Topic: [CLOSED] S.DICE - SatoshiDICE 100% Dividend-Paying Asset on MPEx - page 35. (Read 316363 times)

it exists, http://litecoindice.com/

Why can't someone else just make a litecoin dice game? Maybe one already exists?

To me, Bitcoins are like paper bills and Litecoins are the cents. I'm more willing to gamble with Litecoins because I know they don't hold nearly the same value as Bitcoin.

That said, what would happen if Litecoin was added to SD? EV would have thousands of Litecoins [profit] by the end of the month...and although that sounds nice, it's not if he only wants Bitcoin in the end. Converting mass quantities of LTC or any of the smaller alt-coins could pose two problems: A) People could bid up the exchange rate when they suspect EV is trying to convert to BTC, which cuts in on the final profit obviously, or B) constantly converting thousands of coins at once to BTC would kill the alt-coins value.

Either way, it's a pain in the ass. It's much easier, and vastly more financially stable, to stick with one coin. Obviously if EV intended to hold and spend LTC as we do with BTC, then this may be different...but as far as I can tell most people use LTC as a means to convert to BTC.

definitely the reason. Btc early adopters want altcoin dead, especially those cheap clone gaining popularity. There's already a LTC Dice, another SD copycat. Bottom line is if SD don't grab the market, someone else will. Even Gox, can no longer ignore LTC. I can foresee SD share to the roof, by adding support to alt-currency, which could possibly be a lot less effort than making new games or what not.

Exactly.

I seriously doubt that is the real reason as SD has been operated very professionally and honorably since its inception.

And it appears from the MPEx contract that it already planned to include other crypto-currencies.


So dooglus, drilling down on the implications if that is the real reason then there could be a conflict of interest with the SD shareholders resulting in the bias against LTC.

For example, if one holds a significant amount of BTC and 'doesn't like litecoin' because if LTC were significantly adopted then it could leech from or perhaps even exceed BTC's market cap. This would result in value stored in BTC being significantly eroded if not converted into LTC or some other asset. This may be one of the economic reasons LukeJR is so opposed to LTC. But based on the past performance of SD's management this does not appear, so far, to be legitimate concern.

The bottom line though is that whether LTC is significantly different as a crypto-currency from BTC is completely irrelevant to whether SD integrating LTC can generate value for SD shareholders. And SD management has a fiduciary duty to generate shareholder value regardless of their personal opinions.

No, it probably doesn't.  I suspect the real reason for not supporting Litecoin goes something like:

"I like Bitcoin.  Litecoin is a competitor of Bitcoin.  So I don't like Litecoin.  So I'm not going to support it."

I often see people saying "sure, Bitcoin is limited to 21 million units ever, but there's no limit to the number of Bitcoin clones; what makes Bitcoin so special?".  People dismiss this by saying that the clone won't gain traction, so we can ignore them.  Having Litecoin succeed kind of spoils that argument.  There can be only one!

Actually, I think SD is being too transparent by listing out each individual line item. Disclosing this proprietary information gives significant advantages to competitors and potential competitors.

Consequently, just like most publicly traded companies do not disclose detailed transactions because it could harm their business so likewise I think SD should be disclosing less information so long as the material details are disclosed in accordance with the MPEx contract.

I am not sure that argument holds any logical weight. If there are 'lots of people' in the LTC space then that implies market opportunity. It seems you are referring with the temporary nature to the price by being bid up and not the coins themselves. Obviously, it would not make sense to integrate LTC if one thinks it is going to cease to exist tomorrow. With LTC difficulty rapidly rising the indications are that it will not. And if there are 'lots of people' in the LTC space and if the premise is that LTC will continue to exist then the conclusion to follow is whether the expected return on investment justifies the work.

Consequently, the relevant question is how much would it cost to integrate Litecoin or other crypto-chains in general?

Given most of the back-end work for implementation by SD is probably already done because LTC is so similar to BTC then if the integration and maintenance costs are minimal why not roll out additional product channels? Might as well offer as many options as possible for customers to provide earnings for SD shareholders. Especially if doing so would involve minimal costs.

Practically, any LTC, TRC, NMC, FTC, etc. earnings could either be used to cover costs or be converted to BTC at market rates at BTC-e, and soon MtGox for LTC, for dividends. Really seems like a pretty simple decision depending on what the cost of implementation and maintenance would be.

Would also be interesting to see MPEx support a multi-currency order-book (trading SD shares for LTC, NMC, etc.) and dividends (be able to pay dividends via LTC, NMC, etc.).

Correct, the account-based version will not be replacing the original. Both will exist.

It can be both ways. Let the users choose how they roll.

As soon as I can.

Doesn't SDICE already have a test server?

The expenses deserve explanation, my apologies.

Hosting/Tech
Self-explanatory. It runs about $500-$1500 monthly. There were recently some additional costs here as we changed hosts twice (once because the host was unhappy with the gambling aspect, the other because the host couldn't handle DDoS). Hosting is now done by more than one company.

Head IT April
This is the former head of IT. He is being replaced (for mutually agreeable reasons), though April/May will likely have overlapping costs as he continues consulting and monitoring the system. I'd rather pay two people simultaneously than be without proper skillsets in an emergency.

Systems operator
This is the new head of IT. Unlike the former one, he is full time SD. He's currently rebuilding much of the code, making it readable, documenting it, etc. He's also building a test server, and will then be building new features.

Legal
Self-explanatory. There will likely be ongoing legal costs for SD. I'm working with a lawyer near Seattle, one in Panama, and one in Toronto.

IP Rights to SatoshiRoller
Mentioned in my previous post. This was a one-time expense to own the rights to the desktop and android client IP outright.

As a heads up for next month, there will be a small cost for a PR/customer service person being brought on board as well as a one-time expense for sponsorship at the San Jose conference.

Someone already did

When will you be adding some kind of user accounts on the website, and instant betting? If you don't, someone else will...

The IP cost mentioned in April's expenses was a one-time fee paid to the developer for all future rights to the IP of the apps. It is not a recurring cost.

I had previously paid for the apps to be built and used by SD, but not the rights (this enabled me to get an attractive price). I have plans for the apps, thus I wanted to close this loose end.

Litecoin offers no significant benefit over Bitcoin. I don't care to integrate it simply because lots of people are bidding it up. I believe that to be temporary.  I'm happy that there are cryptocurrency competitors, but LiteCoin doesn't excite me.

It's not clear whether it's per month or whether SDICE has now bought the IP of that desktop client outright.

You will never see a dollar sign in Erik's reports.
To avoid the risk of prosecution, he put a barrier between the BTC and the dollar.

+1 for non-voting share : take it or leave it.

Obviously a minimum of information is necessary, but it was provided last week by Erik +  a crystal clear monthly rapport
Be sure that wages are capped in dollard, in 2 directions.
But safety first no dollar sign in any rapport.