+1 to putting a disclaimer when you invest. You can use any legal prospectus to find suitable language (Something like, "Bankrolling Just-Dice represents a speculative investment and involves a high degree of risk. An investor could lose all or a substantial portion of his/her investment.")
Suggestion: Stop calling it "investment". I think a better word could be "bankroll". This might help people lose the idea that this is some sort of Savings Account with FDIC insurance.
Topic: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game - page 88. (Read 435353 times)
I think the site needs improvement. Investors might help with that. But instead of doing it the way we do it now, whoever shouts loudest on the forum or in the chat, why not let them actually vote on an issue. Weighted by their investement (and time), like I said.
dooglus what do you think about this idea?
Easily gamed: nakowa shows up, deposits 11,000 BTC, obtains > 25% of the vote, votes, and then withdraws.
with this answer the question should be off the table I guess. chapeau for the answer
I think the site needs improvement. Investors might help with that. But instead of doing it the way we do it now, whoever shouts loudest on the forum or in the chat, why not let them actually vote on an issue. Weighted by their investement (and time), like I said.
dooglus what do you think about this idea?
Easily gamed: nakowa shows up, deposits 11,000 BTC, obtains > 25% of the vote, votes, and then withdraws.
I think the site needs improvement. Investors might help with that. But instead of doing it the way we do it now, whoever shouts loudest on the forum or in the chat, why not let them actually vote on an issue. Weighted by their investement (and time), like I said.
dooglus what do you think about this idea?
Easily gamed: nakowa shows up, deposits 11,000 BTC, obtains > 25% of the vote, votes, and then withdraws.
I think the site needs improvement. Investors might help with that. But instead of doing it the way we do it now, whoever shouts loudest on the forum or in the chat, why not let them actually vote on an issue. Weighted by their investement (and time), like I said.
dooglus what do you think about this idea?
If the funds on the bankroll were 100% my own, I would have shut the site down by now. I would have lost enough already. I wasn't expecting variance to be this much of a bitch at all. I was expecting ups and downs, but not like this.
For the first couple of months I felt like the bankroll was mine. I couldn't sleep with the worry that it would be lost. I have found that the only way I can relax is to stop worrying about the bankroll. It's not healthy for me to be constantly stressed about the ups and downs of the site's bankroll. I'm still happy to see it go up, and sad to see it go down, but I'm not as attached to it any more. I think it helped when I put the max profit down to 0.25% and got a massive "no, put it back, we want the variance" from the majority of investors. It made me realise that the investors know what they're doing, and that I don't have to baby them. I still sometimes feel like the best thing to do would be to shut the site down, but then I remember that the investors want the chance to recoup their losses.
Having said that, I was watching mechs almost lose everything just now, and hoping he wouldn't. It would have been great for the house if he had lost it all, but so sad for him too.
I hope that answers your question, and isn't too disappointing.
As an investor I am happy with this answear. I can take the variance, I have lost huge sums on various things before in life. I invested a sum I was willing to risk for this risk and have other sum's with other risks. Even before this investment I know I was not maximizing my value given what I believe is likely to happen, I am too risk averse and have a strong falling utility function, I do in fact believe I would be less happy as a bitcoin billionare than as a bitcoin milionaire and the same is probably true for USD.
The only urgent change that has to be done as soon as possible, in my humble opininon, is a very simple one, and is putting a huge warning on the investing windows about how risky the investment is, how returns aren't at all guaranteed, how there will be a lot of variance and there can be huge losses on the short term, only invest what you can afford to lose, etc, etc. Maybe even put a little warning always next to invested amount when it is >0.
Maybe increasing investors awareness, there would be less whining, which is the biggest problem at this moment...
Maybe increasing investors awareness, there would be less whining, which is the biggest problem at this moment...
I agree, that would be very good to do Doog.
Something like "You have a 10% chance to lose 80% of your investment. Are you prepared to lose 80% of your investment? If not, do not invest!"
Totally agree on that. I would add also a little disclaimer in red explaining what variance is.
You can't protect people from their own stupidity. If you don't understand, and you invest anyways, why the hell should doog care?
I really think a voting mechanism for investors, on-site, is needed. The final decision, as alway, is yours, but at least you can say with more certainty what the "collective decision" of investors really is.
Wise investors vote with their money.
Have you?
Nothing wrong with proposing a better system can be setup but when it becomes pressing, I think you forgot to vote with your money first.
That doesn't make much sense to me.
I just suggested to "vote with your money" (by influencing vote weight), but I guess what you're saying is: get on board with whatever is going on, or get out.
Sure, that's one way to go about it. And I wouldn't have made the voting suggestion if I wouldn't be getting closer to take out my investment. But that's not the solution I'd prefer --
I think the site needs improvement. Investors might help with that. But instead of doing it the way we do it now, whoever shouts loudest on the forum or in the chat, why not let them actually vote on an issue. Weighted by their investement (and time), like I said.
Sure, that sounds like a good disclaimer (seems entirely obvious to me, but maybe investors need a reminder), except he cannot possibly hope to fill up the _% in any meaningful way.
Hm... how about "... our bankroll (and hence your investment) stands to decrease by a significant amount."
and "If you are uncomfortable taking this risk, please reconsider before investing."
I'm not sure what the effect will be on investors - will they go "Um... seems risky..." or "Investment is all about taking risks!"?
For the LULZ, our whining investor mechs and his crazy run (graph below). He was fed up of losing money by being an investor, he withdrew his 1,767BTC to a paper wallet that was in the garbage, he managed to save that money in the last minute, he went berserk, re-deposited the full sum and did THIS:
Quote
2013-10-02 07:34:43 *** fuckit (169618) [#148575723] bet 1767.51587669 BTC at 92% and won 134.4849098 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:34:53 *** fuckit (169618) [#148575921] bet 1767.51587669 BTC at 92% and won 134.4849098 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:35:39 *** fuckit (169618) [#148576957] bet 1767.51587669 BTC at 92% and won 134.4849098 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:42:12 *** fuckit (169618) [#148584193] bet 2170.97057849 BTC at 92% and won 165.18255156 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:43:30 *** fuckit (169618) [#148585325] bet 2336.15313005 BTC at 92% and won 177.75078975 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:48:30 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590355] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:49:13 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590882] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:51:02 *** fuckit (169618) [#148591949] bet 2896.4543159 BTC at 92% and won 220.38240367 BTC ***
2013-10-02 08:01:57 *** fuckit (169618) [#148601047] bet 3116.83674877 BTC at 93% and won 201.08624487 BTC ***
2013-10-02 08:12:54 *** fuckit (169618) [#148612542] bet 3317.92314519 BTC at 93% and won 214.05956096 BTC ***
2013-10-02 08:19:29 *** fuckit (169618) [#148618898] bet 3533.97982021 BTC at 95% and won 148.79913916 BTC ***
2013-10-02 08:21:04 *** fuckit (169618) [#148620446] bet 3682.77897204 BTC at 95% and won 155.06436614 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:34:53 *** fuckit (169618) [#148575921] bet 1767.51587669 BTC at 92% and won 134.4849098 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:35:39 *** fuckit (169618) [#148576957] bet 1767.51587669 BTC at 92% and won 134.4849098 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:42:12 *** fuckit (169618) [#148584193] bet 2170.97057849 BTC at 92% and won 165.18255156 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:43:30 *** fuckit (169618) [#148585325] bet 2336.15313005 BTC at 92% and won 177.75078975 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:48:30 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590355] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:49:13 *** fuckit (169618) [#148590882] bet 2513.9037274 BTC at 92% and won 191.27529235 BTC ***
2013-10-02 07:51:02 *** fuckit (169618) [#148591949] bet 2896.4543159 BTC at 92% and won 220.38240367 BTC ***
2013-10-02 08:01:57 *** fuckit (169618) [#148601047] bet 3116.83674877 BTC at 93% and won 201.08624487 BTC ***
2013-10-02 08:12:54 *** fuckit (169618) [#148612542] bet 3317.92314519 BTC at 93% and won 214.05956096 BTC ***
2013-10-02 08:19:29 *** fuckit (169618) [#148618898] bet 3533.97982021 BTC at 95% and won 148.79913916 BTC ***
2013-10-02 08:21:04 *** fuckit (169618) [#148620446] bet 3682.77897204 BTC at 95% and won 155.06436614 BTC ***
But you can't explain the mathematical definition of variance to someone with no probability background. What would he write?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
"Though we have a 1% house edge, and in the long run will earn a profit of 1% of the wagered amount, in the short term we can still lose money. In times when we are lucky, we win many bets and earn a larger-than-expected profit, and in unlucky times we earn less than expected, and can even lose out. This is especially so if someone comes in and makes a large number of massive bets - we can either gain a lot or lose a lot. In the event that we are really unlucky, our bankroll stands to decrease by over __%. If you believe that the potential gains do not outweigh the potential losses, please do not invest."
Sure, that sounds like a good disclaimer (seems entirely obvious to me, but maybe investors need a reminder), except he cannot possibly hope to fill up the _% in any meaningful way.
But you can't explain the mathematical definition of variance to someone with no probability background. What would he write?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
"Though we have a 1% house edge, and in the long run will earn a profit of 1% of the wagered amount, in the short term we can still lose money. In times when we are lucky, we win many bets and earn a larger-than-expected profit, and in unlucky times we earn less than expected, and can even lose out. This is especially so if someone comes in and makes a large number of massive bets - we can either gain a lot or lose a lot. In the event that we are really unlucky, our bankroll stands to decrease by over __%. If you believe that the potential gains do not outweigh the potential losses, please do not invest."
Quite good! I think a disclaimer is REALLY a good idea, and will help a lot the good old dooglus.
But you can't explain the mathematical definition of variance to someone with no probability background. What would he write?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
"Though we have a 1% house edge, and in the long run will earn a profit of 1% of the wagered amount, in the short term we can still lose money. In times when we are lucky, we win many bets and earn a larger-than-expected profit, and in unlucky times we earn less than expected, and can even lose out. This is especially so if someone comes in and makes a large number of massive bets - we can either gain a lot or lose a lot. In the event that we are really unlucky, our bankroll stands to decrease by over __%. If you believe that the potential gains do not outweigh the potential losses, please do not invest."
But you can't explain the mathematical definition of variance to someone with no probability background. What would he write?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
If I hadn't taken a probability course, didn't know what a random variable, expected value, second moment, etc. was, that article wouldn't say anything to me, as far as the decision whether to invest or not goes.
But you can't explain the mathematical definition of variance to someone with no probability background. What would he write?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
EDIT: I think this sentence explains the basics: Variance describes how much a random variable differs from its expected value.
But you can't explain the mathematical definition of variance to someone with no probability background. What would he write?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
"Variance: Reasonable chance you lose many moneyz" ?
The only urgent change that has to be done as soon as possible, in my humble opininon, is a very simple one, and is putting a huge warning on the investing windows about how risky the investment is, how returns aren't at all guaranteed, how there will be a lot of variance and there can be huge losses on the short term, only invest what you can afford to lose, etc, etc. Maybe even put a little warning always next to invested amount when it is >0.
Maybe increasing investors awareness, there would be less whining, which is the biggest problem at this moment...
Maybe increasing investors awareness, there would be less whining, which is the biggest problem at this moment...
I agree, that would be very good to do Doog.
Something like "You have a 10% chance to lose 80% of your investment. Are you prepared to lose 80% of your investment? If not, do not invest!"
Totally agree on that. I would add also a little disclaimer in red explaining what variance is.
Agree, this would also make dooglus more confident that investors know what they are doing.
The only urgent change that has to be done as soon as possible, in my humble opininon, is a very simple one, and is putting a huge warning on the investing windows about how risky the investment is, how returns aren't at all guaranteed, how there will be a lot of variance and there can be huge losses on the short term, only invest what you can afford to lose, etc, etc. Maybe even put a little warning always next to invested amount when it is >0.
Maybe increasing investors awareness, there would be less whining, which is the biggest problem at this moment...
Maybe increasing investors awareness, there would be less whining, which is the biggest problem at this moment...
I agree, that would be very good to do Doog.
Something like "You have a 10% chance to lose 80% of your investment. Are you prepared to lose 80% of your investment? If not, do not invest!"
Totally agree on that. I would add also a little disclaimer in red explaining what variance is.
Was nakowa invested when mechs won?
He had 20% of bankroll, which means he would have lost over 400+ to mechs
He had 20% of bankroll, which means he would have lost over 400+ to mechs
Great, that just means Nakowa will come and win another 400 from us to make it up...
Then he withdrew: https://blockchain.info/tx/fa6b05b537f1341cbf3c10c74088badb9489a2f282adf17caa99c30f1db55068
... someone that stupid really doesn't deserve to have so many BTC.
hmm who yes deserves so many BTC?
Jump to: