DiceBitco.in - New Thread to Discuss

[Cluster2k]

I guess the other 1% would be ACTUAL EVIDENCE then. Suspicious timing is not evidence. Someone winning is not evidence. Someone winning at a suspicious time is not evidence. I believe Matteo was an inside job too, the difference is I'm leaving open the possibility it wasn't. All this BS talk of improbability and unlikeliness and suspicious timing is just unsubstantiated speculation.

We would need an independent audit of the code, books, betting, etc.  In a state governed casino or lottery such oversight is available.  As DB was an unlicensed and therefore unregulated entity then no such investigation is possible.  Hence the speculation.  We have no better alternative.

Under the broken logic and dubious math you're all using, you know what else is suspicious? Everyone who's ever won the Powerball. It's SO suspicious that anyone would play or win a game with a 0% chance of winning!

Incorrect, although I take the point you're making.  The chances of winning my local version of Powerball is about 1 in 43 million.  It's never zero and chances are someone is going to win every week or two, given enough entries.  What mateo did is quite different.  It wasn't one jackpot win of 500+ btc.  It was consistent betting over thousands of 'rolls'.  Looking at the results I would say mateo had the 1% edge against the house, not the other way around.

The above posters who stated the chances of mateo doing what he did as zero chance are clearly incorrect.  There's always a chance mateo could get very lucky.  But given the certain facts surrounding DB it's natural even a casual observer would have questions to ask.

Don't confuse someone who knows the difference between suspicious circumstances and evidence as someone who believes Matteo and manl are two different people. Just because you've convicted manl with missing pieces of information and while high on emotion and based on speculation doesn't mean everyone has such a low threshold for judgment.

We do know the site was rigged for around two weeks and did not work as advertised.  One could reasonably argue that given the other suspicious events at the site the threshold for judgment has been markedly lowered to the reasonable observer.

[1715021506]

1715021506

[1715021506]

1715021506

[1715021506]

1715021506

[1715021506]

1715021506

[1715021506]

1715021506

[RoooooR]

@LtPaxIV @marcotheminer

You both and the others who keeps their sign for btc is more GREEDY than DiceBitco. They stole a few hundreds BTC. If it's not enough for you I don't know why don't you have a fuckin brain?

You are fuckin greedy poors.

[Cluster2k]

This is a very toxic community. I have seen through so many scams and now I have stopped digging. Thankfully, there are these 2.0 cryptos which are quite interesting to look into.

I'm not sure how a '2.0' crypto would help in a case such as DB where the site was rigged to function incorrectly, or a MtGox that disappears with funds, or a Bitconica where funds are stolen, etc.  Some '2.0' cryptos make things worse by making tracing stolen funds harder.

[RoooooR]

@LtPaxIV @marcotheminer

You both and the others who keeps their sign for btc is more GREEDY than DiceBitco. They stole a few hundreds BTC. If it's not enough for you I don't know why don't you have a fuckin brain?

You are fuckin greedy poors.

For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion (0.3BTC isn't exactly a small amount). I am waiting until I get paid then will decide the best course of action.

Currently, the site is working fine. No one is sure wether it was a scam or not. But it is still functioning, you can bet, you can withdraw. People lost bitcoins out of the advertisers' control, but due to the site owners. For all we know they are not the scammers.

FUCKIN GREEDY.

[suchmoon]

He's sitting on a $3m pile of OPM and what's the first thing he does after the site is compromised? Hastily rolls back the code and insists everything is great. Starts issuing half-assed refunds. Yells at anyone doubting his decisions. Closes chat and then the official thread. Proceeds to lose 80-90% of last investors' coins to a freaky lucky whale. Did I miss anything? Did he do anything that was even remotely rational?

Rolling back code to remove the commit written by the new employee was rational.

Thinking that rolling back his commit would leave a secure codebase was reasonable too, if that was his only commit.

Losing to a lucky whale isn't something he could control (unless he was the whale, or gave him the seed, of course). When a whale is playing, you don't want to stop him because he's probably going to end up losing back his gains.

The refund policy, the yelling, and removing chat were all questionable, as was not freezing betting for longer.

Maybe I'm looking at this wrong but I can't see how it's ok to just roll back code but leave the compromised database in place and tell everyone that issue was fixed when he apparently didn't know the extent of the damage nor did he have a sound plan to deal with it.

As for the lucky whale, even if I suspend my disbelief for a second and try to imagine it wasn't him, wouldn't the first round of ~120 BTC wins be enough of a clue that perhaps there is a backdoor in the code or something else not quite right.

Criminally reckless is the least I can say about all this. But the reality is probably much more "criminal".

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

He's sitting on a $3m pile of OPM and what's the first thing he does after the site is compromised? Hastily rolls back the code and insists everything is great. Starts issuing half-assed refunds. Yells at anyone doubting his decisions. Closes chat and then the official thread. Proceeds to lose 80-90% of last investors' coins to a freaky lucky whale. Did I miss anything? Did he do anything that was even remotely rational?

Rolling back code to remove the commit written by the new employee was rational.

Thinking that rolling back his commit would leave a secure codebase was reasonable too, if that was his only commit.

Losing to a lucky whale isn't something he could control (unless he was the whale, or gave him the seed, of course). When a whale is playing, you don't want to stop him because he's probably going to end up losing back his gains.

The refund policy, the yelling, and removing chat were all questionable, as was not freezing betting for longer.

dooglus, it wasn't just removing chat. He removed the ability for you to view the seed & nonce for other people's bets. This becomes awfully more suspicious when a whale then proceeds to win big while paying small variance bets.

Furthermore, according to the description the nonce rigging involved accounts marked in the database. This required a database schema update. I'd bet that the "developer" simply updated the database schema himself (people are lazy, ok?), instead of pushing out a commit with a schema and patching instructions. This would mean the "developer" had access to the database server, and could grab a server seed.

@marcotheminer: You should edit your signature to add a disclaimer about current events. EG: "[color = red] [b ]I do not endorse DiceBitco.in. DiceBitco.in may be untrustworthy. For more information, see [url == https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=774828.0 ] this thread. [/url] [/b ] [/ color]

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

@LtPaxIV @marcotheminer

You both and the others who keeps their sign for btc is more GREEDY than DiceBitco. They stole a few hundreds BTC. If it's not enough for you I don't know why don't you have a fuckin brain?

You are fuckin greedy poors.

For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion (0.3BTC isn't exactly a small amount). I am waiting until I get paid then will decide the best course of action.

Currently, the site is working fine. No one is sure wether it was a scam or not. But it is still functioning, you can bet, you can withdraw. People lost bitcoins out of the advertisers' control, but due to the site owners. For all we know they are not the scammers.

FUCKIN GREEDY.

Leave him (macrotheminer) and others who carry the signature without updates negative trust - he is supporting a scam.

[marcotheminer]

@LtPaxIV @marcotheminer

You both and the others who keeps their sign for btc is more GREEDY than DiceBitco. They stole a few hundreds BTC. If it's not enough for you I don't know why don't you have a fuckin brain?

You are fuckin greedy poors.

For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion (0.3BTC isn't exactly a small amount). I am waiting until I get paid then will decide the best course of action.

Currently, the site is working fine. No one is sure wether it was a scam or not. But it is still functioning, you can bet, you can withdraw. People lost bitcoins out of the advertisers' control, but due to the site owners. For all we know they are not the scammers.

FUCKIN GREEDY.

Leave him (macrotheminer) and others who carry the signature without updates negative trust - he is supporting a scam.

No one can be sure it is a scam, I understand where you guys are coming from and I will remove the signature ASAP.

[sumantso]

This is a very toxic community. I have seen through so many scams and now I have stopped digging. Thankfully, there are these 2.0 cryptos which are quite interesting to look into.

I'm not sure how a '2.0' crypto would help in a case such as DB where the site was rigged to function incorrectly, or a MtGox that disappears with funds, or a Bitconica where funds are stolen, etc.  Some '2.0' cryptos make things worse by making tracing stolen funds harder.

No, you miss my point. I had stopped bothering about Bitcoin and related stuff due to all the greed and scams, but the interesting stuff made me hang around.

Sometimes I wish these were all just worthless, then we could marvel at the tech instead of seeing people lose their money.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

I left macrotheminer negative trust:

[/b]This user is knowingly advertising a scam website, DiceBitco.in. For information on the DiceBitco.in scam, see this thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=774120.0

macrotheminer has refused to modify his signature to include information about the scamming activities. He has defended advertising a scam because "For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion"

This event has shown that macrotheminer will collude with scams for money. Completely untrustworthy. [/b]

I linked to this post as reference since it quoted macrotheminer's post (so he cannot modify it later). I encourage others to do the same, feel free to copy and paste the feedback.

[sumantso]

For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion (0.3BTC isn't exactly a small amount). I am waiting until I get paid then will decide the best course of action.

Its an interesting dilemma. If people are going to neg rep you then should do that for all those who are sporting the cryptcominer or gawminer signatures. I suggest you add a banner to your posts disclaiming the signature or directing people to the relevant thread.

If its proven to some reasonable degree that they scammed (I am sure they did), then the escrow holders should take the call and divide up the money, or settle it with some lower pay.

[marcotheminer]

I left macrotheminer negative trust:

[/b]This user is knowingly advertising a scam website, DiceBitco.in. For information on the DiceBitco.in scam, see this thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=774120.0

macrotheminer has refused to modify his signature to include information about the scamming activities. He has defended advertising a scam because "For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion"

This event has shown that macrotheminer will collude with scams for money. Completely untrustworthy. [/b]

I linked to this post as reference since it quoted macrotheminer's post (so he cannot modify it later). I encourage others to do the same, feel free to copy and paste the feedback.

Hey! I added a personal message.. Read it!

[jaysabi]

Under the broken logic and dubious math you're all using, you know what else is suspicious? Everyone who's ever won the Powerball. It's SO suspicious that anyone would play or win a game with a 0% chance of winning!

Incorrect, although I take the point you're making.  The chances of winning my local version of Powerball is about 1 in 43 million.  It's never zero and chances are someone is going to win every week or two, given enough entries.  What mateo did is quite different.  It wasn't one jackpot win of 500+ btc.  It was consistent betting over thousands of 'rolls'.  Looking at the results I would say mateo had the 1% edge against the house, not the other way around.

The above posters who stated the chances of mateo doing what he did as zero chance are clearly incorrect.  There's always a chance mateo could get very lucky.  But given the certain facts surrounding DB it's natural even a casual observer would have questions to ask.

I'm asking those questions too. The difference is I'm asking the questions and not drawing foregone conclusions from those questions. I used "0%" sarcastically as a barb at the guy who posted a very convoluted bunch of math garbage to reach the conclusion that Matteo's odds of winning was 0%. It's not 0%, just like the odds of winning Powerball (1:175 million) is not 0%. I was not comparing the odds of Powerball to the likeliness of Matteo's win streak however. My overall point was that people use broken logic and bad math to reach a conclusion, which for the way it was reached is necessarily flawed. In this thread, the fact that something is extremely unlikely is proof that it is impossible. That's not how math works. If the odds are not literally 0, then it is possible, and if it is possible, without evidence of wrongdoing all you have is speculation. As I've already said, I find it compelling speculation and I myself believe Matteo is an inside job weighing all the information available, but I'm answering all the people who question why it's not universally accepted to be fact.

I'm operating under the assumption Matteo somehow stole the coins. I'm just not spreading that as gospel and belittling people who won't. Those are the people I'm taking issue with.

Don't confuse someone who knows the difference between suspicious circumstances and evidence as someone who believes Matteo and manl are two different people. Just because you've convicted manl with missing pieces of information and while high on emotion and based on speculation doesn't mean everyone has such a low threshold for judgment.

We do know the site was rigged for around two weeks and did not work as advertised.  One could reasonably argue that given the other suspicious events at the site the threshold for judgment has been markedly lowered to the reasonable observer.

I agree! The fact that the code was originally rigged is perhaps the most important piece in this whole thing. This whole scenario is suspicious and people should NOT be gambling on the site anymore (which is still running). But it doesn't change anything I posted above about perpetuating suspicions as established facts.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion (0.3BTC isn't exactly a small amount). I am waiting until I get paid then will decide the best course of action.

Its an interesting dilemma. If people are going to neg rep you then should do that for all those who are sporting the cryptcominer or gawminer signatures. I suggest you add a banner to your posts disclaiming the signature or directing people to the relevant thread.

If its proven to some reasonable degree that they scammed (I am sure they did), then the escrow holders should take the call and divide up the money, or settle it with some lower pay.

The issue is that these two sites have not scammed yet. While I am confident that both of these sites will scam, IMHO I think pre-emptive actions are unfair.

Regarding the signature ads: The exchange is for displaying an ad. The exchange does not involve you astrosurfing or defending them. Why not continue to carry the signature, but add a visible disclaimer? You have a free line.

[marcotheminer]

For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion (0.3BTC isn't exactly a small amount). I am waiting until I get paid then will decide the best course of action.

Its an interesting dilemma. If people are going to neg rep you then should do that for all those who are sporting the cryptcominer or gawminer signatures. I suggest you add a banner to your posts disclaiming the signature or directing people to the relevant thread.

If its proven to some reasonable degree that they scammed (I am sure they did), then the escrow holders should take the call and divide up the money, or settle it with some lower pay.

The issue is that these two sites have not scammed yet. While I am confident that both of these sites will scam, IMHO I think pre-emptive actions are unfair.

Regarding the signature ads: The exchange is for displaying an ad. The exchange does not involve you astrosurfing or defending them. Why not continue to carry the signature, but add a visible disclaimer? You have a free line.

The contract is that I may only have the signature, unaltered in the space. I added a personal message however.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

I left macrotheminer negative trust:

[/b]This user is knowingly advertising a scam website, DiceBitco.in. For information on the DiceBitco.in scam, see this thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=774120.0

macrotheminer has refused to modify his signature to include information about the scamming activities. He has defended advertising a scam because "For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion"

This event has shown that macrotheminer will collude with scams for money. Completely untrustworthy. [/b]

I linked to this post as reference since it quoted macrotheminer's post (so he cannot modify it later). I encourage others to do the same, feel free to copy and paste the feedback.

Hey! I added a personal message.. Read it!

Sorry but that's continuing misrepresentation (aka Lying by omission).

You are aware that:

* DiceBitco.in has admitted that their services rigged nonces.

* DiceBitco.in did not refund users who should have earned a profit, but did not. This is scamming, plain and simple. DiceBitco.in did not compensate all the users who lost due to the nonce rigging - the payouts that people *should* have won must be compensated as well, because the winnings are rightfully theirs.

* There are suspicious circumstances concerning mateo and the investments.

[sumantso]

The issue is that these two sites have not scammed yet. While I am confident that both of these sites will scam, IMHO I think pre-emptive actions are unfair.

Regarding the signature ads: The exchange is for displaying an ad. The exchange does not involve you astrosurfing or defending them. Why not continue to carry the signature, but add a visible disclaimer? You have a free line.

So you will add neg rep to all? Better start working on the list then; you will take a few days
Since you neg repped him, you should also do to the two escrow providers, as they asked to revert back to original sig, and also all the other carriers who are aware.

He can't add anything else in sig as it contravenes rules, but yeah, he can add a message after each post. Will require a bit more work on his part.

[marcotheminer]

I left macrotheminer negative trust:

[/b]This user is knowingly advertising a scam website, DiceBitco.in. For information on the DiceBitco.in scam, see this thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=774120.0

macrotheminer has refused to modify his signature to include information about the scamming activities. He has defended advertising a scam because "For some, the income we receive from these campaigns is a big portion"

This event has shown that macrotheminer will collude with scams for money. Completely untrustworthy. [/b]

I linked to this post as reference since it quoted macrotheminer's post (so he cannot modify it later). I encourage others to do the same, feel free to copy and paste the feedback.

Hey! I added a personal message.. Read it!

Sorry but that's continuing misrepresentation (aka Lying by omission).

You are aware that:

* DiceBitco.in has admitted that their services rigged nonces.

* DiceBitco.in did not refund users who should have earned a profit, but did not. This is scamming, plain and simple. DiceBitco.in did not compensate all the users who lost due to the nonce rigging - the payouts that people *should* have won must be compensated as well, because the winnings are rightfully theirs.

* There are suspicious circumstances concerning mateo and the investments.

AFAIK They are still dealing with everyone's requests. Suspicion does not always equate to the truth.

If I remove the ad in the near future, will you remove your trust?

[marcotheminer]

The issue is that these two sites have not scammed yet. While I am confident that both of these sites will scam, IMHO I think pre-emptive actions are unfair.

Regarding the signature ads: The exchange is for displaying an ad. The exchange does not involve you astrosurfing or defending them. Why not continue to carry the signature, but add a visible disclaimer? You have a free line.

So you will add neg rep to all? Better start working on the list then; you will take a few days
Since you neg repped him, you should also do to the two escrow providers, as they asked to revert back to original sig, and also all the other carriers who are aware.

He can't add anything else in sig as it contravenes rules, but yeah, he can add a message after each post. Will require a bit more work on his part.

This aswell, TradeFortress.

[sumantso]

The issue is that these two sites have not scammed yet. While I am confident that both of these sites will scam, IMHO I think pre-emptive actions are unfair.

Regarding the signature ads: The exchange is for displaying an ad. The exchange does not involve you astrosurfing or defending them. Why not continue to carry the signature, but add a visible disclaimer? You have a free line.

So you will add neg rep to all? Better start working on the list then; you will take a few days
Since you neg repped him, you should also do to the two escrow providers, as they asked to revert back to original sig, and also all the other carriers who are aware.

He can't add anything else in sig as it contravenes rules, but yeah, he can add a message after each post. Will require a bit more work on his part.

This aswell, TradeFortress.

Mate, start adding a message at the end of your posts. Nobody looks at the message below the username. I was wondering for a long time what message you were talking about.

Something like this

----------------------------------------------------------
Dicebitcoin is screwed bla bla
read this thread ...(link)