Pages:
Author

Topic: ★ BTC-RAFFLE.COM ★▐ Provably Fair ▐ Referral System ▐ Player VS Player ▐ - page 4. (Read 4335 times)

legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
Could you explain how we could do it any different besides taking 5 mins to pick a winner?

Just make it so the calculation takes longer than the game takes to run.

Also the only claim to us not being provably fair is the house doing transactions, you can check any of the hashes used. most the time its in the $1000s i have even seen a 1.2 million dollar transaction i don't think anyone is going to send 1.2 million USD to rig a game where you make $0.04 lol

You don't have to spend any money other than the fee - you can just send the million USD to one of your own addresses. And again, the sums involved don't matter. "provably fair" means that you can't cheat. It doesn't mean "we can cheat but why would be bother because it's only 4 cents".

But we see your point where even if it is not economically profitable, and extremely hard to do there still is that chance. 

I don't think it's even very hard. If there are only 3 transactions per second, I could send 10 transactions in that second and have a 10 in 13 chance of winning. That tips the odds massively in my favour if I do it every time. Currently it's not worth it because nobody's playing for anything but dust. But I guess you're hoping that sooner or later people will play the more expensive games, at which point you want to be sure that it's not exploitable - or people will exploit it, if only to show you that they can.
newbie
Activity: 16
Merit: 0
Also the only claim to us not being provably fair is the house doing transactions, you can check any of the hashes used. most the time its in the $1000s i have even seen a 1.2 million dollar transaction i don't think anyone is going to send 1.2 million USD to rig a game where you make $0.04 lol

But we see your point where even if it is not economically profitable, and extremely hard to do there still is that chance.

The monetary value of the transaction need not be large. As long as Blockchain.info accepts the transaction the attack could be performed with just a few satoshi as well.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
@dooglus that wouldn't work for our site, as the members do not wait to wait 5 mins to find out if they win. Do you have any other suggestion?  

Well, so long as the calculation takes longer than the game I think it's OK. Most games are what, 30 seconds or less?

Maybe your members don't care if the game isn't provably fair. That's fine too. Just don't advertise it as provably fair when it isn't.

After the last person buys a ticket, its 10 seconds till the game grabs a hash from blockchain. But the timer can be reset at anytime up until the last second.

Could you explain how we could do it any different besides taking 5 mins to pick a winner?

Also the only claim to us not being provably fair is the house doing transactions, you can check any of the hashes used. most the time its in the $1000s i have even seen a 1.2 million dollar transaction i don't think anyone is going to send 1.2 million USD to rig a game where you make $0.04 lol

But we see your point where even if it is not economically profitable, and extremely hard to do there still is that chance. 

I hope to see you give us a better idea soon.

legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
@dooglus that wouldn't work for our site, as the members do not wait to wait 5 mins to find out if they win. Do you have any other suggestion? 

Well, so long as the calculation takes longer than the game I think it's OK. Most games are what, 30 seconds or less?

Maybe your members don't care if the game isn't provably fair. That's fine too. Just don't advertise it as provably fair when it isn't.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
@dooglus that wouldn't work for our site, as the members do not wait to wait 5 mins to find out if they win. Do you have any other suggestion? 
full member
Activity: 230
Merit: 154
I'm a web dev :D
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
I think you must have a really bad connection or something because everything you are seeing no one else is.

I use a satellite connection. I have a ping time between 600 and 700ms to pretty much anywhere. That's pretty bad, but I like living in the middle of nowhere, so it's a compromise I'm happy to put up with. My laggy connection has helped several sites diagnose intermittent bugs in their code, because it tends to exacerbate race condition type errors.

Anyways lets try this you guys first didn't like our provable fair system because the house had the hash+salt meaning we knew the winning number every time just like Ryan at bustabit knows what its going to bust at every game.

You're misrepresenting things there. First off, I don't represent any group. I'm speaking for myself. So your characterisation of "you guys" isn't fair. It looks to me like lots of individuals can see the problems with your site and are pointing them out to you. There's no need to see it as an us-against-them situation. Just read what people are telling you, and try to think about whether they make sense of not. This isn't a war.

The reason I don't like your "provable fair" system is because it isn't provably fair. The house can play against the other players and guarantee to win every time. I'm not saying you do, but you could. And that is what stops it being provably fair.

Ryan's bustabit site is a completely different case. The players on bustabit aren't playing against each other. They are all playing against the house. So the fact that Ryan knows the crashpoint ahead of time doesn't help him much at all. The only problem I see with his system is that there is a per-round profit limit. He could theoretically play his own game to "use up" some of the maximum profit and cause other players to cash out early. But he can't make them lose like you can on your site.

Then we changed it to picking a hash from blockchain so no one knows the winning number until the game is over. But now you say we can broadcast to blockchain a tx id so we win.

Yes. You can broadcast transactions. Everybody can.

So an example this was a winning hash
https://blockchain.info/tx/e06e78a273ae4a2695812c0f57b52f629320abb92476cc6e27407e4ff5ddb3b6
Are you saying we were able to make that transaction?

I don't know if you made that particular transaction. I'm not actually online at the moment and my local bitcoind tells me "Invalid or non-wallet transaction id" so I can't look at the details. But that's irrelevant. You could have made another transaction at the same time with a txid which made one of your tickets win, and you could have selected that transaction instead. I don't understand why you can't see that you could do this.

Lets end this talk about what we can do to cheat the system, and you the so called expert tell us exactly in detail how you want the system to be and we will change it to your system.

We only want to be provably fair, all the talk of us being able to cheat needs to stop, and it sounds like you can tell us how.  

I don't have a clear idea of how the system should be. It's a tricky technical challenge to make a multiplayer game provably fair. Ryan's pevpot is the only place that I have seen even really attempt it (and maybe an old lottery run by Dabs, but I don't remember if he ever launched it or not).

Ryan's solution is to use a bitcoin block hash from after the game ends, and to use a key-stretching function with a lot of iterations to make it impossible for anyone to know who won until an hour or two after the block is found. That works for him because he only has one draw per week. It wouldn't work for you, because your games last less than a minute and people don't want to wait to see if they won or not.

You can't use the traditional "(server hash) -> (client seed) -> play -> (reveal server seed)" technique, because you have multiple players, some of whom could be the house in disguise.

You can't hash the house pick the randomness at the end (like picking a txid, a time in milliseconds, or anything else non-repeatable) because the house at that point has perfect knowledge and can pick the randomness to make their own player win.

But stealing from Ryan's idea, I think a reasonable scheme could be something like the following:

  1) use some kind of client seed from each player (player's name + client-side random number, maybe?)
  2) use "the last txid after 10 seconds", or any other server-generated randomness
  3) hash those two together, then use a stretching function which takes 5 minutes to run to decide the winner

That way, you can't calculate which randomness to use in step 2 to win, because it takes 5 minutes, and you only have 10 seconds * number of ticket purchases at most (so maybe we need to use a longer stretching function when there are more tickets bought).

The key is that step 3 takes longer to run than the time you have available to pick the server-side randomness.
legendary
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
Was your site provably fair yesterday.


(This is a true statement, but not an appropriate response)
If we were wrong then we were wrong.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
We believed our provably fair system was 100%, but after going over dooglus complaints he did have some points. Even know it would be extremely hard to do what he was saying there still is a chance to do what he was saying. But that does not make our system 100% and we don't want to be anything less. So we have now added in a "Client Seed"

We believe we are now at 100%.  

I would like to ask dooglus to comment on this new added system.

Wait a minute, you mean you believe you weren't 100% provably fair yesterday?

Do you understand that 99.99999% provably fair is the same as undeniably NOT provably fair?  

Shouldn't you be apologizing to all the people you were not telling the truth to since you opened?



If we were wrong then we were wrong.
  

If you have a suggestion on how to improve our provably fair then please let us know and we will use that system.
legendary
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
We believed our provably fair system was 100%, but after going over dooglus complaints he did have some points. Even know it would be extremely hard to do what he was saying there still is a chance to do what he was saying. But that does not make our system 100% and we don't want to be anything less. So we have now added in a "Client Seed"

We believe we are now at 100%. 

I would like to ask dooglus to comment on this new added system.

Wait a minute, you mean you believe you weren't 100% provably fair yesterday?

Do you understand that 99.99999% provably fair is the same as undeniably NOT provably fair? 

Shouldn't you be apologizing to all the people you were not telling the truth to since you opened?

newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
I think you must have a really bad connection or something because everything you are seeing no one else is.

Anyways lets try this you guys first didn't like our provable fair system because the house had the hash+salt meaning we knew the winning number every time just like ryan at bustabit knows what its going to bust at every game.

Then we changed it to picking a hash from blockchain so no one knows the winning number until the game is over. But now you say we can broadcast to blockchain a tx id so we win. So an example this was a winning hash
https://blockchain.info/tx/e06e78a273ae4a2695812c0f57b52f629320abb92476cc6e27407e4ff5ddb3b6
Are you saying we were able to make that transaction?

Lets end this talk about what we can do to cheat the system, and you the so called expert tell us exactly in detail how you want the system to be and we will change it to your system.

We only want to be provably fair, all the talk of us being able to cheat needs to stop, and it sounds like you can tell us how.  

legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
The timestamp may not be a good choice. We are changing it to use participant's names.  

That's a step in the right direction.

But just like allowing  player to pick/enter client seed. As player can be house, it just manipulates the result too.

Yes, but so long as the names are fixed before the last element that affects the outcome is selected, that's OK.

There are just very few hash every second, sometimes, there is none. The outcomes of those hash are totally unknown. So the house cant pick a hash that can get a result in the range he desires.

We've been over this. You seem to be saying that because there are very few hashes per second your ability to cheat is somewhat limited, since you can only choose between a few different winners.

Do you see how even if there is limited possibility for cheating, that is still possibility for cheating, and so not provably fair?

And you still seem to be ignoring the fact that the house itself can broadcast a transaction itself that makes a house player win. The fact that there are very few transactions per second makes it easier to cheat, not harder.

Also, on an unrelated note, one of your recent changes broke something. It looks like the participant list isn't being cleared out between games:

newbie
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
Can't believe someone is actually trying to call someone who ran one of the most profitable bitcoin/alt coin gambling websites a troll. Someone who is not willing to listen to bug reports or lie in the face of evidence that disproves provable fairness should be avoided at all costs. Who knows what the site owner is doing to 'game' the system.
legendary
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1007
In all honesty im starting to feel bad for the OP. It is pretty evident that he doesn't really know what he is doing or the knowledge he has is very limited. OP you should understand that the people here actually wanted to help you because in the current form (at least in the form the game was in) no one would really play it. So fixing these issues is something that could help you, if you want to be helped that is.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
I found another possible bug.

The site says "But the final lucky number of each round is the one after 30-second is up" on the main page, and "The final lucky number is the one after 30-second is up" on the FAQ. But I just saw a game that ended less than 17 seconds after the first player bought a ticket.

Maybe it's just a bug in the text, and the 30 second rule is no longer in effect.

But either way you should fix it, and be explicit about which txid is actually used.

the FAQ says the hash which is used is the one after 30 seconds:



Bug reports are fake, i am not going to play your little troll games.

I see you fixed one of the bugs I pointed out, even though you said it was fake:



You've changed the 30 seconds to 10 seconds, matching how the game actually plays. Good job!

Unfortunately you've made the "provably fair" system even less provable than before. Now as well as your unverifiable transaction selection you have added in a millisecond timestamp. You can easily adjust the timestamp by a few milliseconds in either direction to get the result you want.

This is the third different failed attempt to make the site provably fair. It's good that you're trying, I guess, but you really ought to take some advice from someone who knows what they are doing. You are only making it worse.

we have now added in a "Client Seed"

We believe we are now at 100%.  

I would like to ask dooglus to comment on this new added system.

Where can I set the client seed? I haven't noticed that feature.

Even with a client seed, the game isn't provably fair if *you* get to pick the *last* piece of data that affects the result.

The usual flow for provably fair is:

  1) site commits to a server seed by publishing its hash
  2) player picks a client seed
  3) game plays using the two seeds
  4) site reveals server seed

Note that the site's influence on the result happens only in step 1, and the player's influence happens after that, in step 2. That prevents the site from cheating.

On your site the flow is:

  1) players buy tickets (and possibly pick client seeds?)
  2) site picks a txid
  3) site picks a timestamp
  4) result depends on 1, 2, and 3

The site's inputs happen after the player inputs and so can account for them.

Note that in a multiplayer game it isn't good enough even if the client seeds were selected between steps 3 and 4, because we have no way of knowing whether the house is also a player.

I would refer you back to the pevpot thread if you want to see an example of how to make a lottery game provably fair such that even a player who is working with the house is unable to cheat.
full member
Activity: 166
Merit: 100
“What can’t kill Bitcoin, makes it (us) stronger.”
hhmmmm, I may consider playing your game if you make it provably fair....as it is now, I would not play.  If you ever update your game to be provably fair. let me know!! I thanks you sir

Our site is 100% provably fair please read our FAQ page on how it works. You can verify any game using the hash + total satoshi.

Thanks for your interest, hope to see you on the game.


Ohh i see, it is joke right?  Because you say is fair, but is not fair.

It is funny yes, but I think you could make it a real game if you make it fair. Good joke though Smiley thank you for sharing buddy Smiley

As i just said we added a  "Client Seed" If you can show us how it is not 100% provably fair. Please let us know in detail.

Okay, wonderful this is a good step. You are wise to have looked further into dooglus's comments, after operating the biggest bitcoin gambling site that existed I'm sure you pick up a thing or two. Good Luck with your site, and maybe attempt to be less hostile to helpful people in the future Smiley
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
hhmmmm, I may consider playing your game if you make it provably fair....as it is now, I would not play.  If you ever update your game to be provably fair. let me know!! I thanks you sir

Our site is 100% provably fair please read our FAQ page on how it works. You can verify any game using the hash + total satoshi.

Thanks for your interest, hope to see you on the game.


Ohh i see, it is joke right?  Because you say is fair, but is not fair.

It is funny yes, but I think you could make it a real game if you make it fair. Good joke though Smiley thank you for sharing buddy Smiley

As i just said we added a  "Client Seed" If you can show us how it is not 100% provably fair. Please let us know in detail.
full member
Activity: 166
Merit: 100
“What can’t kill Bitcoin, makes it (us) stronger.”
hhmmmm, I may consider playing your game if you make it provably fair....as it is now, I would not play.  If you ever update your game to be provably fair. let me know!! I thanks you sir

Our site is 100% provably fair please read our FAQ page on how it works. You can verify any game using the hash + total satoshi.

Thanks for your interest, hope to see you on the game.


Ohh i see, it is joke right?  Because you say is fair, but is not fair.

It is funny yes, but I think you could make it a real game if you make it fair. Good joke though Smiley thank you for sharing buddy Smiley
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
We believed our provably fair system was 100%, but after going over dooglus complaints he did have some points. Even know it would be extremely hard to do what he was saying there still is a chance to do what he was saying. But that does not make our system 100% and we don't want to be anything less. So we have now added in a "Client Seed"

We believe we are now at 100%. 

I would like to ask dooglus to comment on this new added system.
Pages:
Jump to: