Pages:
Author

Topic: del (Read 3829 times)

legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1005
New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit
del
September 29, 2015, 12:38:51 PM
#71
Was there ever a time they where equal?

It could be equal in just two rolls! Cheesy
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
September 29, 2015, 12:33:34 PM
#70

To clarify, if you make infinite rolls (10^100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000...)
the heads and tails tend to even out. But when you take 10 or a trillion rolls, there is no such concept.

Yeah, it is mostly correct, but if it was to even out, as the rolls go by, the tails would have more odds than heads which is incorrect. So Phildo is not exactly wrong, but in this particular part, leex is 100% correct. Smiley

tl'dr There is no such thing called evening out in practical cases/finite rolls.

But the local probability always converge to the basic probability.

I just rolled 20000000 times with the virtual coin and turned out:  10000630 heads and 9999370 tails, which is very close to eachother.

Maximum consecutive is 29

[IMG.]http://i62.tinypic.com/35k34nc.png[/img]

Of course. That is expected. But still the difference is ~1250. Try making it 0-10.

In dice by evening out I mean tending towards an equal number of 0.0000, 0.0001, 0.0002 to 99.9999

The number of rolls have to be increased, maybe 200 billion? But i`m not going to simulate that.

Was there ever a time they where equal?


Either increase the number of rolls, or try rolling it many times. Its all about odds here.
jr. member
Activity: 41
Merit: 1
September 29, 2015, 12:28:04 PM
#69
Was there ever a time they where equal?


To clarify, if you make infinite rolls (10^100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000...)
the heads and tails tend to even out. But when you take 10 or a trillion rolls, there is no such concept.

Yeah, it is mostly correct, but if it was to even out, as the rolls go by, the tails would have more odds than heads which is incorrect. So Phildo is not exactly wrong, but in this particular part, leex is 100% correct. Smiley

tl'dr There is no such thing called evening out in practical cases/finite rolls.

But the local probability always converge to the basic probability.

I just rolled 20000000 times with the virtual coin and turned out:  10000630 heads and 9999370 tails, which is very close to eachother.

Maximum consecutive is 29


legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1005
New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit
September 29, 2015, 12:22:57 PM
#68

To clarify, if you make infinite rolls (10^100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000...)
the heads and tails tend to even out. But when you take 10 or a trillion rolls, there is no such concept.

Yeah, it is mostly correct, but if it was to even out, as the rolls go by, the tails would have more odds than heads which is incorrect. So Phildo is not exactly wrong, but in this particular part, leex is 100% correct. Smiley

tl'dr There is no such thing called evening out in practical cases/finite rolls.

But the local probability always converge to the basic probability.

I just rolled 20000000 times with the virtual coin and turned out:  10000630 heads and 9999370 tails, which is very close to eachother.

Maximum consecutive is 29

[IMG.]http://i62.tinypic.com/35k34nc.png[/img]

Of course. That is expected. But still the difference is ~1250. Try making it 0-10.

In dice by evening out I mean tending towards an equal number of 0.0000, 0.0001, 0.0002 to 99.9999
jr. member
Activity: 41
Merit: 1
September 29, 2015, 12:07:24 PM
#67
This is just a guess between 35 - 15.  But if I was to bet chance 35 and below and win in about 12 bets

Edited - I just saw the pastebin, I wish you didn't do that. now my answer means nothing.

Never said I can predict the next roll, just be educated in what bets do and when.

Basically when I simulate a betting idea, checking maximum loses before a win happens. I do this with many server seed and client seed pairs. Once I believe I got the maximum loses possible I add 10% to that number and then back in to the biggest bet I can make without going bust.
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
September 29, 2015, 11:56:56 AM
#66

To clarify, if you make infinite rolls (10^100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000...)
the heads and tails tend to even out. But when you take 10 or a trillion rolls, there is no such concept.

Yeah, it is mostly correct, but if it was to even out, as the rolls go by, the tails would have more odds than heads which is incorrect. So Phildo is not exactly wrong, but in this particular part, leex is 100% correct. Smiley

tl'dr There is no such thing called evening out in practical cases/finite rolls.

But the local probability always converge to the basic probability.

I just rolled 20000000 times with the virtual coin and turned out:  10000630 heads and 9999370 tails, which is very close to eachother.

Maximum consecutive is 29

legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1005
New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit
September 29, 2015, 11:52:13 AM
#65
Had edited the post. Here are 10000 rolls to support your analysis. Smiley

I'll agree with if you show me your betting simulations and state which dice game algorithm you used.

All I can tell you is I have made a dice simulator for JD and PD and if you group the results by 10s you do reach a point where you approach equal distribution of numbers.

Using this method I can within a good % know that a bet will win in a worst case situation.


Let us check. Tongue

Server seed hash
3aaac305ec911f3dc3965c731dfe6db16902eb23822487a593114e68922c9e32
Server seed
a151b24df86e5dea2ef3--snip---
Client seed
ndnhc


What is the 10001st nonce roll?

PrimeDice

http://pastebin.com/VAEyF5B1
jr. member
Activity: 41
Merit: 1
September 29, 2015, 11:45:31 AM
#64
Which dice site?

I'll agree with if you show me your betting simulations and state which dice game algorithm you used.

All I can tell you is I have made a dice simulator for JD and PD and if you group the results by 10s you do reach a point where you approach equal distribution of numbers.

Using this method I can within a good % know that a bet will win in a worst case situation.


Let us check. Tongue

Server seed hash
3aaac305ec911f3dc3965c731dfe6db16902eb23822487a593114e68922c9e32
Server seed
a151b24df86e5dea2ef3--snip---
Client seed
ndnhc


What is the 89th nonce roll?

Quote
Nonce: 88 - roll: 98.89
Nonce: 87 - roll: 56.1
Nonce: 86 - roll: 35.51
Nonce: 85 - roll: 52.52
Nonce: 84 - roll: 54.18
Nonce: 83 - roll: 6
Nonce: 82 - roll: 68.76
Nonce: 81 - roll: 16.11
Nonce: 80 - roll: 66.23
Nonce: 79 - roll: 0.46
Nonce: 78 - roll: 36.88
Nonce: 77 - roll: 59.19
Nonce: 76 - roll: 79.42
Nonce: 75 - roll: 40.23
Nonce: 74 - roll: 63.26
Nonce: 73 - roll: 63.24
Nonce: 72 - roll: 21.22
Nonce: 71 - roll: 4.21
Nonce: 70 - roll: 48.35
Nonce: 69 - roll: 59.79
Nonce: 68 - roll: 60.91
Nonce: 67 - roll: 41.93
Nonce: 66 - roll: 23.16
Nonce: 65 - roll: 30.72
Nonce: 64 - roll: 85.32
Nonce: 63 - roll: 80.74
Nonce: 62 - roll: 26.08
Nonce: 61 - roll: 98.65
Nonce: 60 - roll: 80.26
Nonce: 59 - roll: 90.74
Nonce: 58 - roll: 95.12
Nonce: 57 - roll: 18.41
Nonce: 56 - roll: 19.54
Nonce: 55 - roll: 92.7
Nonce: 54 - roll: 31.53
Nonce: 53 - roll: 20.12
Nonce: 52 - roll: 82.97
Nonce: 51 - roll: 92.78
Nonce: 50 - roll: 24.69
Nonce: 49 - roll: 91.51
Nonce: 48 - roll: 42.3
Nonce: 47 - roll: 18.55
Nonce: 46 - roll: 48.49
Nonce: 45 - roll: 42.94
Nonce: 44 - roll: 22.84
Nonce: 43 - roll: 76.58
Nonce: 42 - roll: 93.79
Nonce: 41 - roll: 91.96
Nonce: 40 - roll: 75.94
Nonce: 39 - roll: 74.44
Nonce: 38 - roll: 54.75
Nonce: 37 - roll: 6.88
Nonce: 36 - roll: 92.08
Nonce: 35 - roll: 83.98
Nonce: 34 - roll: 44.43
Nonce: 33 - roll: 9.52
Nonce: 32 - roll: 84.54
Nonce: 31 - roll: 5.33
Nonce: 30 - roll: 88
Nonce: 29 - roll: 86.96
Nonce: 28 - roll: 87.83
Nonce: 27 - roll: 53.67
Nonce: 26 - roll: 81.23
Nonce: 25 - roll: 63.29
Nonce: 24 - roll: 44.41
Nonce: 23 - roll: 29.08
Nonce: 22 - roll: 79.29
Nonce: 21 - roll: 81
Nonce: 20 - roll: 66.28
Nonce: 19 - roll: 78.82
Nonce: 18 - roll: 45.61
Nonce: 17 - roll: 6.91
Nonce: 16 - roll: 97.79
Nonce: 15 - roll: 94.84
Nonce: 14 - roll: 37.74
Nonce: 13 - roll: 45.23
Nonce: 12 - roll: 72.75
Nonce: 11 - roll: 17.79
Nonce: 10 - roll: 28.56
Nonce: 9 - roll: 2.33
Nonce: 8 - roll: 13.51
Nonce: 7 - roll: 70.9
Nonce: 6 - roll: 53.81
Nonce: 5 - roll: 72.72
Nonce: 4 - roll: 36.48
Nonce: 3 - roll: 9.2
Nonce: 2 - roll: 63.17
Nonce: 1 - roll: 96.17
Nonce: 0 - roll: 42.1


Edit: PrimeDice. I can give thousands, just doesn't want it too long, lol.
jr. member
Activity: 41
Merit: 1
September 29, 2015, 11:27:02 AM
#63
I'll agree with if you show me your betting simulations and state which dice game algorithm you used.

All I can tell you is I have made a dice simulator for JD and PD and if you group the results by 10s you do reach a point where you approach equal distribution of numbers.

Using this method I can within a good % know that a bet will win in a worst case situation.

If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

Which is called gambler's fallacy. Tongue
The funny thing is you are the first guy I have seen who have that fallacy for select (may be only for pseudo random) cases but does not have it for the rest.

LOL, your evening out strategy doesn't work. Pseudo random is kind of pre-determined random (in this case) numbers generated using a certain method. It is not predictable and does not even out (esp. in finite rolls).




That's what I was showing. It is unlikely to get 10 heads in a row. But if you do, the next one is still 50/50, AND you will get to 50/50 over the long term without changing the odds.

Yeah I was mostly agreeing with you, but sort of.  I was saying the dice don't know that they rolled 10 heads in a row, so even after the 10 rolls it won't start to go more toward 50/50, from that point on it would be closer to 50/50, but after I suppose 100000 rolls if you had 10 more heads than tails it still would be close to 50/50.  

To clarify, if you make infinite rolls (10^100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000...)
the heads and tails tend to even out. But when you take 10 or a trillion rolls, there is no such concept.

Yeah, it is mostly correct, but if it was to even out, as the rolls go by, the tails would have more odds than heads which is incorrect. So Phildo is not exactly wrong, but in this particular part, leex is 100% correct. Smiley

tl'dr There is no such thing called evening out in practical cases/finite rolls.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1005
New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit
September 29, 2015, 09:51:09 AM
#62
If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

Which is called gambler's fallacy. Tongue
The funny thing is you are the first guy I have seen who have that fallacy for select (may be only for pseudo random) cases but does not have it for the rest.

LOL, your evening out strategy doesn't work. Pseudo random is kind of pre-determined random (in this case) numbers generated using a certain method. It is not predictable and does not even out (esp. in finite rolls).




That's what I was showing. It is unlikely to get 10 heads in a row. But if you do, the next one is still 50/50, AND you will get to 50/50 over the long term without changing the odds.

Yeah I was mostly agreeing with you, but sort of.  I was saying the dice don't know that they rolled 10 heads in a row, so even after the 10 rolls it won't start to go more toward 50/50, from that point on it would be closer to 50/50, but after I suppose 100000 rolls if you had 10 more heads than tails it still would be close to 50/50.  

To clarify, if you make infinite rolls (10^100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000...)
the heads and tails tend to even out. But when you take 10 or a trillion rolls, there is no such concept.

Yeah, it is mostly correct, but if it was to even out, as the rolls go by, the tails would have more odds than heads which is incorrect. So Phildo is not exactly wrong, but in this particular part, leex is 100% correct. Smiley

tl'dr There is no such thing called evening out in practical cases/finite rolls.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 1000
September 29, 2015, 09:43:30 AM
#61
If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

Stats are a crazy thing.  Looking at things in a short run, getting 10 heads in 10 flips is .5^10.  Not good odds.

However after 10 flips, the odds of flipping the next coin is still 50/50.  In your example after the 10 ones are head, the next 100 rolls are still supposed to be closer to 50 heads 50 tails than anything else. 

That's what I was showing. It is unlikely to get 10 heads in a row. But if you do, the next one is still 50/50, AND you will get to 50/50 over the long term without changing the odds.

Yeah I was mostly agreeing with you, but sort of.  I was saying the dice don't know that they rolled 10 heads in a row, so even after the 10 rolls it won't start to go more toward 50/50, from that point on it would be closer to 50/50, but after I suppose 100000 rolls if you had 10 more heads than tails it still would be close to 50/50. 
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1000
September 29, 2015, 09:40:06 AM
#60
If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

Stats are a crazy thing.  Looking at things in a short run, getting 10 heads in 10 flips is .5^10.  Not good odds.

However after 10 flips, the odds of flipping the next coin is still 50/50.  In your example after the 10 ones are head, the next 100 rolls are still supposed to be closer to 50 heads 50 tails than anything else. 

That's what I was showing. It is unlikely to get 10 heads in a row. But if you do, the next one is still 50/50, AND you will get to 50/50 over the long term without changing the odds.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 1000
September 29, 2015, 09:35:56 AM
#59
If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

Stats are a crazy thing.  Looking at things in a short run, getting 10 heads in 10 flips is .5^10.  Not good odds.

However after 10 flips, the odds of flipping the next coin is still 50/50.  In your example after the 10 ones are head, the next 100 rolls are still supposed to be closer to 50 heads 50 tails than anything else. 
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1000
September 29, 2015, 09:32:48 AM
#58
If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

You are comparing something that is truly random(flipping of a coin) to a algorithm. Have you run a simulation with the algorithm from a dice site?

I also notice that in your example that your approaching 50% as more flips happen, which is what I'm saying.

It looked like you were saying that it approaches 50/50 because the other option is more likely. that isn't true, it approaches 50/50 because over more trials, it will approach the true odds by just acting normally.

I have not analyzed dice sites because -ev bets need to be fun for me to make them, and dice looks anything but fun so it's not worth my time. If I was going to trust one of these sites with my money, i would look into figuring out exactly how they work, but I'm going to trust from afar that they are independent, because the code would have been cracked by now if it could be.
jr. member
Activity: 41
Merit: 1
September 29, 2015, 08:02:40 AM
#57
If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

You are comparing something that is truly random(flipping of a coin) to a algorithm. Have you run a simulation with the algorithm from a dice site?

I also notice that in your example that your approaching 50% as more flips happen, which is what I'm saying.
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1000
September 29, 2015, 07:53:19 AM
#56
If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.
jr. member
Activity: 41
Merit: 1
September 29, 2015, 07:45:33 AM
#55
If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
September 29, 2015, 02:36:22 AM
#54
I do not understand the strategy as it is, it looks like I will start to see in this post  Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1005
New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit
September 29, 2015, 02:06:09 AM
#53

Each bet is not independent of each other. Each bet is determined by a algorithm where a nonce is incremented each bet. Which means each bet is dependent on all previous bets, since the bet with nonce=10 would never exist without the previous 9 nonces.

The algorithms that determine the outcome are pseudo random and not truly random.

thank you for that and Chapeau!

there will be many user who will disagree with you but a few will understand the point you made

More than half the time I don't get you Einstein. Sad a compliment, not sarcasm

What is the point he made?

Quote
Each bet is not independent of each other.
Incorrect.

Quote
Each bet is determined by a algorithm where a nonce is incremented each bet.

Correct. Many dice sites have nonce-based provably fair systems. So you are saying nonce-based provably fair bets are dependent and others generated with just a server and client seed or txid and something else, aren't? Tongue


Quote
Which means each bet is dependent on all previous bets
Generation is, result isn't.


Quote
The algorithms that determine the outcome are pseudo random and not truly random.
Correct.

Edit: You know pseudo random doesn't mean it is in any way predictable or follow a pattern, right? Provably fair system doesn't work if bets aren't predetermined.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1005
New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit
September 29, 2015, 01:55:51 AM
#52
The result is independent.

If I give you 10 rolls, can you predict the next? No. That is referred to as independence here, of the result.

The 11th roll is dependent on the server seed, client seed, and nonce and the previous rolls.

Example:

roll 1: 0.65
roll 2: 0.23
roll 3: 0.99
roll 4: 0.55
roll 5: 0.09
roll 6: 0.13
roll 7: 0.33
roll 8: 0.67
roll 9: 0.04
roll 10: 0.97

I would be willing to bet that the next roll will be higher then 1. But without the knowledge of the previous 10 bets I wouldn't.

At the same time I would like to see a server seed, client seed, nonce produce rolls anywhere close to what I listed.




1. Above post by Shogen explains significant stuff you are supposed to know. If you don't understand, hash some number using SHA256, SHA512, find a pattern, bankrupt a couple of dice sites and come back. Grin

2.
Quote
I would be willing to bet that the next roll will be higher then 1. But without the knowledge of the previous 10 bets I wouldn't.
Gambler's fallacy.

3. If say all the rolls are dependent on each other as you said how come you are betting that the next roll will be higher and not lower than 1? That is a weird of thinking, lol.


Quote
At the same time I would like to see a server seed, client seed, nonce produce rolls anywhere close to what I listed.
Getting 10 rolls less than 1 has around (0.01)^10 probability.
Getting the next roll below 1 after that has 1% chance, above 1 has 99% chance as usual.
If you disagree read : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy


Quote
The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the mistaken belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, it will happen less frequently in the future, or that, if something happens less frequently than normal during some period, it will happen more frequently in the future (presumably as a means of balancing nature). In situations where what is being observed is truly random (i.e., independent trials of a random process), this belief, though appealing to the human mind, is false. This fallacy can arise in many practical situations although it is most strongly associated with gambling where such mistakes are common among players.
Pages:
Jump to: