Topic: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game - page 93. (Read 435457 times)

Lastly, this has been a gut-wrenching experience as an investor.  I was prepared for losses, but not for the amounts sustained for 3 reasons:
1.  The speed and improbability of the losses.  We have huge losses that occur in very short order
2. Magificaition of losses inflicted upon passive investors at those who successfully "day trade" their investment. These investors sustain bigger losses than the site
3. Much harder to get back to even since investor take losses and then get diluted by new investor (or day trading ones) after the drop.  In the last example, Nakowa brought the site down to 36k BTC and then invested over 12k himself diluting all other investors by over 25%.  He causes losses (due to whatever improbable mechanism) on his wagers and then he profits from the sites over the smaller wagers which tend to behave +EV.  It seems Nakowa has been able to overcome the +EV for his large bets for whatever reason (variance, luck, a good system, a flaw in RNG or cheating)

At the very least, the risks of points 2 & 3 should be added to the FAQ in the name of full disclosure.  I must admit my morale is shot to hell at this point looking at 30%+ losses and greatly diluted bankroll percentage due to all the reinvestment (by nakowa and daytraders).

I like a divestment fee and it should only kick in if you divest more than once every 10 days. 

I don't like the investment fee, I think investment should be encouraged by being totally free.

On the contrary, I'm entertaining the idea that a divestment fee applied on profit only could be good for the long term investors and thus the Casino. It would be a fee independent from the weekly one, and it could be redistributed between investors that did not divest, being a reward for maintaining a stable roll for the Casino. At first sight it seems to me a nice way to minimize the risk of "bank run", which was the main concern during nakowas winning streaks.

Also, just as an observation, it is interesting at 0.25% we immediately became profitable and at 0.5% investors again losing badly.  Also the luck of the players at 100.49% after 150 million bets is odd since that implies an historical effective edge of 0.51%.  

Lastly, this has been a gut-wrenching experience as an investor.  I was prepared for losses, but not for the amounts sustained for 3 reasons:
1.  The speed and improbability of the losses.  We have huge losses that occur in very short order
2. Magificaition of losses inflicted upon passive investors at those who successfully "day trade" their investment. These investors sustain bigger losses than the site
3. Much harder to get back to even since investor take losses and then get diluted by new investor (or day trading ones) after the drop.  In the last example, Nakowa brought the site down to 36k BTC and then invested over 12k himself diluting all other investors by over 25%.  He causes losses (due to whatever improbable mechanism) on his wagers and then he profits from the sites over the smaller wagers which tend to behave +EV.  It seems Nakowa has been able to overcome the +EV for his large bets for whatever reason (variance, luck, a good system, a flaw in RNG or cheating)

At the very least, the risks of points 2 & 3 should be added to the FAQ in the name of full disclosure.  I must admit my morale is shot to hell at this point looking at 30%+ losses and greatly diluted bankroll percentage due to all the reinvestment (by nakowa and daytraders).

These guys are IMO Gamblers that have found a way to dodge the house edge.

There should be something implemented to discourage this like f.e. a higher commission on high turnover invests, divests. Or a instant fee on every invest (that has to be made up before an invest has to pay any commissions of course).

The problem is Dooglus will resist saying how do you know random.org will not cheat. What would be your counter to that?

I would say that if random.org is accepted by all investors it should be fine for Dooglus because he is not invested and if he is invested I would ask him to divest for the given time because he and the whale are the real winners for now. I think that random.org can close tomorrow if they would cheat or let it happen.

also it would be good for Dooglus(JD) reputation and it will give a big advertisement bonus for JD. the other question is are You sure that random.org is the only solution?

lets say it would be possible and it would give players, the OP and the investors a fair shot, why not test it over a week or even more (for example) and lets see how the whale will perform, or he will not show up at all. sure the whale could come and play and could have luck or he will lose and say goodbye because he has no chance without a cheat he might have. the question what OP and investors should ask themselves is if it is worth to have a whale with a cheat and losing all the money to the whale or to recover with the time without the whale (cheat).
sure it is not proven yet that the whale has a cheat. but the signs are more and more pointing in this direction. therefore a test period where the player, OP and investors are Provably fair could  clear things up.

just my 2 cents

The only way to make fair to investors is to pull the random number from a provable RNG such as a hardware one.  Services such as random.org offer this.  Of course, this translate CP risk from the OP now to a different 3rd party.  Also, you would not have the standard type of provable fairness, though any player could audit random.org (or any other true RNG service) to prove the #s are fair to the player in that way.  I think that would satisfy most players.  Not sure if more investors would prefer blinding the OP to the random numbers but transferring it to a 3rd party.  

Nothing is wrong with me, it was a mistake. Thanks for the heads up.

What's the matter with you people?


You don't have to quote everything!

I disagree. Suppose that the max bet was, for example, 0.00001B and that an hacker get into the server and cheat the game by "winning", say, 100BTC generating different accounts. This would mean winning 10^8 times the max bet and the profit would deviate from the expected mean so much (probability being like one over millions) that no one would believe in the chance and we could safely believe the server has been compromised. Thus the website could automatically stop accepting bets or something like that.


You are saying that by yourself, "there is no evidence". The only evidence we could have is statistical and with such an high maxbet we cannot built it.

The only way to make fair to investors is to pull the random number from a provable RNG such as a hardware one.  Services such as random.org offer this.  Of course, this translate CP risk from the OP now to a different 3rd party.  Also, you would not have the standard type of provable fairness, though any player could audit random.org (or any other true RNG service) to prove the #s are fair to the player in that way.  I think that would satisfy most players.  Not sure if more investors would prefer blinding the OP to the random numbers but transferring it to a 3rd party.  

Can we all agree that if the server seeds are compromised or (hypothetically) Dooglus is double-timing the investors (I'm not suggesting this is the case), that no amount of edge or limited max profit will save us??? Why does this keep getting brought up?

If the server is hacked, then you need to divest, period. But there is no evidence so far that it is hacked or that nakowa knows the server seeds. He simply has a huge bankroll and can take the enormous swings. That isn't to say it's not possible.

Thanks for the more detailed explanation. I should also say, I trust dooglus. It's more out of curiosity that I'm wondering if a trustless system not involving the blockchain could be set up...

Can you explain what is wrong with the following set-up:

1) the rng server/seed server

2) the usual just-dice server

3) the player.

the rng server allows exactly the following 3 calls made from outside:

- give me a random number (including a timestamp and a hash of the server seed that was used)

- reveal a server seed (this call be made exactly once per seed, the 2nd time it returns "already revealed")

- shutdown (needs a password, only dooglus has it)

Gambling works as follows: Player sends player seed and some 'bet identifier' to the seed server. Seed server generates a random number and sends it to player and just-dice server. Just-dice server does the rest (size of bet, storing the result, adding/deducting amount from players account etc).

Say an attacker wants to know the server seed you are using. He can ask the server to reveal it, but you will be able to tell afterwards (since the server doesn't allow revealing more than once). It doesn't prevent cheating in this way, but it makes it visible.

Say an attacker somehow intercepts the random number generated by the seed server. That's where the time stamp could help I think: tampering will take time, which will show itself in a delay between time stamp and bet executed on the just-dice server.

How to prevent reading out information if you have physical access to the server? Don't know if that's possible. Is there a way to encrypt more or less the entire execution of a program?