Topic: Primedice.com | Since 2013 | Longest Running Crypto Casino | 113 BTC Jackpot! - page 1283. (Read 1990087 times)

OK, so it's a different situation.

At PRC dice they designed a bad provably fair algorithm that rolled 'high' too often, implemented the bad design perfectly, someone discovered it, exploited it, profited, but wasn't allowed to withdraw.

At PD here the provably fair algorithm was bad during beta, I pointed it out, they fixed it, but didn't update the documentation or the verification script. I pointed that out and they tried to fix the verification script but got that wrong.

So PRC had a bad design, correctly implemented and correctly documented.
PD had a good design, correctly implemented but poorly documented.

I expect Stunna would argue that the site is working as intended, that only the documentation is wrong, so "suck it". Except he'd use better words.

so is there going to be any refunds?

This is like PRC's "sjess" problem all over again, only worse.

PD3 seems to have 3 different ways of generating rolls:

1) the way the site actually does it (use digits 1 through 5, then 6 through 10, 11 through 15, etc. until it finds a number under a million); that's the best way, and the way that JD did it.

2) the way the text on http://primedice.com/#/verify says it is done (use digits 1 through 5, then 2 through 6, 3 through 7, etc. until it finds a number under a million):


That's a bad way to do it, but is how PD3 did it during beta. I told them it was bad and they fixed it, but still apparently didn't update the text.

3) the way the code snippet on http://primedice.com/#/verify shows:



The "hash.substring(index * 5, index + 5)" bit will give a very low number if the first group of 5 is over million (it's using digits 1 through 5, then just digit 6); the code should say "hash.substring(index * 5, (index + 1) * 5)" or "hash.substring(index * 5, index * 5 + 5)". It looks like another case of untested code being put on a live system.

Method 1) rolls 1025966 which is too high, then rolls 139229 which when you take the last 4 digits and put in the decimal gives a roll of 92.29 (a loss for you)

Method 2) rolls 1025966 which is too high, then rolls 686818 which when you take the last 4 digits and put in the decimal gives a roll of 68.18 (a loss for you)

Method 3) rolls 1025966 which is too high, then rolls 000002 which when you take the last 4 digits and put in the decimal gives a roll of 00.02 (a win for you)

So PD needs to decide which of the three methods they're really using, and update the other two to match it. They also need to decide what to do about all the bets whose outcomes are different in any of the three methods.

That's weird , probably has to do with issue i told torba to fix , like if u have more than 30 refs it won't show them all , so he will make scroll there , but for that idk what could be. But ur ref is probably there in db, so that should be an easy fix.

As for that bet , i will try to figure it out while we wait for dev or somebody else to see whats up .

Happy to know it's not just me. Waiting for explanation please. 

Welcome to v3.0 Cheat experiment called "if they will notice"

806,462,841

define this bet

Interesting.

Sounds very good, any way in which we can lower the edge towards 0 suits us!

Out of interest, what's the biggest jackpot paid out so far?

That has happened with me as well. Says three refs but only two show up.

That sounds very good. It will make Primedice even more addicting lol.

Did you check the hashes etc and they were as he said?


Rake back sounds awesome!

Looking for a reply to the cheating post as well.

Also, on the affiliate dashboard it says I have 5 referred users but there are only 4 listed below that.  Explanation please?

Primedice is cheating

Today I was just using PD to bet and doing the double-or-nothing experiments.
It was going fine at first. But suddenly, I had 11 consecutive-losing bets.
They were pretty odd, weren't they?
So I did some verification using the script provided by Primedice.

See the screenshots below. I did verify all 11 bets. All 10 bets are correct, but the No.2 bet from top is wrong.
On the screenshot, the roll is 92.29. However, the result I got from script is 0.02.
So I should win that bet, there would not be the last one bet(top one) which cleared me out.

BET #805607190 INFO

SERVER SEED (REVEALED)
41fa224237f452360db8d35a276f4067fce6cad8d3dbf3c73bde2e804c8cb8c7
CLIENT SEED (NONCED)
ca45edd88ef251dd43edf42dc97c7ffb-3391

Screenshot of 11 consecutive-losing bets
http://prntscr.com/4ed9mo

Screenshot of BET #805607190 INFO
http://prntscr.com/4eda18

You can look up these bets by the bet id shown in the screenshot and verify them by yourself.
This did not just happen once but twice today and almost clear me out.
Since Primedice has been online for so long, I could not imagine how many times it has cheated.
I probably will do the same experiments on other bitcoin gambling web site. But Pirmedice is not trustworthy and return my bitcoin.

I also found the possible unfair when you PVP with "strangers" on Primedice.
See the post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8315850


The script I am using:

            //the seed pair itself
            var clientSeed = "ca45edd88ef251dd43edf42dc97c7ffb"; //dont forget to exclude the dash and the nonce!
            var serverSeed = "41fa224237f452360db8d35a276f4067fce6cad8d3dbf3c73bde2e804c8cb8c7";

            //bet made with seed pair (excluding current bet)
            var nonce      = 3391;

            //crypto lib for hmac function
            var crypto = require('crypto');

            var roll = function(key, text) {

                //create HMAC using server seed as key and client seed as message
                var hash = crypto.createHmac('sha512', key).update(text).digest('hex');

                var index = 0;

                var lucky = parseInt(hash.substring(index * 5, index + 5), 16);

                //keep grabbing characters from the hash while greater than
                while (lucky >= Math.pow(10, 6)) {
                    index++;
                    lucky = parseInt(hash.substring(index * 5, index + 5), 16);

                    //if we reach the end of the hash, just default to highest number
                    if (index + 5 == 128 + 1) {
                        lucky = 99.99;
                        break;
                    }
                }

                lucky %= Math.pow(10, 4);
                lucky /= Math.pow(10, 2);

                return lucky;
            }
            console.log(roll(serverSeed, clientSeed+'-'+nonce));

Looking to maybe add a form of "Rake back" to Primedice.

This would mean if you wager a certain amount the house edge would be lowered. Here's an example:

 - User A has a total wagered 50 BTC. He then receives 0.1% of all his bets back (Win or lose) - Making house edge 0.81
 - User B wagered of 200 BTC. He then receives 0.2% of all his bets back (Win or lose) - Making house edge 0.71
 - User C had a total wagered of 1,000 BTC. He then receives 0.3% of all his bets back (Win or lose) - Making house edge 0.61

Sound good?

A quick reminder of our daily giveaways!!



Current top leaders!!

I intuitively think my betting method shouldn't have any effect on the statistics whatsoever, but both of my datasets across two different betting environments says otherwise. In science, we have falsifiable tests to dispel crackpot theories, and I'm going to test my crackpot theory

Suppose that I flip a coin 100 times, and it turned up heads 60 times, you could say with good confidence that it is within acceptable standard deviation of the norm.

Suppose that I flip a coin 40,000 times and it turned up heads 24,000 times, that is so many standard deviations out there that additional questions about underlying fundamentals need to be asked.

You can guess where I'm going with this.

As the last word, it seems like some people with angry-little-man syndrome is attacking me for putting my honest idea idea out there without considering the content of my dataset... I should be used to it as putting new ideas out there is considered threatening to those who do not think critically... much like Galileo and the Church.

I see, so You have got some big whale ref lol (at 10%, that 12 persons need to bet 375btc to generate 0.34btc ref earning for you). 

Do you know is it possible to get it to 20% even if I don't use it in my signature currently?