Topic: Just-Dice.com game is rigged - page 3. (Read 8595 times)

Matter Of Opinion

BCP- downgraded JD from A+ to A which I still consider safe just a drop in financial security. (I'm aware of the large investing pool really could be an entire new conversation)
uvwvj- yes there is financial issues  
I guess I don't comprehend what your trying to dispute by mentioning this.

BCP- upgraded Betcoin from A to A+
uvwvj- Betcoin is participating with house betting and now competes with some other competitors by offering similar products.
Response 1: Not sure why a well funded company competing against another should be considered a bad thing. I think a majority would agree it keeps the sites in question on top of things and continues to push them on improving the products that they currently do offer.
Response 2: Bit777 and Betcoin provide different random number generating software. (feel free to submit to us positive feedback with Bit777 so we can keep a file of more player reviews and consider upgrading.

regards

So the guy that might be tied to Betcoin just downgraded JD from A+ to A, yes there is financial issues but after TF provided evidence of in house betting nothing happens to Betcoin. Betcoin is basically a complete copy of Sahosti Dice and Sahosti Circle and a RNG casino pretty much like Bit777 (whom I have had very good dealings with).

So the guy that might be tied to Betcoin just downgraded JD from A+ to A, yes there is financial issues but after TF provided evidence of in house betting nothing happens to Betcoin.  Betcoin is basically a complete copy of Sahosti Dice and Sahosti Circle and a RNG casino pretty much like Bit777 (whom I have had very good dealings with).

Yes, by giving the player a bad / pre-computed original seed.

I claim that the user can independently verify that we're not cheating him and offer a description of how to do it, and even link to third-party tools that do it for him.  Do you see any way Just-Dice can cheat its users given this?  If so, how specifically?

Another huge hit from this company and according to the site is in the RED. As I was mentioning financial security is extremely important and have hinted in the past in regards to the betting limits that are allowed currently. As much as I and all of us like Douglas and Just-Dice we are going to downgrade slightly until some sort of in surety betting limits put into place. ........

Not true the point is a company can exploit the roll based on the outcome they want it to be http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1frm4x/provably_fair_by_bitzino_not_provable_with/

I agree just-dice got hit hard by dr lee in which we considered lowering the financial security of the company based on it. I still don't see a reason though to do such just yet.

Just-Dice is not a scam I just made a profit once again and cashed out with no problems. (mods should consider deleting this thread gives a legitimate company a bad name)

I'm not taking it personally.  But this is a thread about whether Just-Dice is a scam.  That's what I thought we were talking about.  We can stop if you like.

I already mentioned Just-Dice should not be considered rogue or unfair as I was speaking from a main generality from all bitcoin gambling operations in general. I think we both know a majority of bitcoin gambling sites are not to be trusted. Financial security is clearly an important aspect to any online bitcoin site as well (look at casinobit as an example). I still don't see any reason though why one should be concerned with Just-Dice they pay and pay fast and the operation currently is set up to which they cannot lose more than what is available. I think your taking this personal which you shouldn't I still like you and respect the brand just as I did last week or a month ago. (even after Dr Lee took about 2%) 

Do you think any of those points apply to Just-Dice?  If so, which?

It's hard to argue against such a large wall of text which was written about a different site with quite different provably fairness.

I claim that the user can independently verify that we're not cheating him and offer a description of how to do it, and even link to third-party tools that do it for him.  Do you see any way Just-Dice can cheat its users given this?  If so, how specifically?


Who is "we" and how would you be able to lower Just-Dice's "financial security"?

Not true the point is a company can exploit the roll based on the outcome they want it to be http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1frm4x/provably_fair_by_bitzino_not_provable_with/

I agree just-dice got hit hard by dr lee in which we considered lowering the financial security of the company based on it. I still don't see a reason though to do such just yet.

The point is law of probability is a farce and not mathematics. According to the infinite law of probability by putting your wet clothes into a dryer some day or time they will be perfectly folded and organized which we both know is not a reality. I'm not necessarily arguing any particular comment you made accept the fact 1 in 1024 chances is assuming the particular program is legitimate. Now we both know I think Just-Dice is but should only be used if a legitimate 3rd party has the winning/losing draws prior to the roll. If not any scam company could claim as such which is a green card for cheats and scammers to exploit legitimate customers.

Not true the point is a company can exploit the roll based on the outcome they want it to be http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1frm4x/provably_fair_by_bitzino_not_provable_with/

(08:34:01 PM) dooglus: the point of provably fairness is that you don't have to trust the company - you can check for yourself whether the rolls were fair

I must take issue with this statement.

(08:30:44 PM) dooglus: I don't know the infinite law of probability you refer to
(08:30:55 PM) dooglus: I don't know any mathematical law about clothes dryers
(08:31:09 PM) aksplace: hehe no worries
(08:31:15 PM) dooglus: but to say probability isn't math is odd
(08:31:22 PM) dooglus: it is a part of math
(08:31:25 PM) aksplace: well it is
(08:31:39 PM) aksplace: but only if that probability could be verified prior to any drawing
(08:31:49 PM) aksplace: if not its a theory
(08:31:59 PM) dooglus: we can test the theory
(08:32:22 PM) dooglus: generate a billion rolls using the roll algorithm.  see that the distribution is very nearly linear
(08:32:56 PM) aksplace: agree but again with that happening thats only based on the fact the player would get the same distibution
(08:33:01 PM) dooglus: you don't have to trust Just-Dice - it is provably fair.  I publish the hash of the server seed before you roll, and the algorithm that does the rolling
(08:33:17 PM) aksplace: we dont know that for a certainty to many shady companies
(08:33:20 PM) dooglus: then when you're done, I publish the seed, so you can generate the rolls for yourself and see that they're the same
(08:34:01 PM) dooglus: the point of probably fairness is that you don't have to trust the company - you can check for yourself whether the rolls were fair
(08:34:11 PM) dooglus: you have to trust them to pay you when you click 'withdraw' of course

The point is law of probability is a farce and not mathematics.