Topic: ChainProfit.com - 27+ BTC Paid | 140% Return | Running over four months now - page 29. (Read 28740 times)

Answer to a question asked in meta[1] as this is about provably fair not about the rating towards ponzis:


So you are saying it possible that I test 100000 rolls with their code and the seed (which is partly provided by me) in question which all turn out exactly as they did on the server, but they still cheat every 1millionth roll?
Even if thats true - which I doubt - it still needs only a single person to test 1million instead of 100k rolls and they are done with it. E.g. paradocks (#1 rolls on coinichiwa) has as of now made 3,929,072 rolls. Even if only half of them have been verified the scam would be public by now. The users total wagered is ~4.8 BTC which is 122 Satoshi on average. Lets say your code would pass all the tests and cheat every millionth roll, that user would be short 488 satoshi.

Again I know provably fair is not 100% because there are other factors but the roll, but to say that there are possible loopholes is very unlikely. Id like to see stats like those for primedice, but aparently Stunna keeps them hidden or I am to stupid to find them. The site has run 3 billion rolls now. Someone would have caught a cheat.


[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10174134

Dicebitco.in did skip nounces and it came out very fast. The only reason it every came out is because it was provably fair. Without provably you just have a gut feeling that a site might do something shady to the rolls, but you can never confirm or deny it. Gamblers have strange gut feelings all day long.

Investing is a very high risk granted. Thats why the dice sites that allowed investments had been under very close watch by highly reputable members within the gambling subsection (e.g. doog).


Very good read on the subject, thanks.


How can the blockchain prove who is playing?

The idea with ponzi games is that the operator does not play. Its PvP players gamble against eachother and the operator gets a little bonus for providing the service. Youd have to prove this for a ponzi to be provably fair. So you have to prove that a certain person and their friends are not playing. Proving a negative[1] is considered impossible. I dont want to rule out that there is a solution, but all I currently see is people saying: stop the warning we dont do bad. I see very little actual suggestions towards a solution.


No. It means the player can reveal the cheat, thus giving the operator a very high incentive to be honest. A single instance of a revealed cheat would ruin the operators reputation (see dicebitco.in).

---

tl;dr: A provably fair ponzi would have to prove either that the operators are not playing or make sure that everyone is a player. That is to remove the operator.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence

You can't create a provably fair system as that scheme is all about the proven randomness of things (rolls, card shuffles, etc). I the case of a ponzi game we can't talk about programmed randomness and we can't ensure that the owners can't get involved in the investment procedure. I think the only thing what you can achieve is a  transparency when all the site addresses are traceable on the blockchain. Maybe you can research using multisignature transaction to make sure you can't withdraw investor funds and run with the coins .

When I first read the story, I was surpirsed he was able to run it for years. I thought it should have crashed much sooner.

Seriously, you need to read some history.   What Charles Ponzi did was set up an investment that paid people from deposits coming in.  However he lied about how the money was generated.   It was based on deception.    It certainly wasn't the first time that kind of scheme was used.  He got caught and the scheme took on his name.   The loses were around $20 million US which was a lot around 1920.    

The key was people didn't know where the money was coming from.   It was all a deception.  

A Ponzi can never ever be provably fair. An owner can (and most likely will) put money into it, this to make it seem like it's active and attract new players. Nothing can or will prevent that. It's impossible.

Interesting approach.  +1

That might be solved by having an escrow handle the address or a new address to which funds are sent to.

Charles Ponzi who introduced this scheme for the first time
and that person is really unfair to introduced this and how
do you think this scheme is provably fair?

Provably fair also doesn't mean you can't be cheated.   

I think having a blockchain already makes it provably fair.

all ponz is scam

they will run with your btc

Sure it is gambling, you are gambling on the site behaving fairly.   I think odds can be calculated, but the calculations are very complex and well beyond simple math.     

Anyway, any gambling site can be "hacked" at any moment.   Many have especially in the altcoin world.   Can you be sure none of those weren't the same, that is the operator just ran off with the money?

I personally thing they can be "fair" as long as the operator doesn’t run away with the money and he does exactly as his rules state. I play Poker and I take other people’s money all the time. The house takes their portion via the rake and the rest is taking from the other player. So as long as it is clearly stated what will happen I am ok with it. It is just a different sort of gambling. Just like Black jack, roulette, craps, poker, they all have different rules. So as long as they follow the rules they set forth and pay those who should be paid then it is “fair” to me. The weekly ponzi guy had 100 BTC in his wallet because of an API issue. He fixed it and then paid out. That is pretty fair to me. Yes a lot of people will lose. But that is also what happens at a casino. Some games take from the house and others take from other players.

I think you should ensure the last person to invest gets his investment back if there are no further deposits.
Most people are afraid to invest after deposits are stagnant for a while, with the fear of being the last one and losing the coins.

Moreover you should arrange for an escrow who holds 'payback' money in case the ponzi fails to deliver on its promises.

In Ponzi, some people would win a lot and some would lose all invested money and that was determined largely by the time you invest, earlier or later, obviously it not provably fair.

Ponzis won't qualify as being provably fair

http://bitcoin-casino-guide.com/provably-fair-gambling/

I was thinking to write exactly the same thing when I saw title.

You need to have a very highly trusted person to be running a casino to invest in their bankroll. The vast majority of the time it will not be a good idea.

You are exactly right that there is no seed in a ponzi game so it would be that much easier to cheat.

The point is that after a ponzi starts to payout enough then people then it will attract an ever increasing amount of money which is not the case with casinos. The ever increasing amount of money will cause the operators to have a greater chance of running away

Dont you think that the same probability exists for a dice site as well that accepts invetment in bank roll ? If players win against their odds, they can also run away with all the investments. They can play in their own website knowing the seed. In fact, Dicebitco.in did the same. In Ponzi game, there is no seed. The probaility is 100% real - "Whether there will be a next investor or not". So, how can it not be provably fair ?


Please explain...