Topic: Review of S.DICE - page 5. (Read 12285 times)
What was your logic behind an S.DICE crash?
by selling it
I'm shorting S.DICE 
You sure about that with the favourable Matonis write-up in Forbes?I was just thinking I'd bought just in time. Thanks for your timely nicely timed response Erik, btw to my questions
I'm shorting S.DICE
Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?
Some other time on a more appropriate thead and board. And after I've brushed up on some tech and spent more effort understanding more precisely the current state of things. Current magnitude of some of the numbers, and studied some recent growth charts some more. Thx for your patience.
I would be interested in reading this when you get to it. A pm with link to thread at that point in time would be great.
Doh! I'm really on the hook now
I'm tied up with non-computer projects this week and need to do a week of real work the week following. I planned to take some time and put some real study into things once the ASIC fiasco had calmed and produced some more clarity...partially to decide if I wish to own one. As a side effect of that, I hoped to be able to elaborate on my conjectures about the possible futures of Bitcoin. I don't think I have any extra-ordinary insights into Bitcoin and my grasp of the technical aspects is exceeded by many in the community, but I'll try to remember to PM you (or ping at least ping this thread) if/when I produce anything I feel may be vaguely worth reading. Or if I see someone else capturing what I feel to be particularly comprehensive and well written concepts which mirror my own thoughts.
Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?
Some other time on a more appropriate thead and board. And after I've brushed up on some tech and spent more effort understanding more precisely the current state of things. Current magnitude of some of the numbers, and studied some recent growth charts some more. Thx for your patience.
I would be interested in reading this when you get to it. A pm with link to thread at that point in time would be great.
For a preview of this look at http://feedzebirds.com which is one of the major reasons not to invest in sdice.
There are some exciting plans for FZB as well, though indeed it has suffered from some neglect over the past few months. The FZB IPO was for 30% equity and only cost about $12k. S.DICE was for 10% and cost FAR more. I think the cost-to-potential return on both are very good, but then again I know the inside information on both.
Expect a renaissance of FZB within 2-3 months.
I'm assuming you know the mystery SD 90% holder
Erik owns at least some of that 90%, and I'd wager he owns a substantial amount. Which is good, entrepreneurs should be rewarded when they succeed
But seeing as you brought it up I've got a few ifs lined up (none of which am I assuming to be true): If Erik owns a substantial amount, let's say he is the majority stakeholder and everyone else is coming along for the ride, if he is is also SD's main 'technical staff' whilst largely occupied with let's say BitInstant projects, is it possible that the SD project, which is doing just fine with minimal intervention, thank you very much, would not get the same attention to take advantage of its position today as it might were it the passion of someone who wanted it to bring him fame and fortune (or to sell out for maximum return)?
I am no VC and I am not claiming rights to know everything about the business, nor even am I saying Erik is obliged to answer at all, but the principle of investing in the person as well as the business counts for me and even if nothing is forthcoming I don't think it is unreasonable to make a request forsome kind of broad statement of what is planned for SD.
You have great points, thoughtfan.
Is it possible that another person could run the site better than me, and make it even more successful? Absolutely. If that person reads this, please contact me, because it'll likely be a win for you, a win for me, and a win for the shareholders. But, I think I've done reasonably well turning this site into the most popular bitcoin game in the universe, no?
Promoting/managing it doesn't take a huge amount of time, but yes I'm spread across a number of Bitcoin projects (and what better way to spend my time... this stuff is so damn cool)
The plans for SD are fairly simple and straightforward.
1) Continue promoting Bitcoin around the world and working to bring about the global monetary revolution. SD is obviously a huge benefactor of base level Bitcoin adoption, and my passion and loyalty will always be first and foremost with promoting the Bitcoin system itself.
2) Maintain the site securely, actively monitor potential exploits, review findings with people smarter than me, etc. This is always top priority and we've done a damn good job so far I think.
3) Continue to promote through the channels I've used. I won't go into details here.
4) Continue developing and polishing the desktop and Android apps
5) Find excellent partnerships (the blockchain.info integration is a prime example)
6) Watch for and seek out those who could take the site to the next level (this gets back to your prime point, thoughtfan)
Thanks for the good question!
Still at a discount on bitfunder. lowest ask there is 0.0044440 currently
https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.SDICE
https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.SDICE
Need someone to decide that playing market maker would be fun.
Between BitFunder btct.co and MPEX I am sure one could find some good arbitrage opportunities.
One point I forget to mention : I do trades free of charge. You can trade your S.DICE for GSDPT or your GSDPT for S.DICE 1:1. I also offer to liquidate the bond on MPex for a 1:1 trade between the amount liquidated by selling the bond and the amount you will receive.
I've been kicking the idea around. DeaDTerra seems pretty busy. I doubt that he'd like to be the conduit for such a thing.
What really makes me pause is that trades on MPEX are absolute and final. I don't trust any other exchange enough to be willing to tie up much capital or effort in an arbitrage bot, because I have a feeling that I'd get hung out to dry in a rollback sooner or later. That said, if some exchange is willing to start GPG-signing account listings or trade notifications, and they demonstrate a lasting commitment to them, I'll do it.
In other words, if you do the probability (some other math whiz can solve this if they feel particularly magnanimous) that SD will exhaust its RE's due to bad luck in the dice game and cease being a going concern then it reveals that solvency risk just plummeted massively causing an increase in the expected discounted future cash flows.
Think that's largely irrelevant anyway - as if they have some bad luck then the max size of bets would just get decreased. So the real Risk of Ruin is (and always has) been very near zero.
Larger cash reserves DOEs, however, allow increasing max bets OR maintaining current limits through a longer run of bad luck (both of which tend to increase cash-flow and hence profit) - but that has nothing like the impact it would have had if the max bets had been fixed in stone and there were a real risk of ruin.
Looks like it broke past 48 last night over on mpex
yep. lowest ask: 0.00484562
I wonder how much havelock has "stored" for future IPOs on havelock.
Still at a discount on bitfunder. lowest ask there is 0.0044440 currently
https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.SDICE
Looks like it broke past 48 last night over on mpex
yep. lowest ask: 0.00484562
I wonder how much havelock has "stored" for future IPOs on havelock.
In a nutshell, that's about the size of it.
It's a bit more complex than that of course. Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies. But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.
To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal. Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.
There are huge difference between USD and BTC and also between the Banking Cartel that runs the Dollar and a potentially small Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin network will always be open for anyone who has the resources to join. The fate of the USD is loss of trust and hence evaporation. I don't quite see how Bitcoin would follow here. Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?
Some other time on a more appropriate thead and board. And after I've brushed up on some tech and spent more effort understanding more precisely the current state of things. Current magnitude of some of the numbers, and studied some recent growth charts some more. Thx for your patience.
of course... looking forward to it.
I'm assuming you know the mystery SD 90% holder
Erik owns at least some of that 90%, and I'd wager he owns a substantial amount. Which is good, entrepreneurs should be rewarded when they succeed
But seeing as you brought it up I've got a few ifs lined up (none of which am I assuming to be true): If Erik owns a substantial amount, let's say he is the majority stakeholder and everyone else is coming along for the ride, if he is is also SD's main 'technical staff' whilst largely occupied with let's say BitInstant projects, is it possible that the SD project, which is doing just fine with minimal intervention, thank you very much, would not get the same attention to take advantage of its position today as it might were it the passion of someone who wanted it to bring him fame and fortune (or to sell out for maximum return)?
I am no VC and I am not claiming rights to know everything about the business, nor even am I saying Erik is obliged to answer at all, but the principle of investing in the person as well as the business counts for me and even if nothing is forthcoming I don't think it is unreasonable to make a request forsome kind of broad statement of what is planned for SD.
For a preview of this look at http://feedzebirds.com which is one of the major reasons not to invest in sdice.
In a nutshell, that's about the size of it.
It's a bit more complex than that of course. Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies. But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.
To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal. Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.
There are huge difference between USD and BTC and also between the Banking Cartel that runs the Dollar and a potentially small Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin network will always be open for anyone who has the resources to join. The fate of the USD is loss of trust and hence evaporation. I don't quite see how Bitcoin would follow here. Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?
Some other time on a more appropriate thead and board. And after I've brushed up on some tech and spent more effort understanding more precisely the current state of things. Current magnitude of some of the numbers, and studied some recent growth charts some more. Thx for your patience.
Blockchain bloat will have to be dealt with at some point anyway. SDICE is just accellerating this a bit. It was clear a long time ago that the "p2p nature" (as in: every customer runs a node) of Bitcoin was going to be "reduced".
Ya, this has significantly shifted my interest in the Bitcoin implementation of 'crypto-accounting systems'. My interest is still high of course, but it is weighted more toward seeking personal profits than it was, and analyzing the system as a general study for future independent efforts vs. hoping that evolutionary developments of Bitcoin proper hold much hope as leverage toward balancing the imbalances in our mainstream monetary solutions. So it goes.
If I parsed this correctly you said something like: "Due to this I don't think bitcoin can save the world any more but still make me rich"?
In a nutshell, that's about the size of it.
It's a bit more complex than that of course. Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies. But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.
To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal. Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.
There are huge difference between USD and BTC and also between the Banking Cartel that runs the Dollar and a potentially small Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin network will always be open for anyone who has the resources to join. The fate of the USD is loss of trust and hence evaporation. I don't quite see how Bitcoin would follow here. Care to elaborate or point me to a post/thread where you or someone else has done this?
Blockchain bloat will have to be dealt with at some point anyway. SDICE is just accellerating this a bit. It was clear a long time ago that the "p2p nature" (as in: every customer runs a node) of Bitcoin was going to be "reduced".
Ya, this has significantly shifted my interest in the Bitcoin implementation of 'crypto-accounting systems'. My interest is still high of course, but it is weighted more toward seeking personal profits than it was, and analyzing the system as a general study for future independent efforts vs. hoping that evolutionary developments of Bitcoin proper hold much hope as leverage toward balancing the imbalances in our mainstream monetary solutions. So it goes.
If I parsed this correctly you said something like: "Due to this I don't think bitcoin can save the world any more but still make me rich"?
In a nutshell, that's about the size of it.
It's a bit more complex than that of course. Bitcoin can still contribute much more than the enormous contribution it already has in an effort towards proving the viability of alternatives to modern fiat currencies. But on it's current trajectory Bitcoin is more-or-less destined for the same fate as the USD, and in my opinion, headed that way even faster than the USD when Brenton Woods is taken as a starting point.
To clarify, the 'fate' I mentioned is monopolization by parties who don't have the interests of the public at large as a primary goal. Not that this was ever fully the case with the USD, but it has served surprisingly well over a fair period of time as a vehicle upon which the bulk of the population realized significant benefit by it's use and/because had some pretty decent management over much of it's lifespan.
I'm assuming you know the mystery SD 90% holder
Erik owns at least some of that 90%, and I'd wager he owns a substantial amount. Which is good, entrepreneurs should be rewarded when they succeed
But seeing as you brought it up I've got a few ifs lined up (none of which am I assuming to be true): If Erik owns a substantial amount, let's say he is the majority stakeholder and everyone else is coming along for the ride, if he is is also SD's main 'technical staff' whilst largely occupied with let's say BitInstant projects, is it possible that the SD project, which is doing just fine with minimal intervention, thank you very much, would not get the same attention to take advantage of its position today as it might were it the passion of someone who wanted it to bring him fame and fortune (or to sell out for maximum return)?
I am no VC and I am not claiming rights to know everything about the business, nor even am I saying Erik is obliged to answer at all, but the principle of investing in the person as well as the business counts for me and even if nothing is forthcoming I don't think it is unreasonable to make a request forsome kind of broad statement of what is planned for SD.
Jump to: