Topic: Regarding Ponzi Sites -- Requesting some attention (not another section thread) (Read 1595 times)

Just a couple points, from a programming point of view.

1) The seeds are not meaningful unless you can actually exercise the code and produce the same throws.   Unless you know for certain the exact bytes running on the server, you can't be sure what you are seeing.   There are many possible cheats here, but they are complex in nature for an unskilled programmer.    I won't say more, but there are many possibilities.

2) You can still cheat without mucking with the random numbers by favorable rounding of the thresholds, etc.   A ton of little nicks can add up and if caught ... "Thank you for finding a bug!"

The problem is proof in the crypto world is only hash deep.   You can wrap a cheat in proof and it would still cheat.   

Only if the hash function behind it is broken. The basic principle that makes the rolls (not the site !) proveably fair is that the server can provide a hash of the seed used to generate the rolls. Once the full seed (or the servers part) has been revealed the player can check that its indeed the correct seed and that the rolls had to be like this.


It is of course still possible that the operator of a site itself is not honest and runs with the wallet (e.g. dice.ninja), but this is true for all Bitcoin services that do not work directly on the blockchain. Even those running directly on the blockchain coud run, at least with parts of the funds, by stalling the payout for a bit.


Thanks, Ill drop in

You are correct that proving the operator of a Ponzi site hasn't put his own deposits in first could be hard to prove.   I agree completely that is an issue.   It wouldn't be in their long term best interest, but most scammers are not long term thinkers.   

However, at the same time, many of the so call proofs accepted for things like dice games could be cooked by a skilled programmer.   Open source isn't a protection either as it may not be the actual source for the program running.   There are many backdoors.   However that type of exploit takes a lot more skill than a Ponzi operator stacking the deck.   The counter point is I don't see how any gambling game can be really made provable fair.   

I have started a discussion here about How can we create a provably fair Ponzi Game ? If anyone of you have any constructive suggestion, please do drop by...

+1
It was good to read a couple of thoughtful posts on this subject, without red 48 point font or "I get payed out my .00000001 is be good sceme live long time" contributions.
Just a couple of points:
"Ponzi games" cannot be considered legit (overused word) imo until there is some way of proving that the early (profitable) deposits in a round do not come from the operator of the scheme. I can't see how this can happen, so they cannot be compared to conventional gambling with 'provably fair' and house edge systems.
The comparison with governments providing social benefits by kicking the deficit can down the road in the form of future unfunded liabilities is not valid.
I am no lover of the world's current financial system which is why I am interested in possible alternatives like bitcoin, but there is a huge difference between political decisions taken with few socially acceptable alternatives and deliberately engineered fraud designed to benefit the perpetrator only.

Think about it like Peta's pictures[1]. Sometime you have to exaggerate to get peoples attention.


I certainly am, we all are formed but what we experienced and by the stories that have been told to us. This is why I suggest that it is a cultural thing. I can only guess, but I suspect that plenty of those in support of ponzis are from east europe/russia. A different background results in a different view of the world. On the other hand I think live would be boring if we all agreed on everything.

IMHO the best solution for both sides is a seperate section as theymos suggested. This results in a seperation of gambling and ponzis/hyip and I can reasonably assume that those still participating do understand the difference as well as the risks involved in ponzi/hyip games.

[1] possibly NSFW: http://www.toxel.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/meat05.jpg

You are thinking deeply about things, that is to be commended.   Still what you present is a loophole.   The posts were basically calling everyone that played a Ponzi a thief if they were paid by the Ponzi.   That wasn't a joke or even a piece of fiction.   However it is a moot point since you have stop making those posts.  For the record, the only problem I had with your posts was that blanket labeling all winners (even if they end up losing) as thieves.   

I also understand your position is limited by your accepted definition of what a Ponzi is.   I think that is a little blind, but I also realize I'm probably blind to many of my own ways of thinking.   

I think the topic of Ponzi scheme is emotional to many since we often forced to contribute to Ponzi schemes.   No point is debating politics, but I think it is very safe to say that many if not most governments around the world routinely force people into very large schemes that while not considered a Ponzi scheme they have all the same attributes of a classical Ponzi scheme with the added injustice that if you don't play you face penalties.  It is easy to see the end results, just look at the massive debts many modern governments have.   From Japan where I live, to the US to the UK to Russia the problems are everywhere.   You are correct with your humor.  Ponzi schemes are everywhere. 

I have received more PMs and will again answer in public as I think this should be discussed openly. On the other hand I also understand that some people might want to stay in the shadows for now.


---
Subject: Re: Ponzi warning doesn't need the lie


Again, I stoped posting the message as I agree it does not help my cause. Its better to educate people in a more calm manner. Blatant posts will not change anything.


Same to you.

-Sho
---

Another message, from someone else. This message is refering a third person which I will label "zzz" and forth person which I will label "aaa".

---
subject: Hi!


Hi,

I will do my very best.


Honestly? If I see a thread like this I would rate it as any other. I have yet to be convinced that a ponzi can be honest, but I have argued that. I am sure you read it.


As I wrote the other person above and as zzz wrote: You would have to prove that you are not participating, which is impossible. I do however support that you refrain from the usual alt accounts which only live as long as the ponzi does.


I hope theymos implements the subboard that was discussed. It could have a sticky that would contain all the information people need to understand what the "games" (sorry for this, but I just dont see it as a game) in this section are about.


I support the established member approach, but the main problem still exists. Its not provably fair and AFAIK it cant be.

I also dont really see the issue with my ratings. I understand that blatant posts in the ponzi threads might piss some people off. I stopped that. My rating pretty much confirms that you are running a ponzi (if/when you do) and if people are scared away by the red number, frankly they should be as they are apparently unable to click the trust link and see what is behind it. If they cant do that, how do you think could they judge the risks involved in a ponzi? I dont patronize anyone, they are free to send you or any other ponzi as many coins as they want.
If it helps: If theymos creates the new section[1] I will stay away from it.

-Sho

[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10135486
erm no I think it was this one: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10135115

I received a PM today, here is my answer. I dont like to repeat myself and as I did not see any new arguments, it fits well here.

subject: [Ponzi warning doesn't need the lie]

Hi,

nice of you to drop in. I like how you take the time to tell me what this is about.


It is not possible for a ponzi to be honest as a ponzi can never prove they do not play themselves against the players. While the transactions on the blockchain can be seen by everyone they are pseudonymous and its very easy to get a new pseudonym (address). This is where these ponzis deceive. They use the deception the blockchain offers them to manipulate people into sending them money. Lets for one second assume that a ponzi does not do this. There is no way for a player to distinguish this ponzi from the others.


No, not when if a player should win, the money comes from those that have been convinced they have a fair chance of winning themselves. Yet there is no fair chance. Its not a gamble its a ponzi. A paying ponzi is no different from one that does not pay from the start, only that what you consider "honest" ponzis run longer and scam more people. Just because you received a payment to further feed the greed of others does not mean you are not used to manipulate them. I assume for your sake that you are not running a ponzi yourself but just play and there is still hope that you will understand this. 


How am I lying? Please give me a way that someone running a ponzi can prove they are not cheating, that they are not doing the first or 13th transaction themselves in order to convince others. Only if you can find a way to prove(!) this you have a provably fair gamble and I will gladly participate in Ponzis myself. I am a gambler, I understand that sending money to a casino is a risk as well. But there are honest casinos where you play against them and have a chance to win. Those running a ponzi can manipulate the game to their pleasing and the players have no way to figure this out. This is not gambling, it is not a chance its arbitrariness.


They choose to play because they are convinced by people like you that there is a fair chance. I fully understand that I am no ones custodian and its their own decision to play. Yet all you who run and play the ponzi, whine about me and others. Thus I conclude what I do is working and people start to understand that a ponzi is in fact not a gamble.



Dont worry I stopped posting that message anyway. IIRC I posted it two or three times, but I started to understand that it is only helping those running the ponzi. Its not that I think its wrong, but its a free bump for the thread every time I post it and I dont want to spam the forum with the same message over and over again. There is enough ponzi related spam already.

You didn't respond to any of his arguments. All you keep saying is that everybody is missing the point. I think you are missing the point and deluding yourself into thinking what you are doing is responsible gambling when in fact it is a large scam. Find another way to make BTC besides scamming people.

You are both missing the point
Again: if Bitcointalk were all on 0 trust how would we know who are scammers and who are not?
Same thing with the ponzi section.
Secondly we can't hold more than 1.95btc at a time on our site I've said this time and time again
That's why myself and weekly ponzi do not deserve these ratings.

As for those quotes, this is what happened when you don't have a self moderated thread. People FUD and trash the shit out of it. That's not our fault and we can't do anything about it sadly. bt234 is a FUD,and in all honesty I don't know what the other two quotes are talking about (I've been asleep so maybe my dev edited the site to fix those errors)

Either way, you better read this thread properly you are both missing my point

H8HmIEPxaKAU6XR1itlUXfP4FM14+Uj5QrWyql9I11CdKawkiUZpoft76VRTqWH9JdC/7UQ3zbLVBV3wRqyybY4=

^^^^ signed

What can I possibly add after this? Quickseller perfectly summed it up. There is no such thing as a legit ponzi. Same as a thimblerigger you are allways in full control, never is the other party risking their money.

If you actually think that Ponzis are a legit form of gambling, why do you hide behind your alt?

And another question: where do you come from? I wonder if this is some cultural thing.

Edit:

Id like to post some recent quotes your "happy" customers left:




And this:

"Your partner" apparently "yelled" at someone and removed the post. You dont even know about this. Strike that, might honestly been faked.

If you ignore the fact that you are running a ponzi (this is a ponzi), then the negative trust is still appropiate.

Your "game" is not fair to players: there is no way to verify that appropiate players are receiving a payout. I haven't looked real closely at how your "game" works, however I assume it determins who gets paid something similar to the early players profit while the later players get nothing. Even if you used the first blocks that confirmed transactions you could easily use your own money (via mixers) to play early on this would make it so the majority of plays would end up loosing.

There is no real way to "verify" bets. In addition to the above you need to be trusted that appropiate players get payout. Even prime dice, which is arguably the most reputable Bitcoin casino here allows players to verify their bets to prove they received appropiate payments.

You are asking players to trust you with large amounts of money while you have no reputation. Mu believe your first post was creating your game. This is very similar to a brand new user asking to be trusted with a short term loan.

You clearly are not new to the forum based on how quickly you made it to meta and how familar you are with the trust system. This means that you are either a scammer (and should not be trusted) or plan on eventually scamming and want to protect your existing accounts reputation when you eventually run away with investor money. I am sure you knew you would probably get negative trust the hour you started your game however, a reputable member could potentially provide a history of "honesty" with their game to get it removed. I somewhat thing it is the former. I somewhat doubt that badbear will confirm or deny this, however I would speculate that you can be linked to either a scammer or are using An IP masking service like tor or a vpn.

There was recently a ponzi that was "honest" with players for a while (a few weeks) and had over 700 BTC move through their address. This built up a lot of confidence with their game allowing them to quickly accumulate large amounts of Bitcoin very quickly which means if they delayed payouts even a short time then they could run away with large amounts of Bitcoin. The end game in these ponzis is to run away once enough confidence is built up.

I would like to know, what would we should call our program?
I doubt the SEC will confront us as we clearly state people can lose their money therefor this isn't a scam nor is it fraud.

No, you're not understanding what we do.
We run a ponzi GAME. We clearly state it is a gamble and take a 4% fee for the game (just like a house edge).
What happens is people deposit their BTC and the first person who invested gets paid the second persons funds ect. We offer 130% (1.3x your deposit) per "bet"
Example:
Person A sends .1BTC
Person B sends .2BTC
Person A gets paid .13BTC as promised instantly, most scams make you wait
Wallet is now at .07BTC
Person B will get paid when more deposits make the wallet reach .26BTC

This cycle continues until the round ends. Rounds are set at specific end times.
Those who remain unpaid at the end of the round lose.

It's a gamble just like any other site.

A Ponzi scheme would do this but not have a set end date and would wait until they collect a large amount of funds and run off. It is not possible for us to do this as the site is 100% automatic, so it isn't possible for us to do if.

As I can see, bitcoininformation has removed the -ve feedback, which is a good sign. I hope, other DefaultTrust members will also do the same.

But, if any of those declared ponzis breaks any stated rule of the game, please do not hesitate to make them -ve again.

@OP You are only half right. You are trying to argue that a ponzi can be legitimate. A ponzi, by definition, cannot be legitimate.


Problem is, you are calling yourself a ponzi when you aren't. Don't act surprised when people leave you negative feedback when you are calling yourself a fraud from the start.

SEC isn't likely to be so enlightened though, so don't be surprised when they bust down your door.

I've no idea what type of service you run and you provided no information about it in this thread. If you're not running a ponzi, then don't call yourself a ponzi and people might not call you a scammer. Not exactly rocket science is it?

Scams are now every single section and I dont think it is possible to cover all for one person. But, when some DefaultTrust linked guy is covering a category, he should cover all. So, asking bitcoininformation about mining is too much IMO. But, unless he gives -ve to other gambling sites, it would be giving undue advantage to them. AFAIK bitcoininformation is a long standing respected member of the community. I believe, he'll understand the logic and change -ve feedbacks to neutral.

You obviously did not read the thread at all, thanks for proving that to everyone.
1. My site makes more from fees than what it possibly can scamming (max in wallet is 1.95BTC at a time)
2. The goal is not to run away with the money. Since the site is instant and there is no incline in our balance at all, it's not a confidence scam or anything like that.

You're wrong, sorry.

Exactly right, another point I missed. If you are going to label ponzi's then why haven't you labelled hashie or any current cloud mining scams?

I am sorry to say that your reasoning is wrong.

Ponzi is a scheme where investors get an illusion from the Ponzi operator that their investments are being used in proper business for their return, whereas in reality they are getting return from new investor's money. Hence this type of investment schemes are destined to fail by defrauding/scamming the investors. For example PBmining.com, Hashie.co, CryptoMine.io etc.

But, when a Ponzi declares itself that it is a Ponzi, then investors are well aware of the fact that the last person investing will not get paid. In this case, every investor knowingly takes the risk of probability that next investor will invest. Hence it gets categorized under gambling. Gambling is a service where people invest their money knowing that most will lose, but some will get high return depending on probabilistic calculation. For example Just-Dice.com, PrimeDice.com, BitDice.me etc.

So, if you believe gambling is scam, then declared ponzis are as well. In that case, you should leave -ve trust on Stunna, Dooglus etc. as well. Otherwise, you should not leave -ve trust on declared ponzis.

Of course, if they are cheating, i.e. not giving the promised return, then it is a different story, e.g. Dicebitco.in, dice.ninja etc.