Topic: Just-Dice.com : now with added CLAMs : Play or Invest - page 119. (Read 454769 times)

A fool and his money are quickly parted.

The easiest way to test this would be to allow Just-Dice players to bet at 100%.  That has a payout of 0.99x, and is exactly what you're describing.

I wouldn't want the 'max chance' button to go there though, because that's just rude.  But I could allow players to type 100 into the chance box and accept the box.  It doesn't feel right though to give them no chance of winning, and I also really don't see why anyone (who understood it) would play.

Gamblers understand that a 49.5% chance of doubling their money is slightly less than fair, but it's close enough to fair that they're willing to take the chance.  But who wpuld ever accept a guaranteed loss of 1%?

I'd like to test this.  I bet that if you created a game that has a fixed guaranteed return of -1% that people would still play.  For every bitcoin wagered 0.99 bitcoins is returned.

How about it Dooglus.  Can you create a site that is not only provably fair but deterministic.  In that you know exactly your return before you wager.

Gambling is an activity that is against the gamblers own financial interest.  Would that tendency to gamble away money work if there was no way to win.  I guess it wouldn't be gambling then.

Try it see what happens.

I'd like to test this.  I bet that if you created a game that has a fixed guaranteed return of -1% that people would still play.  For every bitcoin wagered 0.99 bitcoins is returned.

How about it Dooglus.  Can you create a site that is not only provably fair but deterministic.  In that you know exactly your return before you wager.

Gambling is an activity that is against the gamblers own financial interest.  Would that tendency to gamble away money work if there was no way to win.  I guess it wouldn't be gambling then.

Try it see what happens.

...  Variance is the only way the player can ever win.  Without it, he doesn't even bother playing. ...

He has a point.

Variance isn't the investor's friend, it's the player's friend.  Without variance the player loses 1% of every bet, and the investor gains 1% of every bet.  Variance is the only way the player can ever win.  Without it, he doesn't even bother playing.

Investors should prefer 100 bets of 1 BTC each than 1 bet of 100 BTC.  The expected profit for investors is the same in both cases, but the variance is much lower with the 100 bets than with the single large bet.

Of course if choosing between 100 bets of 1 BTC and 100 bets of 100 BTC, we'd prefer the bigger bets.

No, it won't.  That's why you invest with thousands of other people, so that your collective bank can be very large.  Variance is the investor's friend, as gamblers are going to gamble.  Doog posted a graph of the total bets, and EVERY bet is already very very small with the exception of a teeny tiny amount of outliers.

As an investor, YOU WANT LARGER BETS because you have the edge!  You can't beat the house with "a few large bets and some discipline" because you don't have the advantage.  If what you are saying is true, then every casino ever would be broke.

Obviously realistically this doesn't really matter, as there are only like two people who can even think about touching the max bet number, and to be safe it could only really be raised by about 4x what it is right now, but the principle is still true.  The larger bets you are willing to take, with an edge, the more money you'll make in the long run.

Whoever asks why dooglus has to remain anonymous just has to read something like this, and get the answer. It's a hard earned money for him when he has to think about retards like this one.

Edit:
dooglus, don't feed the troll any more pls.

you are technically in my brothers territory so you have to deal with the Qubecicans or Canadian moose jockeys ...whatever you are funny guy but soon I get all your coins! LOL =) weeeee

= lol it's "fairer" than most>>you are technically in my brothers territory so you have to deal with the Qubecicans or Canadian moose jockeys ...whatever you are funny guy but soon I get all your coins! LOL =) weeeee

Yeah, damn me and my mathematical rigour.


A site is fair or it isn't.  Just-Dice is.

I've never ignored anyone on this forum ever.  You're close to becoming the first.

No, it won't.  That's why you invest with thousands of other people, so that your collective bank can be very large.  Variance is the investor's friend, as gamblers are going to gamble.  Doog posted a graph of the total bets, and EVERY bet is already very very small with the exception of a teeny tiny amount of outliers.

As an investor, YOU WANT LARGER BETS because you have the edge!  You can't beat the house with "a few large bets and some discipline" because you don't have the advantage.  If what you are saying is true, then every casino ever would be broke.

Obviously realistically this doesn't really matter, as there are only like two people who can even think about touching the max bet number, and to be safe it could only really be raised by about 4x what it is right now, but the principle is still true.  The larger bets you are willing to take, with an edge, the more money you'll make in the long run.

Please don't do this. Variance will burn us investors big time. The edge is already very low. The more small bets there are,  the closer it gets to the ideal of 'you give us your money, we give you 99% back, you give it to us again we give 99% of THAT back, and every 72 turns we have half your money'.

Larger bets means someone can make a score at our expense with a few large bets and some discipline.

you are good at making smokescreen to whitewash your scam lol ;-)

you are full of it bro, yes it's fairer than other sites... but it still is rigged!~ i want my BTC back because i know i was cheated i'm not too happy about it ! =(

You again?

The game is probably provably fair as I keep telling you.

Just because I've blocked you from trolling the support system doesn't mean you have to come back and troll the forums.

Edit: sick typo!

Edit2: Also, I'm not encouraging anyone to invest.  I don't care if people invest or not.  The bankroll is arguably too big already, and I wouldn't mind at all being responsible for a smaller number of other people's coins.

The results are supposed to match up, yes.

Probably the reason they don't is that you're using the wrong roll generation algorithm.

On Just-Dice we used to use a simple algorithm which only used the player's "nonce" value once per roll calculation.  Some investors complained that maybe that wasn't good enough (nakowa had just won a lot and investors were losing confidence) so I gave in to pressure and announced that from bet 145,000,000 we would be using a more complex algorithm to generate rolls.  (We were on bet 144 million or so at the time).

When I made Doge-Dice.com, I copied the Just-Dice code, so that too uses the simple algorithm up to bet 145M, and the other one afterwards.  The two algorithms are both described on the 'Fair?' tab, as is the fact that it switches at bet 145M.

So for doge-dice, which has seen less than 145M bets so far, you need to use the old algorithm.  The verifier was designed with Just-Dice in mind, after the change, but if you read the small grey writing, you'll see that you can put the bet ID into the 2nd box, and if it's less than 145M, it will use the old algorithm.

I just tested it out on my most recent Doge-Dice rolls.  First pull up details on a bet:



Copy the values into the verifier.  Make sure you put a number less that 145M into the betid field.  It doesn't matter what number you use.  I put '1':



Compare with your actual rolls.  The numbers should be identical:

Any screenshots of the blood bath? Missed it by a hour or so

does no one recognize the moral dilemma here? incouraging peeps to "invest" in a rigged dice game?...doog i love you man but this house of cardz soon to fall imho! :-) weeeee