Topic: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game - page 191. (Read 435360 times)

Yes, not having it would be the best option probably. Or at least not at visible as it is right now

Lol. It is better to keep a fair track of your stats.
If you want to start from scratch, you can create a new account easily, just by refreshing the website. Then, you can choose a new username and password and start again. Good luck.

It would be = (site_wagered / 2) + (site_profit / 2)

I don't think there should be an option to track total losses, doesn't sound good from a marketing perspective...?

But some players will be put off with the constant negative numbers. Maybe I don't really gamble that much so I don't know. Maybe you are right.

Is having the option so bad? I guess you can always make a new profile and that is a reset.

Yeah this is a good point, when someone walks into a casino if they were reminded how much they have lost over their lives playing it might ruin the fun for that evening. Allowing for counter reset would be a wise move.

Wrong, if you see you are down any amount your OCD will force you to play it into positive or 0 balance   ev+ for site

Also, the option to turn the betting controls and personal history off entirely to just watch investment and global stats would be welcomed

Suggestion, allow players to reset their profit/loss counter. A psychological placebo of sorts. I never gambled in my life but thought to try it since I'm an investor. I lost 0.5btc in about an hour. Now every time i come to the website i get this glaring -0.5 in the profit column that just screams "you are a looooooser". this is probably a healthy deterrent but allowing a user to refresh to 0, at their own choosing, would help them keep the thrill.

Why should these whales get a safer way to invest? If they don't trust you they can go away.

Also if they keep coins locally and the site ruins badly one week, only the investors who trust you will get burned. These lucky whales from the 1 cent days will simply run and leave us to burn.



Thanks dooglus, this is what attracted me and many others to the site too. If whale investment becomes a priority then we will be forced out. The downside is that you will be beholden to one or two millionaires and they can start dictating once they have driven the smaller fish out.

The way I see it, if they don't trust you they can invest somewhere else.

Nothing wrong if individual investors choose to decrease their variance with the knowledge long-term it is likely to reduce their returns.  Not everyone has the same stomach for volatility.

I'll give mine here. The possibility of dooglus getting robbed is a very serious concern, but
for him things won't change much with managed investments.
A sensible part of investment to keep on site would be about 20%.
At the same time, you can expect a lot more investors attracted if this system is implemented.
Double is not unreasonable to expect. So the amount dooglus will be keeping will be roughly
half of what it is now, which I'd say does not significantly affect the chance of him getting attacked.

Just a very rough estimate of course.

A bot could detect whale activity, and divest until the whale leaves. Such a bot would produce lower volatility for the investor, but also lower expected returns.

Dooglus, thanks for your reply.

What's your opinion on you being physically robbed? Aren't you becoming a main target as this stash continues to grow?

I understand the positives about keeping it as it is, but it can only go so far before a disaster strikes I think. Either you making a mistake or someone you trusted screws you over, the horror stories in bitcoin land are immense with concentrated stashes. Maybe I'm too paranoid but that seems like a serious ever increasing problem to me in how this is setup?

I'm asking since that's the main appeal to me with that new system. One could entrust you with a lot less coins and have the same exposure to the investment. Is that a correct conclusion or will other factors likely neutralize this advantage?

I think you're taking investor psychology into consideration where I am (perhaps erroneously) dismissing it in favour of cold and technical statistical basics. I'm not sure which approach it more merited.  Mine is a rule based approach where yours is more dependant on human emotions which are perhaps more unpredictable to people like me (I'm bad at reading others in personal situations) but exist none the less.

The reason I find more merit in my approach currently is because despite the fact that people seemed to follow along with your perceived interpretation of their motivations, (when site is up, more people invest and when site is down, people panic and divest) it doesn't change the fact that their actions could have been completely justified had the site's profits continued decreasing.  Again, because the past does not affect the future, further losses were equally as likely as the gains that were experienced instead.  Had the losses continued, those who had divested when the site was down 2K or whatnot would have been vindicated in their chosen course of action.  If crafty sorts had invested while the site was down, their actions too would have been judged as positive but again, the likelihood of the site experiencing further losses even when down is still just as likely at that particular point as the gains that were instead realized.

Honestly, I really don't know which interpretation is more merited but I do find my consideration of statistics over emotions to be more understandable and predictable.  Not that I'm a statistician or anything, just makes more sense to me.  


AH!  See that I think is probably the best idea for an investment and divestment strategy if one is to be employed but of course, if it proves successful, it ironically would become useless as more and more people employed it.  *chuckle*

The most sensible time to invest is when investments are low, because then each coin you invest represents a larger share of the bankroll, and so gets a correspondingly larger part of any bettor action.

If investors use a bot to invest when the total site investment is below a certain threshold, the bot could well have a stabilising effect on the investment level.

Yes, I think you missed my argument in favor of reducing investment when site is up and vice versa, what do you think of it?

Right now you can change the emergency withdrawal address without requiring a 2FA code, or any kind of confirmation for that matter. Textboxes on just-dice work without any buttons, which is a neat feature, but maybe not so great when dealing with bitcoin addresses.

People trying to invest and divest using the site's profit percentage as prime investment and divestment points are buying into the gambler's fallacy just the same as those who employ martingale gambling strategies not in that they're trying to invest and divest multiples of anything but rather in that they believe the past will influence the future.

For example, some one might choose to divest when the site is up in total profit by 1.5% and re-invest when the site drops to -1.5% or perhaps they will choose some manner of determining when the site's profits have been eaten into a sufficient amount to make investment statistically better than before.  

Whatever the case, it's something of a follie I think though I'm happy to be corrected. It seems to me that even if the site dips to -1.5% profit, there's nothing to say that it's not just as likely at that time for the site to go to -5% as it is to increase by the same number of points (3.5 points) to +2% profit

I don't have anything against this of course.  I'm happy to keep my pitiful little chunk in there no matter the variance and it seems to me that strategic investing/divesting is just trying to predict random chance as the site's retail side investors are doing.

I dunno.  I could be full of crap.  Did I miss something here?

I'm not sure how this will play out. *whips out popcorn*

It seems this might be counterproductive to dooglus goal of having good-sized bankroll not intended as a cash-cow. This might introduce volatility and I'm unsure wether this could do harm.

Just thinking loud, what do I know...