Unfortunately, you aren't the first with this solution.
Something similar (AI based oracle) was suggested by 'markm' - the member of these forums.
Topic: [Open Draft] Betmarket -- distributed prediction market (Read 1634 times)
@TimJBenham
Unfortunately, you aren't the first with this solution.
Something similar (AI based oracle) was suggested by 'markm' - the member of these forums.
Unfortunately, you aren't the first with this solution.
Something similar (AI based oracle) was suggested by 'markm' - the member of these forums.
Now i have insane idea : "paper betting" 
51) there are "introducers" ( at least 1 (person or robot ))
they only create correct betting statements
from thin air and users' wishes and publish them on webserver (maybe tor hidden service),
only published bets are open for betting ( the measure against Assas.Market and other abuses)
52) User of the "paper" BM in betting app creates his "identity" (username + keypair )
and sets up his *coin address tied to his "identity".
53) Now user can "paper" bet any amount of coins <= MAX_BET (constant, say 100 BTC ),
user's bet then records and propagates through BM to other client apps.
In fact no coin changes owner at this stage and no escrow is needed.
54) when bet expires, the "oracle" ( again : robot or human with suicidal habits )
announces the outcome of the event into the BM.
Inside the betting apps distributed matching engine calculates amongst
all bettors of this very bet (on both sides of the bet -- true and false ):
who must transfer *coins to whom and specific amounts of each transfer.
Then the responcibility of the users to perform "sentenced" transactions
from *coin address tied to their identities.
Yes , many of users will cheat and don't transfer, but other honest bettors
will act responcibly So system will still partially work and clever bettor
can earn money from his wisdom.
What else can be done against cheaters ?!
55) users cheating to much will be banned by BM system.
It must be easy, cuz all players will be able to see who is responcible and who is not.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is definetly not a prediction market, because of cheating "allowed".
But system can refine "prediction" by simply discarding bets made by cheaters
from results, after bet has expired.
Of course, this "paper" plan has flaws -- but
a) it's quite simple to implement
b) this is a low-trust solution
c) third party risks are minimized
Any thoughts ?!
51) there are "introducers" ( at least 1 (person or robot ))
they only create correct betting statements
from thin air and users' wishes and publish them on webserver (maybe tor hidden service),
only published bets are open for betting ( the measure against Assas.Market and other abuses)
52) User of the "paper" BM in betting app creates his "identity" (username + keypair )
and sets up his *coin address tied to his "identity".
53) Now user can "paper" bet any amount of coins <= MAX_BET (constant, say 100 BTC ),
user's bet then records and propagates through BM to other client apps.
In fact no coin changes owner at this stage and no escrow is needed.
54) when bet expires, the "oracle" ( again : robot or human with suicidal habits )
announces the outcome of the event into the BM.
Inside the betting apps distributed matching engine calculates amongst
all bettors of this very bet (on both sides of the bet -- true and false ):
who must transfer *coins to whom and specific amounts of each transfer.
Then the responcibility of the users to perform "sentenced" transactions
from *coin address tied to their identities.
Yes , many of users will cheat and don't transfer, but other honest bettors
will act responcibly
So system will still partially work and clever bettorcan earn money from his wisdom.
What else can be done against cheaters ?!
55) users cheating to much will be banned by BM system.
It must be easy, cuz all players will be able to see who is responcible and who is not.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is definetly not a prediction market, because of cheating "allowed".
But system can refine "prediction" by simply discarding bets made by cheaters
from results, after bet has expired.
Of course, this "paper" plan has flaws -- but
a) it's quite simple to implement
b) this is a low-trust solution
c) third party risks are minimized
Any thoughts ?!
Very relevant thread :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=8821.0;all
There are MANY brilliant thoughts there.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=8821.0;all
There are MANY brilliant thoughts there.
On challenges #1 & #2 :
There are 3 variants of design of BM's data storage :
1) We store ALL our data in new specialised blockchain ( betchain ).
2) We store ALL our data in some kind of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_data_store,
and if so BM won't have it's own blockchain. <-- this option, likely have too
little benefits in comparison with 1) -- so let's drop it.
3) We store all data encoded as transactions (standard and/or non-standard ).
Those transactions will "pollute" the blockhain of Bitcoin or maybe Litecoin.
This option has it's own advantages, though i'm not sure : is this possible technically ?!
Esp. if only standard txses are used for encoding of betting data ?
-------------------------------------------------
All 3 options have its own pro and contra. What to choose ? <-- that's the Question 
PS: I was advised by Satan not to do anything on challenge 666.
HIM is promising me his help with coding of BM.
There are 3 variants of design of BM's data storage :
1) We store ALL our data in new specialised blockchain ( betchain ).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_data_store,
and if so BM won't have it's own blockchain.
little benefits in comparison with 1) -- so let's drop it.
3) We store all data encoded as transactions (standard and/or non-standard ).
Those transactions will "pollute" the blockhain of Bitcoin or maybe Litecoin.
This option has it's own advantages, though i'm not sure : is this possible technically ?!
Esp. if only standard txses are used for encoding of betting data ?
-------------------------------------------------
All 3 options have its own pro and contra. What to choose ? <-- that's the Question
PS: I was advised by Satan not to do anything on challenge 666.
HIM is promising me his help with coding of BM.
http://forum.truthcoin.info/index.php
A forum for a prediction market on a blockchain
A forum for a prediction market on a blockchain
Some event outcomes could be defined in terms of observable events on the web.
Sure! Just observe the event outcomes posted to a noncommercial prediction market such as Ideosphere's Foresight Exchange.Just layer Bitcoin on top of another site that already decides outcomes.
Sounds great. What happens when the admin of the noncommercial prediction market discovers he can make big munnies by posting bogus outcomes?
OPEN CHALLENGES aka weak points of the concept :
5) How to decide the event outcome without necessity to have human referee/judge ?
5) How to decide the event outcome without necessity to have human referee/judge ?
Without (super)human level AI I don't see how that is possible. For example, a boxing match is decided by the judges, who are human. If you want to bet on it then you are at least relying on the judges, unless you have a super-AI that can say, "The judges scored it 112-110 for Rodriguez but I am awarding it to Lopez instead". I think that would cause more disputes than relying on humans!
Why not let the miners decide as referees. They will not be dishonest or lazy,
lest they damage the coin they just mined.
Main purpose of this coin/block chain must be betting, of course. Bitcoin miners would be
mostly uninterested.
OPEN CHALLENGES aka weak points of the concept :
5) How to decide the event outcome without necessity to have human referee/judge ?
5) How to decide the event outcome without necessity to have human referee/judge ?
Without (super)human level AI I don't see how that is possible. For example, a boxing match is decided by the judges, who are human. If you want to bet on it then you are at least relying on the judges, unless you have a super-AI that can say, "The judges scored it 112-110 for Rodriguez but I am awarding it to Lopez instead". I think that would cause more disputes than relying on humans!
Some event outcomes could be defined in terms of observable events on the web. For example, instead of betting on whether Miami Heat will beat the Trail Blazers you can bet on whether Yahoo! sport will display a greater score for MH than TB at such and such an URL at such and such a time. This removes the site operator's discretion but introduces problems of its own.
Hi all !
4) What else
4) What else
Jump to: