I have tried running multiple copies of the client on different sites. I found that it really doesn't handle orphans very well. When both clients found a block at the same time, the one with the smaller weight would quickly get left behind, since its block would be orphaned. It would take up to 30 blocks before the smaller weight client realised this and did a reorg. For those 30 blocks it would see all the new blocks it received as "orphans" (which is weird, since they aren't) and would continue clinging to the hope that the single block it had staked would be accepted.

I should really have looked into this and fixed it, but instead all I did was move all the coins back to a single wallet to avoid the problem.

   Do you actually see the orphans in your clients transactions?  IE in the qt client?  I thought you just ran the daemon in Linux, but I could be mistaken.  I've just started staking locally again.  I haven't noticed a problems with orphans since the last fork. 

   Was there anything special about running 2 wallets on your end that you can think of?  Wouldn't it be the same as everyone else VS the JD wallet?   I moved clams into my personal wallet and got a stake about 1 hour after the blocks became mature.  And another 7 hours later.  No orphans in that time. At least not in the QT transaction list.   

dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2548
Merit: 1125



View Profile
December 24, 2014, 08:37:31 PM
 #1886

  I'm not understanding how you can only accept a portion of the bankroll and leave the rest local. Are you planning to use the time lock thingy? 

No, it's like this:

The bankroll is 90k, you deposit 100 and say "I have 9900 locally and want to invest the whole 10k with you". That makes the bankroll 100k in total, and you are 10% of it. You risk up to 0.5% of your total investment per roll, ie. 50 CLAMs. You get 10% of all losing bets, and lose 10% of all winning bets. If the site makes a net loss of 1000, you suffer 100 of that loss, and your actual deposit is all gone. You get divested at that point, and have lost your 100.

I can't tell, and don't care if you really have 9900 locally or not. You were risking up to 50 CLAMs per roll. If you only really had the 100 you deposited, then that's really risky behaviour. But it's only risky for you, not for JD. Once it's gone, you're divested.

But if you really DO have 10k CLAMs, it would make sense to send just 100 of it to JD and just tell it about the other 9900 you hold locally. Then your counterparty risk is vastly reduced, since only you have control of the majority of your coins. And the centralisation issue is moot, since 99% of your coins are no longer in the JD wallet.

  If you required everyone to have the same percent in the active bankroll, you would be exactly where you are today.

I won't. You can have 100% of your coins on deposit if you want to - then we'll stake them for you, and charge 10%. But why not stake most of them for yourself and keep 100% of the rewards?

  I'm not sure how the system handles investing/devesting.  Does it take a snap shot at that point and update everyones balance? 

The site just has a list of what percentage of the bankroll each investor owns. It calculates the size of individual user investments by multiplying their percentage by the current bankroll. When anyone invests or divests, all the percentages are adjusted accordingly.

  And what happens if the bankroll falls below a certian point?  Is there a call option?  Some way you can gaurentee you can get the funds.  I'm not worried about you or me, but there are some that would be hessitent to send in addition funds to cover losses. 

When you lose your actual deposit, you are forcibly divested. You aren't allowed to risk coins that aren't actually on deposit. You just risk a higher percentage of them based on the amount of coins you claim to hold locally.

   Do you actually see the orphans in your clients transactions?  IE in the qt client?  I thought you just ran the daemon in Linux, but I could be mistaken.  I've just started staking locally again.  I haven't noticed a problems with orphans since the last fork. 

I can't run the Qt client - it's just totally unresponsive. I've not looked into it very much, but I suspect it is updating every transaction (perhaps with the 'confirmations' count) every time a new block is received. The time it takes to update everything is longer than the time between blocks, so it's just constantly busy and unresponsive. I was just watching the debug logs on the clients. There's a message in all caps about orphans that I saw each time a new block was received.

   Was there anything special about running 2 wallets on your end that you can think of?  Wouldn't it be the same as everyone else VS the JD wallet?   I moved clams into my personal wallet and got a stake about 1 hour after the blocks became mature.  And another 7 hours later.  No orphans in that time. At least not in the QT transaction list.   

Actually, yes. Most times when I saw this problem I was staking from the same wallet on two different machines. That will obviously cause a lot of "race conditions" since they will both be staking at the same time always. The blocks they made had different hashes, but the same content. I'm not sure why the hashes were different, come to think of it. I'll look into this situation more when I get a chance. In another test, I imported just one of many privkeys from one wallet to the other, so the smaller wallet would be staking a subset of the blocks from the bigger one, but causing races when it did stake. It took a long time for the smaller wallet to recover from having a single block orphaned, and I don't know why.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
J. J. Phillips
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


Islam and Nazism are belief systems, not races.


View Profile WWW
December 24, 2014, 08:59:41 PM
 #1887

Keep in mind that however age is included, stakers will (legitimately) split their clams to optimize their rewards.

I don't know the real numbers, but suppose JD has 25,000 transaction outputs staking with 4 clams on each. No matter how many of these have recently staked, most of them necessarily haven't staked recently and will have some age saved up.

I doubt there is a modification that would cause JD to stake fewer blocks. There could simply be a modification that the same *address* cannot stake twice in a row, but this has the obvious workaround that JD (and everyone else) would use different addresses for each staking output.

I can give you the numbers if you like, but pretty much we have 216k CLAM split into 54k piles of 4 CLAM each. Those 4's become 5, 6, then 7, and then 4+4 and the cycle repeats. Transaction fees get added in, and change from withdrawals too, so the actual picture is really messy.

The point of adding age back in is the following:

Suppose you have 10 CLAMs and are solo-staking. You stake for 20 days and eventually manage to stake a block. Unfortunately JD stakes a block at the same time, and goes on to orphan your block. You lose. And now you'll probably be waiting another 20 days to get another chance to try again.

With age, it will still take you 20 days on average for your first chance to stake (since all the competition is also aging), but if you get orphaned, your age doesn't get reset, and so you are likely to get your 2nd chance of staking after less than 20 more days. You will be getting to stake more and more often as your age (and thus weight) increases, and so will eventually get a block accepted.

The downside of reintroducing age is that it removes some of the incentive that currently exists for people to run their client 24/7.

Thanks for the numbers. I might write a little python code to simulate what might happen with different coin age options. If I do, I'll post the results.

If Israel is destroyed, I will devote the rest of my life to the extermination of the human species. Any species that goes down this road again less than 100 years after the holocaust needs to be fucking wiped out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Affair_of_the_Gang_of_Barbarians
Ilan Halimi: tortured and murdered in France by barbarian Jew haters who'd be very comfortable here at bitcointalk.
dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2548
Merit: 1125



View Profile
December 24, 2014, 10:17:54 PM
 #1888

Thanks for the numbers.

Actual numbers:

http://privatepaste.com/9533a910e0

It ends:

  501 5.00010000
  8316 5.00000000
  42365 4.00000000

which means we have 501 outputs of size 5.0001, 8316 of size 5, and 42.3k of size 4.

Edit: I'm surprised we only have 2 of size 7. I would have expected lots of the 4's to have gone 5, 6, 7 by now. I guess it takes longer to stake than I realised.

Edit2: those two 7's are here if anyone's interested:

http://khashier.com/tx/71d76437d72d9f581a4973bd1855f375073ca89cccc45a3666ab72ad181e3b7e
http://khashier.com/tx/faa31666e0575f985fce72ef910faa4298f5af793514f6ea8d9defd0e5a9998a

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
Jbanna
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 151
Merit: 100



View Profile
December 25, 2014, 03:54:45 AM
 #1889

No, it's like this:

The bankroll is 90k, you deposit 100 and say "I have 9900 locally and want to invest the whole 10k with you". That makes the bankroll 100k in total, and you are 10% of it. You risk up to 0.5% of your total investment per roll, ie. 50 CLAMs. You get 10% of all losing bets, and lose 10% of all winning bets. If the site makes a net loss of 1000, you suffer 100 of that loss, and your actual deposit is all gone. You get divested at that point, and have lost your 100.

I can't tell, and don't care if you really have 9900 locally or not. You were risking up to 50 CLAMs per roll. If you only really had the 100 you deposited, then that's really risky behaviour. But it's only risky for you, not for JD. Once it's gone, you're divested.

But if you really DO have 10k CLAMs, it would make sense to send just 100 of it to JD and just tell it about the other 9900 you hold locally. Then your counterparty risk is vastly reduced, since only you have control of the majority of your coins. And the centralisation issue is moot, since 99% of your coins are no longer in the JD wallet.

This is absolutely brilliant and revolutionary. Margin investment on gambling dice? holy shit. Doog, I greatly hope you go through with this implementation  Smiley
BayAreaCoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960
Merit: 1015


FreeBitcoins.com - LuckyGames.co


View Profile WWW
December 25, 2014, 11:12:22 AM
 #1890

New service to add to the OP please:

https://fortunejack.com/

They now accept CLAM.

(I have not made a deposit/withdraw yet, but plan to do so after Christmas.)

They are a Bitcoin Foundation member and the website is fully licensed by Law of Saint Kitts and Nevis, owned and operated by the "Nexus Group Enterprises", LLC.

FreeBitcoins.com is currently being rebuilt.  We do have a rocket game live that offers playing or investing. Our faucet should be back before the end of 2018. Thanks!
LuckyGames.co - games and exchange.  No KYC or e-mail required.  Instant deposits and withdraws.
hopenotlate
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722
Merit: 1019



View Profile WWW
December 25, 2014, 11:35:18 AM
 #1891

New service to add to the OP:

https://fortunejack.com/

They now accept CLAM.

(I have not made a deposit/withdraw yet, but plan to do so after Christmas.)

They are a Bitcoin Foundation member and the website is fully licensed by Law of Saint Kitts and Nevis, owned and operated by the "Nexus Group Enterprises", LLC.


wow that's really a good news for clams.

I 'm a long time player at FortuneJack and never had issues with them.  I only used BTC there  until now and can definitely state doposits and withdraw works regularly and quickly at FJ.
My opinion, for what it matters, on them is they are reliable ( they also pay regularly and in time for their signature campaign I'm joining at trhe moment).

good job CLAM

waves



           ▄▄▄       ▄▄▄▄
         ▄█████▄   ▄██████▄
       ▄████████ ▄██████████▄
     ▄████████▀▄██████████████▄
   ▄████████▀▄████▀▄▄▄▀█████████▄
 ▄█████████ ████▀▄█████▄▀█████████▄
████████████▄▀▀▄█████████▄▀█████████
 ▀██████▀▄▄ ▀████████▄▀████▄▀█████▀
   ▀██▀▄████  ▀███▄▀███▄▀████▄▀█▀
     ▄████▀▄██▄ ▀███▄▀███▄▀██▀
      ▀█▀▄████▀▄▄ ▀███▄▀███▄
        ▀███▀▄████  ▀███▄▀▀
          ▀▄████▀▄██▄ ▀█▀
            ▀█▀▄████▀
              ▀███▀
.SMART.........
.CONTRACT..
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬




   ███████████████  ██▄
   ██           ██   ▀██
   ██           ██     ██
   ██           ██ ▐██████▌
   ██           ██ ▐█ ████▌
   ███████████████  ██ ███▌
   ███████▀███████   █████
   █████▀   ▀█████      █
   ███▀       ▀███      █
   ██▄         ▄██      █
   ████▄     ▄█████▄    █
   ██████▄ ▄██████ █    █
   ███████████████ ▀▄▄▄▄▀
   ███████████████
████████████████████
.NO....
.GAS..
▬▬▬▬▬




HIGH   
        SPEED




.MULTI-SIG WALLETS..
.ATOMIC SWAPS...........
.VOTINGS......................




.FREEZING......
.DAPPS AND....
.EVEN MORE...
picolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882
Merit: 500


https://www.localcoinswap.com/


View Profile
December 25, 2014, 12:08:01 PM
 #1892

No, it's like this:

The bankroll is 90k, you deposit 100 and say "I have 9900 locally and want to invest the whole 10k with you". That makes the bankroll 100k in total, and you are 10% of it. You risk up to 0.5% of your total investment per roll, ie. 50 CLAMs. You get 10% of all losing bets, and lose 10% of all winning bets. If the site makes a net loss of 1000, you suffer 100 of that loss, and your actual deposit is all gone. You get divested at that point, and have lost your 100.

I can't tell, and don't care if you really have 9900 locally or not. You were risking up to 50 CLAMs per roll. If you only really had the 100 you deposited, then that's really risky behaviour. But it's only risky for you, not for JD. Once it's gone, you're divested.

But if you really DO have 10k CLAMs, it would make sense to send just 100 of it to JD and just tell it about the other 9900 you hold locally. Then your counterparty risk is vastly reduced, since only you have control of the majority of your coins. And the centralisation issue is moot, since 99% of your coins are no longer in the JD wallet.

This is absolutely brilliant and revolutionary. Margin investment on gambling dice? holy shit. Doog, I greatly hope you go through with this implementation  Smiley

Other dice sites already had this option that lower the risk of losing all your coins in case of the site disappearing.

                 ▄▄██████████████▄▄
             ▄███████████████████████▄
           █████████████████████████████
         ███▀▀█████▀▀ ██  ██  ▀▀██████████
        ██▀ ▄  ▀      ██  ██      ▀█████████
       █▀ ▄██▀        ██  ██        █████████
      ▀ ▄███▌      ███████████▄▄  ▄███████████
      ▄████▌        ▀██████████████████████████
    ▄██████     ██▄   ▀███████████████████████████▀
  ▄████████    █████▄▄  ▀███████████████████████▀
▄██████████    ████████▄  ▀███████████████████▀
    ███████    ██████████▄   ▀██████████████▀ ▄█
    ███████    ████████████▄▄  ▀██████████▀ ▄███
    ███████▌    ██████████████▄  ▀██████▀ ▄████
     ███████      ██████████████▄  ▀██▀ ▄██████
      ███████▄      ▀██████████▀      ████████
       ████████       ██  ██        █████████
        █████████▄    ██  ██     ▄██████████
          ██████████▄▄██▄▄██▄▄▄███████████
            ████████████████████████████
              ▀██████████████████████▀
                  ▀▀████████████▀▀
                  

LocalCoinSwap
   World's Most Inclusive 
         Cryptocurrency Marketplace
[]
██████████████
█████████████████
██░░░░░████████████
██░░░░░██████████████
█████████████████████
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
█████████████████████
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
█████████████████████
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
█████████████████████
█████████████████████
TELEGRAM
TWITTER
FACEBOOK
REDDIT
INSTAGRAM
MEDIUM
LINKED IN
STEEMIT
lovewiki
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261
Merit: 250

Share Love


View Profile WWW
December 25, 2014, 02:50:08 PM
 #1893

New service to add to the OP please:

https://fortunejack.com/

They now accept CLAM.

(I have not made a deposit/withdraw yet, but plan to do so after Christmas.)

They are a Bitcoin Foundation member and the website is fully licensed by Law of Saint Kitts and Nevis, owned and operated by the "Nexus Group Enterprises", LLC.


Great, one more good website is accepting CLAM.

This will certainly attract more people to start using CLAM and make this coin even stronger.  Wink

Register for FREE Bitcoin or Dogecoin!
picolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882
Merit: 500


https://www.localcoinswap.com/


View Profile
December 25, 2014, 03:38:30 PM
 #1894

New service to add to the OP please:

https://fortunejack.com/

They now accept CLAM.

(I have not made a deposit/withdraw yet, but plan to do so after Christmas.)

They are a Bitcoin Foundation member and the website is fully licensed by Law of Saint Kitts and Nevis, owned and operated by the "Nexus Group Enterprises", LLC.


Great, one more good website is accepting CLAM.

This will certainly attract more people to start using CLAM and make this coin even stronger.  Wink

More people will hear about CLAM and the velocity of clam may increase with this new option to use clam but you can play at fortunejack with bitcoin so if you never used clam you will not use it to play fortunejack

                 ▄▄██████████████▄▄
             ▄███████████████████████▄
           █████████████████████████████
         ███▀▀█████▀▀ ██  ██  ▀▀██████████
        ██▀ ▄  ▀      ██  ██      ▀█████████
       █▀ ▄██▀        ██  ██        █████████
      ▀ ▄███▌      ███████████▄▄  ▄███████████
      ▄████▌        ▀██████████████████████████
    ▄██████     ██▄   ▀███████████████████████████▀
  ▄████████    █████▄▄  ▀███████████████████████▀
▄██████████    ████████▄  ▀███████████████████▀
    ███████    ██████████▄   ▀██████████████▀ ▄█
    ███████    ████████████▄▄  ▀██████████▀ ▄███
    ███████▌    ██████████████▄  ▀██████▀ ▄████
     ███████      ██████████████▄  ▀██▀ ▄██████
      ███████▄      ▀██████████▀      ████████
       ████████       ██  ██        █████████
        █████████▄    ██  ██     ▄██████████
          ██████████▄▄██▄▄██▄▄▄███████████
            ████████████████████████████
              ▀██████████████████████▀
                  ▀▀████████████▀▀
                  

LocalCoinSwap
   World's Most Inclusive 
         Cryptocurrency Marketplace
[]
██████████████
█████████████████
██░░░░░████████████
██░░░░░██████████████
█████████████████████
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
█████████████████████
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
█████████████████████
██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██
█████████████████████
█████████████████████
TELEGRAM
TWITTER
FACEBOOK
REDDIT
INSTAGRAM
MEDIUM
LINKED IN
STEEMIT
Jbanna
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 151
Merit: 100



View Profile
December 25, 2014, 04:32:17 PM
 #1895

No, it's like this:

The bankroll is 90k, you deposit 100 and say "I have 9900 locally and want to invest the whole 10k with you". That makes the bankroll 100k in total, and you are 10% of it. You risk up to 0.5% of your total investment per roll, ie. 50 CLAMs. You get 10% of all losing bets, and lose 10% of all winning bets. If the site makes a net loss of 1000, you suffer 100 of that loss, and your actual deposit is all gone. You get divested at that point, and have lost your 100.

I can't tell, and don't care if you really have 9900 locally or not. You were risking up to 50 CLAMs per roll. If you only really had the 100 you deposited, then that's really risky behaviour. But it's only risky for you, not for JD. Once it's gone, you're divested.

But if you really DO have 10k CLAMs, it would make sense to send just 100 of it to JD and just tell it about the other 9900 you hold locally. Then your counterparty risk is vastly reduced, since only you have control of the majority of your coins. And the centralisation issue is moot, since 99% of your coins are no longer in the JD wallet.

This is absolutely brilliant and revolutionary. Margin investment on gambling dice? holy shit. Doog, I greatly hope you go through with this implementation  Smiley

Other dice sites already had this option that lower the risk of losing all your coins in case of the site disappearing.
damn.. i'm outta the loop then
pawel7777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1080


We're all gonna make it


View Profile WWW
December 25, 2014, 05:15:51 PM
 #1896

New service to add to the OP please:

https://fortunejack.com/

They now accept CLAM.

(I have not made a deposit/withdraw yet, but plan to do so after Christmas.)

They are a Bitcoin Foundation member and the website is fully licensed by Law of Saint Kitts and Nevis, owned and operated by the "Nexus Group Enterprises", LLC.


Great, one more good website is accepting CLAM.

This will certainly attract more people to start using CLAM and make this coin even stronger.  Wink

Not only they accept CLAM, but they also launched Coin Swap service, that means you can trade CLAM for other coins.

CLAM & Coin Exchange service have been officially added to our website. Good luck playing and let us know if you will have any questions

seedtrue
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 963
Merit: 1000



View Profile
December 26, 2014, 07:23:34 AM
 #1897

New service to add to the OP please:

https://fortunejack.com/

They now accept CLAM.

(I have not made a deposit/withdraw yet, but plan to do so after Christmas.)

They are a Bitcoin Foundation member and the website is fully licensed by Law of Saint Kitts and Nevis, owned and operated by the "Nexus Group Enterprises", LLC.


this is very good news.
SuperClam
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1002


CLAM Developer


View Profile WWW
December 26, 2014, 08:04:40 AM
 #1898

Announcement and link concerning FortuneJack added to the OP post.

The service appears to be legitimate and have a history/user base.

We rely on user reviews of services to verify addition to the OP post, and look forward to hearing about your experiences. Grin

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623147
Proof-Of-Chain, 100% Distributed BEFORE Launch.
Everyone who owned BTC, LTC, or DOGE at launch got free CLAMS.
dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2548
Merit: 1125



View Profile
December 26, 2014, 08:30:35 AM
 #1899

Announcement and link concerning FortuneJack added to the OP post.

The service appears to be legitimate and have a history/user base.

We rely on user reviews of services to verify addition to the OP post, and look forward to hearing about your experiences. Grin

I just tried it. I was able to make an account, and found the dice game.

When I clicked on 'my bets', I got a spinning circle of dots that never stopped spinning:



When I hit reload I got this:



I guess they're having some problems at the moment.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
FortuneJack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442
Merit: 1006


www.fortunejack.com


View Profile WWW
December 26, 2014, 01:21:31 PM
 #1900

Announcement and link concerning FortuneJack added to the OP post.

The service appears to be legitimate and have a history/user base.

We rely on user reviews of services to verify addition to the OP post, and look forward to hearing about your experiences. Grin

I just tried it. I was able to make an account, and found the dice game.

When I clicked on 'my bets', I got a spinning circle of dots that never stopped spinning:



When I hit reload I got this:



I guess they're having some problems at the moment.


Hi,

There was a minor problem, it is solved now.





.FORTUNE.JACK.
      ▄▄███████▄▄
   ▄████▀▀ ▄ ██████▄
  ████ ▄▄███ ████████
 █████▌▐███▌ ▀▄ ▀█████
███████▄██▀▀▀▀▄████████
█████▀▄▄▄▄█████████████
████▄▄▄▄ █████████████
 ██████▌ ███▀████████
  ███████▄▀▄████████
   ▀█████▀▀███████▀
      ▀▀██████▀▀
         
         █
...FortuneJack.com                                             
...THE BIGGEST BITCOIN GAMBLING SITE
       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄█████████████████▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄
 ▄██
█████████▀███████████▄
██████████▀   ▀██████████
█████████▀       ▀█████████
████████           ████████
████████▄   ▄ ▄   ▄████████
██████████▀   ▀██████████
 ▀██
█████████████████████▀
  ▀██
███████████████████▀
    ▀█████████████████▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
#JACKMATE
WIN 1 BTC
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████▀█████▀██████████
███████▀░░▀░░░░░▀░░▀███████
██████▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐██████
██████░░░░██░░░██░░░░██████
█████▌░░░░▀▀░░░▀▀░░░░▐█████
██████▄░░▄▄▄░░░▄▄▄░░▄██████
████████▄▄███████▄▄████████

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀
Pages: « 1 ... 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 [95] 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 ... 460 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!