Topic: bustabit.com -- The Social Gambling Game - page 149. (Read 293938 times)

Just out of curiosity, what's with the tickers in your sig?

 Yep. Precisely why [Blockchain-Based ] Meritocracy is vastly superior to the outdated joke Democracy is.

Just cuz someone follows the laws doesn't make them a nanny-state supporter. After all, bad law or not, it's their ass if they don't follow it. Blame the law all you want, but the casino lobby pays enough to keep gambling websites illegal. Democracy at work!

 Actually it's not the individual complainer who is the sadder entity.

 That award in reality would duly go to AWS and their holding company, for having a typical nannystate-supportive corporate culture and policy, as well as of course, to the US Government in general, for being this sad hypocritical bloated extortive we-bailout-too-big-to-fail-schemes monstrosity of a constipated repressive anti-liberty dogma.

This one.

What bet are you talking about?

Yeah, I didn't even move the server or take it down. I just changed nameservers. In fact, the AWS nameserver is still running it's just not the default the domain points to anymore.

Eric just told me that CoinRocket has pussied out of the bet due to the site being forced off of AWS.

Seems like a lame way for him to avoid having to put his money where his mouth is, but I can't really say I'm surprised.

You should check chat logs, there was a player talking about this the other day,

Asking what would happen if someone told on you ect.

From what I remember he steady trolled after that.

Probably was him or someone who saw that convo, that you banned or whatever.

That's the silver lining I guess. Doesn't change the fact that someone is a very sad individual though. I hope filing a complaint brought some modicum of satisfaction to what I can only assume is an existence devoid of contentment.

Think it's a good thing this happened now, also it's good that amazon didn't just kick him out. I guess that it would've been harder to move a bigger website, so it's good that this happened now while moneypot is still growing and didn't cause any problems.

Someone is a dick. Disgruntled loser perhaps?

For the next ~15 minutes you may see SSL error warnings.

Someone has filed a complaint with Amazon about money pot being a gambling site, and amazon has asked me to discontinue using their services. The first and most important step for me is to move away from their name server and CDN services, which is currently propogating. I will be using a new https certificate, which is not yet authorized -- and your browser will likely throw a spac attack. This situation should be resolved shortly, and there should be no interruption to any games.

Edit: New certificate has been issued. You should not see any more ssl errors. Domain changes will likely take a long time to propagate, but should have no foreseeable impact on the game.

Thank you very much for your help. I guess I will have to read FAQ to fully understand game strategy

Indeed, I was not in the chat. I was actually wondering where all this was coming from. Thought I missed another thread somewhere or something.


Fair enough. With all the gambling scams, I'd love nothing more than your site to check out. It's a great game.

And yeah, whether Doog wins or loses this bet, it doesn't conclusively prove anything. Even at 200 games, the sample size is too small to say with great certainty that anything has been proven.

It's just a fun bet, I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from it. Ultimately if the game was rigged, and there was a contest to determine its integrity, I'd have to be a retard to not unrig it for that period of time.

If I understand correctly, CoinRockets believes that for a given hash, I have been able to generate two or more different outcomes with different seeds. If the total bet size is large, I reveal the less favorable crash and seed that would yield the same hash. I understand that Dooglus does not believe that I have been able to, or am able to generate such collisions.  If Dooglus does win the bet, it would not conclusively prove either way, and in the 10% chance that dooglus does lose the bet, I will be faced with serious credibility issues -- but its certainly not a 1-in-a-million.

I have provided CoinRocket with a full dump of every single game and all the wagers, which I think would be more interesting to try find any correlation between bet sizes and game crashes, but that's just me.

I really hope this bet does proceed! It's certainly going to be a suspenseful event.

Honestly, I'm hoping doog will win this bet but not because I think moneypot is threatened in any way. Were you in the chat yesterday? Coinrocket (among other things) made some ridiculous statements. Just by what he was saying (followed by him asking people for a 4 BTC "loan" so he can "test" his "system") I came to the conclusion that he was either a lunatic or just a kid that somehow managed to earn some BTC.

I could mention few of the things he said just so you guys can have a laugh as well.  

Ostensibly, we should be rooting for Dooglus to win this bet, as it means the integrity of your game checks out?

Nice write up. I will being acting as escrow for both parties, ensuring payment is made. CoinRocket has informed me he will send the 10 BTCs to me an hour before the event begins, and half an hour before the event begins he would like a fresh complete dump of all games and play data (something I provided for him yesterday).


Dooglus also has production access, and should be able to tell conclusively see that no deployments or production setting have been changed, assuming I have no backdoor into the hosting provider  (it shows records for all changed and deploys).


Assuming CoinRocket does indeed not back out, here is the countdown to the 10 BTC  Dooglus vs CoinRocket bet:

http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?iso=20141007T23&p0=179&msg=Dooglus+vs+CoinRocket&csz=1

It didn't go down because it got too late for CoinRocket. He's on the East Coast. We postponed it to 11pm Eastern, 8pm Pacific tonight.

Here's the story, as I saw it:

I went to moneypot.com last night and saw Eric (the owner) betting 500k bits (0.5 BTC) over and over again. It's not like him to play on his own site, so I asked what was going on.

It turned out that a player called CoinRocket had been saying that the site never picks high multipliers when people bet big, Eric had countered that the multiplier it packs is independent of the bet size, and they had decided to settle the dispute by betting on it. Eric was to bet 500k bits 20 times at an auto-cashout of 2x and if he won 9 or more he would win a 1 BTC bet against CoinRocket. If he won less than 9 times he would give CoinRocket 1 BTC.

Eric only won 7 or so out of 20 and so CoinRocket won the bet.

Someone said that 20 trials wasn't enough to prove anything, and that we should do more. I volunteered to try a longer sequence.

CoinRocket suggested the new bet should be that I bet 500k bits 200 times at 2x and if I win at least 90 of them, I win the bet.

It seems the bet is 10 BTC, 1:1 payout (2x). But he offered a side bet to anyone watching where he's willing to pay 3:2 (2.5x). It seems a little unfair that I get a worse payout than the observers, since I'm taking the risk of playing for large stakes on moneypot, but I think that's the offer.

There was a lot of discussion about what to do if the game forced everyone out early. There's a maximum house loss of 2 BTC per game. If there are bets totalling 2.1 BTC then the multiplier won't go higher than around 1.9x because at that point (assuming nobody cashed out yet) the player profit would be 2 BTC. At that point the game pays everyone out at 1.9x and announces what the actual pre-selected crash point would have been.

CoinRocket suggested that if the game forced everyone out early, before 2x, then that should be considered a "draw", and skipped. I countered that the problem with that is that he could force me to lose the bet by betting 1.6 BTC every game. Then I'd never reach 2x, but would often lose before the 1.9x multiplier was reached.

Eric suggested that we could work around this by just ignoring any game where 1.99 BTC or more was wagered.

So I think that's the story so far. I made a new account, 'doog2' for the bet.