Got my BFL Single today and I'm raffling it away for 0.5BTC!

Matthew N. Wright

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet

Quote from: chris200x9 on March 19, 2012, 02:23:45 PM

Quote from: Matthew N. Wright on March 19, 2012, 01:52:37 PM

Quote from: NothinG on March 19, 2012, 01:33:06 PM

Quote from: Fiyasko on March 19, 2012, 01:14:45 PM

Well shit. I mayaswell try for it

The raffle is already over. :\

lawl irl

So is it not over, is that why you lawling in real life?

No, I was laughing because he first said "Screw this!", then he waited till after it was over to get involved. Cry

It's funny.

The BFL Single is being sent out to Estonia. Stay tuned for another raffle.

chris200x9

legendary

Activity: 1316

Merit: 1011

Quote from: Matthew N. Wright on March 19, 2012, 01:52:37 PM

Quote from: NothinG on March 19, 2012, 01:33:06 PM

Quote from: Fiyasko on March 19, 2012, 01:14:45 PM

Well shit. I mayaswell try for it

The raffle is already over. :\

lawl irl

So is it not over, is that why you lawling in real life?

Matthew N. Wright

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet

Quote from: NothinG on March 19, 2012, 01:33:06 PM

Quote from: Fiyasko on March 19, 2012, 01:14:45 PM

Well shit. I mayaswell try for it

The raffle is already over. :\

lawl irl

NothinG

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 500

Quote from: Fiyasko on March 19, 2012, 01:14:45 PM

Well shit. I mayaswell try for it

The raffle is already over. :\

Fiyasko

legendary

Activity: 1428

Merit: 1001

Okey Dokey Lokey

Well shit. I mayaswell try for it

dab

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Does bit-pay not take anything in Fees?

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: SgtSpike on March 19, 2012, 02:45:25 AM

But there's also a 50% chance that he has to send 100 BTC out of his own pocket to another person, if they win.

Maybe a more extreme example will help you see the logical fallacy.

Say I have a BFL Single.
Say in a fair auction this will net 1000 BTC in tickets.
I buy 100,000 BTC in tickets from me. Cost = 0 BTC (moving BTC from one hand to another).

Chance I will win the BFL Single 99%.
99% of the time I will win my own Single and collect 1000 BTC in real tickets.
1% of the time someone else will win the Single and I still collect 1000 BTC in real tickets.

Ultimately using block chain can only ensure the drawing is fair. If the raffle operator is stuffing the ticket box you will still "lose" fair drawing or not.

Note: nothing should be taken to indicate Matthew "stuffed" his own raffle just pointing out that there is no cost to the operator to do so. There really is no way to avoid such a situation. Even using something like OTC signatures only ensures the operator isn't buying tickets directly. He/she could still be using a proxy.

On edit: DUH. There is an obvious solution to ensure operator acts fairly. A fixed # of tickets. If the acution has a preset limit on # of tickets then there is no economic value in the operator "buying" tickets for himself.

Matthew N. Wright

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet

Quote from: deepceleron on March 19, 2012, 06:09:45 AM

Perhaps you should re-think what you are saying here? Nobody gets sent any BTC, the raffle prize is what is shipped (such as the BFL single). The raffle organizer keeps all bitcoins people send him to buy raffle tickets. The raffle organizer has promised to ship the prize to a winner at the end of the raffle. However, to defraud, he just buys many fake tickets, essentially for free, to reduce the chance of a legitimate winner. If he wins himself, he doesn't have to ship the prize to anybody - even if the ticket sales and picking method are done by someone else. If he doesn't win himself, it cost nothing extra to attempt to defraud all legitimate entrants, and he does what the raffle promised, ship the prize to the winner.

That's true, and I thought about that before I did the raffle and the ultimate conclusion was that there is absolutely no logical way to confirm who is who. Email addresses don't mean anything, and neither do bitcoin wallet addresses.

deepceleron

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1032

Quote from: SgtSpike on March 19, 2012, 02:45:25 AM

Quote from: deepceleron on March 19, 2012, 01:37:26 AM

Quote from: Matthew N. Wright on March 19, 2012, 12:40:12 AM

There is no way to do that anyway. E-mail addresses are free, you know?
It wouldn't matter anyway because the original has a link to the paid invoices, so even if the operator was buying tickets himself, it doesn't give him any advantages over anyone else in itself.

I saw you misunderstand this potential fraud method earlier in the thread (anyone else, and I'd say spread disinformation denying this fraud method), so I'll clarify. A raffle operator who buys his own tickets buys them for free, because the money goes out of his pocket and right back into his pocket. If he buys half his own tickets, there is a 50% chance that his fake entries will "win", and he will get to keep the raffle ticket earnings plus not have to ship the prize to anyone.

Real: I earn 200 BTC in ticket sales, and send the prize to someone
Fraud: I earn 200 BTC in ticket sales, and 50% chance I send the prize to someone

In all cases where I recommend disclosure as an anti-fraud mechanism, it is something that you can't make hundreds of for free without detection, such as your forum account here.

But there's also a 50% chance that he has to send 100 BTC out of his own pocket to another person, if they win.

Perhaps you should re-think what you are saying here? Nobody gets sent any BTC, the raffle prize is what is shipped (such as the BFL single). The raffle organizer keeps all bitcoins people send him to buy raffle tickets. The raffle organizer has promised to ship the prize to a winner at the end of the raffle. However, to defraud, he just buys many fake tickets, essentially for free, to reduce the chance of a legitimate winner. If he wins himself, he doesn't have to ship the prize to anybody - even if the ticket sales and picking method are done by someone else. If he doesn't win himself, it cost nothing extra to attempt to defraud all legitimate entrants, and he does what the raffle promised, ship the prize to the winner.

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

Quote from: deepceleron on March 19, 2012, 01:37:26 AM

Quote from: Matthew N. Wright on March 19, 2012, 12:40:12 AM

There is no way to do that anyway. E-mail addresses are free, you know?
It wouldn't matter anyway because the original has a link to the paid invoices, so even if the operator was buying tickets himself, it doesn't give him any advantages over anyone else in itself.

I saw you misunderstand this potential fraud method earlier in the thread (anyone else, and I'd say spread disinformation denying this fraud method), so I'll clarify. A raffle operator who buys his own tickets buys them for free, because the money goes out of his pocket and right back into his pocket. If he buys half his own tickets, there is a 50% chance that his fake entries will "win", and he will get to keep the raffle ticket earnings plus not have to ship the prize to anyone.

Real: I earn 200 BTC in ticket sales, and send the prize to someone
Fraud: I earn 200 BTC in ticket sales, and 50% chance I send the prize to someone

In all cases where I recommend disclosure as an anti-fraud mechanism, it is something that you can't make hundreds of for free without detection, such as your forum account here.

But there's also a 50% chance that he has to send 100 BTC out of his own pocket to another person, if they win.

deepceleron

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1032

Quote from: Matthew N. Wright on March 19, 2012, 12:40:12 AM

There is no way to do that anyway. E-mail addresses are free, you know?
It wouldn't matter anyway because the original has a link to the paid invoices, so even if the operator was buying tickets himself, it doesn't give him any advantages over anyone else in itself.

I saw you misunderstand this potential fraud method earlier in the thread (anyone else, and I'd say spread disinformation denying this fraud method), so I'll clarify. A raffle operator who buys his own tickets buys them for free, because the money goes out of his pocket and right back into his pocket. If he buys half his own tickets, there is a 50% chance that his fake entries will "win", and he will get to keep the raffle ticket earnings plus not have to ship the prize to anyone.

Real: I earn 200 BTC in ticket sales, and send the prize to someone
Fraud: I earn 200 BTC in ticket sales, and 50% chance I send the prize to someone

In all cases where I recommend disclosure as an anti-fraud mechanism, it is something that you can't make hundreds of for free without detection, such as your forum account here.

Matthew N. Wright

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet

Quote from: deepceleron on March 16, 2012, 09:45:38 PM

Quote from: Red Emerald on March 16, 2012, 09:38:37 PM

You should add a thing to sha256 a text field. I liked having the list of emails be hashes.

I didn't like that, it becomes easier for a raffle operator to disguise his own fake entries (instead of showing forum user names, etc., which allows us to intuit that every ticket purchase in the list is legitimate).

I also didn't like having to do that and didn't plan on it originally, but I didn't provide a disclaimer on the Bit-Pay site that the email address provided would be published publicly, so I thought it was unfair to do so regardless of what the thread said.

As for verifying uniqueness:

There is no way to do that anyway. E-mail addresses are free, you know?
It wouldn't matter anyway because the original has a link to the paid invoices, so even if the operator was buying tickets himself, it doesn't give him any advantages over anyone else in itself.

notme

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1002

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on March 19, 2012, 12:26:34 AM

What does .net have to do with C#?

C# + mono framework = open source
C# + .net framrwork = closed source

C++ + open source API = open source
C++ + closed API = closed source

Nothing, other than it is an example of the "extend" part of "embrace and extend". They leave off the "extinguish" for home-grown technologies like C#.

Also, I have a hatred for using .Net C# APIs because their documentation is lousy. Open source doesn't always have the greatest documentation (although it often does have great documentation), but where it lacks it is easy enough to dig in and see what the code is actually doing. If you want to add a feature, you submit a patch and it gets added.

Proprietary software harshes my mellow when I code, and the mellow is why I code.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

What does .net have to do with C#?

C# + mono framework = open source
C# + .net framrwork = closed source

C++ + open source API = open source
C++ + closed API = closed source

notme

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1002

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on March 19, 2012, 12:07:57 AM

C# is an international open standard.

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=42926

But .Net is a layer on top of C# with strong encouragement of private APIs. I couldn't watch the olympic streaming last time because of their lame shit.

Thankfully, this year NBC is going with youtube over silverlight.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

C# is an international open standard.

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=42926

kano

legendary

Activity: 4466

Merit: 1798

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Didn't notice the new page when I added an edit to my comment.
Yes I do realise that about Microsoft Cheesy

The only time I know of where they failed to do that was with Java - thankfully.
I have vowed ever since that incident to never use C# (as I never have) since that is basically the reason why MS has C#.

deepceleron

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1032

Quote from: kano on March 17, 2012, 12:06:45 AM

LOL it took until 2008 for someone to realise that MS had messed that up in Exchange and write an RFC that was actually wrong?
I wonder how hard it is to delete an RFC that someone came up with.
... and why did anyone bother to agree to that Tongue

Do any mail servers except exchange do that "MUST BE"?
I'm pretty sure the majority of mail servers on the internet don't do that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

If there's a difference between standards and how Microsoft does stuff, it is because Microsoft does stuff wrong.

Your mail server may send either kano or Kano or even KANO@ emails to your email box. My email server might send deepceleron@ and DeepCeleron@ to different mailboxes. Nothing along the line can mess with the case of the email address that you type in to email me, otherwise deepceleron might get DeepCeleron's email.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4466

Merit: 1798

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

LOL it took until 2008 for someone to realise that MS had messed that up in Exchange and write an RFC that was actually wrong?
I wonder how hard it is to delete an RFC that someone came up with.
... and why did anyone bother to agree to that Tongue

Do any mail servers except exchange do that "MUST BE"?
I'm pretty sure the majority of mail servers on the internet don't do that.

Edit: Ah - OK, I read that again.
The case is not relevant in the email address, it's just that computer accounts can have case sensitivity so a mail server that uses the front part of the address to determine the account name on the server may screw that up ...
Still, not a problem for anyone who uses the norm like e.g. virtusertable on sendmail.

deepceleron

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1032

Quote from: kano on March 16, 2012, 11:40:49 PM

Quote from: deepceleron on March 16, 2012, 10:45:37 PM

Quote from: Red Emerald on March 16, 2012, 09:38:37 PM

Quote from: deepceleron on March 16, 2012, 09:31:34 PM

I have updated my raffle ticket picker here: http://we.lovebitco.in/raffle.html.

You should add a thing to sha256 a text field. I liked having the list of emails be hashes.

Done. Works for emails, I'm not doing any input validation, so you can probably confuse it by pasting a bunch of junk into the input field.

Don't forget to lower case the input for those who don't realise that upper/lower case is not relevant in email addresses

People just need to remember how they typed their email address. You can not alter the case in email addresses, as they can be case-sensitive.

rfc5321 says:
The local-part of a mailbox MUST BE treated as case sensitive. Therefore, SMTP implementations MUST take care to preserve the case of mailbox local-parts. In particular, for some hosts, the user "smith" is different from the user "Smith".

If a user inputs inputs the domain part of an email address in upper case, then bit-pay should not accept the invalid domain, instead alerting the user that they are a retard.

Topic: Got my BFL Single today and I'm raffling it away for 0.5BTC! (Read 29283 times)