bustabit.com -- The Social Gambling Game

[RHavar]

Good explanation. I was also under the impression that if you disconnect, your game was terminated immediately, and so I was trying to reconcile this with what happened here. But it would make sense that on the server end, the game would continue to run to your predetermined bet cashout. Can Ryan just confirm that this is how it does work and how it is intended to work? That on player-side disconnect, the game runs until the predetermined cashout point? If so, the player has no legitimate claim for refund. (If the game did go past 100x on his disconnect and he was auto-cashed out despite being disconnected, I doubt he'd be offering the money back because that's what is "fair.")

Basically in bustabit you can be cashed out by one of three things:

a) Sending a "cashOut" event to the server (e.g. manually hitting the button).
b) Force cashout (basically the max profit gets hit, and the server forces you to take the money)
c) Your "auto cash out" value, which is done server side (and there's no interference by lag/latency or what not).


In the past, we used to have a forth option -- which was a "best effort" disconnection detection. However it was extremely unreliable (as there's no way possible way on the internet for a server to immediately and reliably know when someone disconnects). The best you can do is if they're not responding to pings for X milliseconds, then assume they've disconnected. However there were a lot of false positives, and people accusing me of cheating them with this (which completely wasn't the case, but I can understand why it might have looked like it) so I ended up just totally removed it.


I've once had a user who hit something like 2.3 BTC due to hitting a 1100x due to disconnecting (while they were intending to play conservatively, with a small amount of money). Obviously they got happily got the money, and it would've been totally unreasonable for me to expect or want it back etc.

The reality is if that if there is lag (or even disconnects) bustabit doesn't really make any more money, it just uses the risk/reward from your "auto cash out" value. So it's not really possible for us to give refunds (especially for a thing that is impossible to know from the servers point of view, so it would be abused by scammers).



(I've spent a great amount of time an energy explaining and providing information to the guy about this, but he seems more interested in threats and getting me to to pay to delete his posts. I told him at the onset that I don't give in to blackmail,  but I guess some people need to learn the hard way ). I really think it'd be best if we just collectively ignore him, to save everyone the trouble.

[RHavar]

Almost starts to feel like a pyramid scheme with new investors paying old investors but of course its not the same since it isn't the only source of income for investors.

Haha, yeah.  Although I think technically it would be more ponzi-ish than pyramid-ish. It'll certainly get to the point that investors will never be able to recoup their "dilution fee" from the "dilution fee" of future investors. But that's also fine, because investors should be expecting to make profit from bankrolling the site, and not from future investors.

[jaysabi]

Good explanation. I was also under the impression that if you disconnect, your game was terminated immediately, and so I was trying to reconcile this with what happened here. But it would make sense that on the server end, the game would continue to run to your predetermined bet cashout. Can Ryan just confirm that this is how it does work and how it is intended to work? That on player-side disconnect, the game runs until the predetermined cashout point? If so, the player has no legitimate claim for refund. (If the game did go past 100x on his disconnect and he was auto-cashed out despite being disconnected, I doubt he'd be offering the money back because that's what is "fair.")

Basically in bustabit you can be cashed out by one of three things:

a) Sending a "cashOut" event to the server (e.g. manually hitting the button).
b) Force cashout (basically the max profit gets hit, and the server forces you to take the money)
c) Your "auto cash out" value, which is done server side (and there's no interference by lag/latency or what not).


In the past, we used to have a forth option -- which was a "best effort" disconnection detection. However it was extremely unreliable (as there's no way possible way on the internet for a server to immediately and reliably know when someone disconnects). The best you can do is if they're not responding to pings for X milliseconds, then assume they've disconnected. However there were a lot of false positives, and people accusing me of cheating them with this (which completely wasn't the case, but I can understand why it might have looked like it) so I ended up just totally removed it.


I've once had a user who hit something like 2.3 BTC due to hitting a 1100x due to disconnecting (while they were intending to play conservatively, with a small amount of money). Obviously they got happily got the money, and it would've been totally unreasonable for me to expect or want it back etc.

The reality is if that if there is lag (or even disconnects) bustabit doesn't really make any more money, it just uses the risk/reward from your "auto cash out" value. So it's not really possible for us to give refunds (especially for a thing that is impossible to know from the servers point of view, so it would be abused by scammers).



(I've spent a great amount of time an energy explaining and providing information to the guy about this, but he seems more interested in threats and getting me to to pay to delete his posts. I told him at the onset that I don't give in to blackmail,  but I guess some people need to learn the hard way ). I really think it'd be best if we just collectively ignore him, to save everyone the trouble.

I totally get that, it's clear now that this has devolved into a blackmail type of issue. Not that it matters for much, but as a neutral party, I totally agree with the stance you've taken. My only concern was that he might have had a point (although not communicated terribly well) to expect that on disconnect from his side, his bet would have immediately terminated. Since I thought that was how it worked too, I just wanted clarification on the issue, because it seemed from the public discussion that it could have been a misunderstanding of points (you having a zero refund policy for "losing bets" and his contention that it shouldn't have been a "losing bet" to begin with but for your software error) and I didn't see that basic issue being addressed, but rather both sides arguing further past it. Further complicating was his screenshot of the chat where your mod seemed to concede that there are known issues with gambler-side disconnects. But since your site doesn't claim that there is immediate bet termination on connection interruption, that's not something gamblers can count on, and I am satisfied with the explanations you offered. It makes total sense that on player-side disconnect, the game runs based on the auto cash out value. The risk of that happening is on the gambler, and small as it is, it can be mitigated by not setting an extremely high auto cash out threshold (e.g. 100x), and further by not playing from mobile when you have spotty reception, as someone previously rightly pointed out.

[RHavar]

Further complicating was his screenshot of the chat where your mod seemed to concede that there are known issues with gambler-side disconnects. But since your site doesn't claim that there is immediate bet termination on connection interruption, that's not something gamblers can count on, and I am satisfied with the explanations you offered. It makes total sense that on player-side disconnect, the game runs based on the auto cash out value.

I didn't notice that conversation before, but I think Dexon was playing with an old version of the code that attempted to detect disconnects and cash people out, and was commenting about how unreliable it is (which is why it's removed).  If you want to detect client disconnects, you need to keep pinging the client and based on a lack of response disconnect them. If you use 15 seconds for instance, there's very few false positives but it's almost useless (the game will have almost certainly already busted). And if you use a timeout of like 2 seconds, you catch most disconnects in time, but then players who got hit by false positives (e.g. temporary lag) and got cashed out would be infuriated and feel like they were cheated. ("Omg, it lagged AND i got cashed out early AND i should've won!)

So I think what has works best, is just always relying on the "auto cash out" and players making sure to always use an auto cash out that they are comfortable with

[jaysabi]

Further complicating was his screenshot of the chat where your mod seemed to concede that there are known issues with gambler-side disconnects. But since your site doesn't claim that there is immediate bet termination on connection interruption, that's not something gamblers can count on, and I am satisfied with the explanations you offered. It makes total sense that on player-side disconnect, the game runs based on the auto cash out value.

I didn't notice that conversation before, but I think Dexon was playing with an old version of the code that attempted to detect disconnects and cash people out, and was commenting about how unreliable it is (which is why it's removed).  If you want to detect client disconnects, you need to keep pinging the client and based on a lack of response disconnect them. If you use 15 seconds for instance, there's very few false positives but it's almost useless (the game will have almost certainly already busted). And if you use a timeout of like 2 seconds, you catch most disconnects in time, but then players who got hit by false positives (e.g. temporary lag) and got cashed out would be infuriated and feel like they were cheated. ("Omg, it lagged AND i got cashed out early AND i should've won!)

So I think what has works best, is just always relying on the "auto cash out" and players making sure to always use an auto cash out that they are comfortable with

Yeah, thanks for the explanation. I get why you would have removed the code. For something like that to be a feature, it needs to work reliably, and anything less than that is a huge problem for you and the gambler. With a game that relies so heavily on precise timing, any lag issues are a huge potential problem, and are far more work than they are worth attempting to compensate for.

[game-protect]

So just a bit of update, the good news is bustabit v2 is coming along nicely. -snip-

Who is operator of bustabit v2?

[RHavar]

Who is operator of bustabit v2?

It's not changing ownership, just a code update. It'll continue to be run by me

[BoXXoB]

I also feel like 10% is a bit of a rough fee. People who invest bitcoin seem to often divest and cashout. Then later they would come and invest again. Maybe it should be changed slightly?

That's also rather intentional, as it is designed to create stable investors. If there's a ~10% entrance fee (which goes to other investors, not me) it makes it more difficult to "day trade" and attract investors who are more willing to weather a storm.

I was also hoping (down the line) to do some stuff that is rather terrible for investors, without worrying about the smart/active ones divesting. Like one thing I was hoping to do is have a periodic "charity hour" where all profits from that hour will go to a charity (that takes bitcoin)  e.g. "Red Cross Charity Hour". And any loses from a charity hour would be carried forward to the next. I think it'd be fun for players, good marketing, help good causes etc. But since during those times investors would have no upside (and only downside) it's nice to incentivize them to not just temporarily divest.

Although I should try avoid getting too far sidetracked with that, but it's fun to think about =)

Okay, I see your point there. Obviously only serious investors would invest in a case where they would be charged 10%. Guess I'll just have to make sure to invest early if I plan on doing so

Hopefully the returns will be good so that the potential 10% fee would seem even remotely worth it for new investors.

[Dogedigital]

How exactly is the distribution handled?

Will it be a round of 1st investors that get bonuses?  Or first in gets most?

[RHavar]

How exactly is the distribution handled?

Will it be a round of 1st investors that get bonuses?  Or first in gets most?

I assume you're asking about the dilution fee? It's not final (as it's not released) but the way I coded it is pretty simple. Lets say you invest 1 BTC, you get assigned a stake in the bankroll as if you had invested 0.9 BTC, and all other investors get diluted as if you invested 0.9 BTC

i.e. you off the bat lose 10% of your investment

Then immediately that 0.1 you lost is given to all investors (including yourself) via increasing the bankroll (but not adjusting the stake). So in effect, it is given to all investors equally based on how much they've invested.


Anyway, it gets a little messy when you consider the leverage thing I've added too. But instead of  documenting it here, I'll build up a full explanation and FAQ about it ready for the beta =)

[jaysabi]

I also feel like 10% is a bit of a rough fee. People who invest bitcoin seem to often divest and cashout. Then later they would come and invest again. Maybe it should be changed slightly?

That's also rather intentional, as it is designed to create stable investors. If there's a ~10% entrance fee (which goes to other investors, not me) it makes it more difficult to "day trade" and attract investors who are more willing to weather a storm.

I was also hoping (down the line) to do some stuff that is rather terrible for investors, without worrying about the smart/active ones divesting. Like one thing I was hoping to do is have a periodic "charity hour" where all profits from that hour will go to a charity (that takes bitcoin)  e.g. "Red Cross Charity Hour". And any loses from a charity hour would be carried forward to the next. I think it'd be fun for players, good marketing, help good causes etc. But since during those times investors would have no upside (and only downside) it's nice to incentivize them to not just temporarily divest.

Although I should try avoid getting too far sidetracked with that, but it's fun to think about =)

Okay, I see your point there. Obviously only serious investors would invest in a case where they would be charged 10%. Guess I'll just have to make sure to invest early if I plan on doing so

Hopefully the returns will be good so that the potential 10% fee would seem even remotely worth it for new investors.

Go in with reasonable expectations. The house edge is 1% (less than?). That means in the long run, the house can expect 1% of the wagered amount in profits. Then divide the expected profit by your percentage of the bankroll. If you're investing a significant amount into the bankroll, perhaps that will be worth it. However, and this is a personal opinion here, being locked into a long term investment that's denominated in an extremely volatile currency for a (likely) small profit upside is extremely risky. Just be aware of how risky it is. Everyone is at the height of optimism right now because we've had steady price appreciation for a string of months. Remember that optimism is at it's highest point right before bubbles pop. Bitcoin in 2012, housing in 2007, dot com in 1999... None of these investors thought they could lose money.

Just be aware of the risks is all I'm saying, because they're much deeper than it appears on the surface.

[jaysabi]

Go in with reasonable expectations. The house edge is 1% (less than?). That means in the long run, the house can expect 1% of the wagered amount in profits. Then divide the expected profit by your percentage of the bankroll. If you're investing a significant amount into the bankroll, perhaps that will be worth it. However, and this is a personal opinion here, being locked into a long term investment that's denominated in an extremely volatile currency for a (likely) small profit upside is extremely risky. Just be aware of how risky it is. Everyone is at the height of optimism right now because we've had steady price appreciation for a string of months. Remember that optimism is at it's highest point right before bubbles pop. Bitcoin in 2012, housing in 2007, dot com in 1999... None of these investors thought they could lose money.

Just be aware of the risks is all I'm saying, because they're much deeper than it appears on the surface.

Yeah, definitely good advice. Right now our turn over is pretty good (our bankroll is ~640 BTC and we do around 2000 bitcoin of volume a day). Obviously things will change considerable with outside investors inflating the bankroll, but hopefully there will also be a corresponding increase in volume as we can appeal to larger gamblers.


Anyway, i think I'll call it "bankroll gambling" instead of "investing" to set proper expectations (even though it'll be +EV and +expected bankroll growth) as it's pretty insanely risky

I like calling it "bankroll gambling" as an indicator that it's risky. People to tend to treat anything related to bitcoin investing like something that can't lose money, whether it be just buying the currency, or buying into a casino type business. The risks aren't because of bustabit exactly, the risk is more related to bitcoin itself. But the risk is pretty unique to the way you're structuring it though by incentivizing long term investments. I think that's a good thing for the site, but I think that a lot of the people you're going to get rolled up into it aren't at all aware of the risk they'd be taking on.

[undef1ned]

who is Ryan on BaB?

RHavar or espringe?

[RHavar]

Congratulations to dudaxmaimons who has continued his 19x martingale to an amazing 238 bitcoin (..and counting)






(Sorry, I don't like to advertise much. But I feel it'd be a waste of the $133000 USD I lost last night to not do so  )

[undef1ned]

who is Ryan on BaB?

RHavar or espringe?

That would be me, I'm Ryan on BaB.

ah man. great chats i have with you on there

[dooglus]

(Sorry, I don't like to advertise much. But I feel it'd be a waste of the $133000 USD I lost last night to not do so  )

That seems like an expensive way to advertise.

Why don't you buy my forum signature instead? A snip at just $100000 USD.

[kolloh]

Congratulations to dudaxmaimons who has continued his 19x martingale to an amazing 238 bitcoin (..and counting)

Wow, that is quite an impressive win streak he has going there. He has avoided the dreaded martingale fail so far I see.

[moooonu]

Congratulations to dudaxmaimons who has continued his 19x martingale to an amazing 238 bitcoin (..and counting)






(Sorry, I don't like to advertise much. But I feel it'd be a waste of the $133000 USD I lost last night to not do so  )

He got balls. some serious titanium balls. Also seems like his strategy is working fine. Too much lucky to make that high.

[convertekk]

The guy is on an amazing run. witnessed it myself.

[BoXXoB]

Congratulations to dudaxmaimons who has continued his 19x martingale to an amazing 238 bitcoin (..and counting)

Wow, that is quite an impressive win streak he has going there. He has avoided the dreaded martingale fail so far I see.

Martingale has failed him quite a few times. Seems like the comeback was mostly due to some lucky yolo I think he went from +170 to +70 once.