Topic: SatoshiDICE.com - The World's Most Popular Bitcoin Game - page 195. (Read 495688 times)

+1

Can we get a confirmation on this? Not sure whether this is real or if that account was compromised.

Holy shit..

Satoshi Dice stock will drop in 3..2. Oh wait it already has gone down. Wow.

I'm pretty confident this is legit unless it is SatoshiDICE_PR's resignation letter.

Evoorhees has confirmed SD_PR is the official acc, you could try asking him on skype/irc to be sure.

Is there an announcement from a more legitimate member about this?  Call me crazy but I'm not going to believe every word of a newbie member with 4 posts

In other words, just send to address.

SD should have never being associated with Erik Voorhess and should have just being a bunch of BTC addresses.

Dear Community,

Beginning tomorrow, Thursday May 16, SatoshiDice.com will close to US players and all US-based IP’s will be blocked from the website. You will also see a new terms of service agreement to which you must
agree if you wish to play.

This decision was made on the basis of extensive legal counsel. The best way to limit legal risk for SatoshiDice, and thereby protect its stakeholders, is to block US players.

Note that this decision does not mean that online gambling is illegal in the US, nor does it mean that Bitcoin gaming is illegal. However, the courts have not been clear on the definition of gambling, nor
on what would constitute “legitimate gaming,” nor are jurisdictions properly defined, and thus this is a proactive measure to protect those involved in the project.

Further, this decision is not being made because of any citation or notice from any government agency, whatsoever. This is not, in any way, related to the recent Gox/Dwolla court order issue. Again, it is a proactive measure, based on the prudent legal guidance of our trusted lawyers.

We believe this is a wise move for the site to perpetuate in the long term. 

Further, to clarify, SatoshiDice is hosted in Netherlands, Iceland, and Ireland, and has never utilized US currency or engaged with the US banking system whatsoever. 
-SD

yeah, and this is how things work. If I explain something to you in a detailed level and you're still not sure about it, I will tell you my references and you can check by your own. Books and scientific publications work this way for a long long time, and now Wikipedia too.

You can lose your winnings...

I don't provide the wikipedia page as proof, but as a source of proofs; it contains many proofs.  The packet of Doritos, less so.

You can read the wikipedia page and judge whether the proofs are valid or not for yourself.

In short,

1/3 = 0.333...
3 * 1/3 = 0.999...
so 3/3 = 1 = 0.999...

But it goes into much more detail than that.

Ah right, so you fall under the category of people who when trying to justify something will say ...
"He knows - go ask him - and he might tell you someone who knows - who might have a link to something ... somewhere ... that might be reliable" ...

Meanwhile - I'll go change that page and make it say 2 = 1 ...

If you're interested in the mathematics behind division by zero, I could introduce you to the point at infinity. It turns out if you throw away some axioms and assume both infinities as one and the same, you can divide by zero.

Back on topic, you must understand that infinity does not necessarily do what you say it does. For example, the sequence 1, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125, ... is infinitely long, but will never reach −1. Similarly, given infinite time and money neither you nor SatoshiDice can possibly go broke. And finally, one clearly cannot have an infinite number of infinitely long losing streaks—in fact, one cannot even have one infinitely long losing streaks. There is no longest losing streak, as for each losing streak there will be a longer one, but there are also clearly no infinite losing streaks.

There are certain weird things that happen with infinity. For example, for every time one plays there is a corresponding time one loses. But simultaneously for every time one plays there is also a corresponding time one wins. Anything more complex is set theory.

Also: pi is not necessarily normal, although it is suspected to be such. If pi is not normal, it likely (but not certainly) does not contain many works of Shakespeare.

Given infinite time, both you and Satoshidice will go broke, and you will also have an infinite number of infinitely long losing streaks, due to the nature of infinity. This is why you can't divide by zero, because then you can make any statement you like; when 1/x is simultaneously -infinity and +infinity at zero, I can prove that dogs are cats.  The number pi does actually contain Shakespeare's complete works and every child porn image that will be created, but when infinity is applied to time, it makes no sense, as there is no reason to assume time is infinite when our the laws of our universe have only existed for 14 gigayears.

So, another wikipedia negativist. I have to disagree with you as the vast majority of the articles have references where you can check the information, including that one in question. Studies have been conducted about the reliability of Wikipedia and these informations can be checked here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia

don't worry, this article also have references where you can check the information.

Irrelevant of if it is true or not, providing a wikipedia link as a proof is no better than saying you read it on the back of a packet of Doritos ...

If you say "look there's someone who at the moment agrees with me" yep fine.
As long as you consider it an explanation, and not a proof, fine

I decided to make 1 more bet of 0.5BTC and I won double this time lol. It seems Satoshi likes giving me free money. I figure as long as I bet my winnings I cant lose.  

And that's where I disagree.

Given finite time there's a possibility you'll lose every 50/50 bet you make.

Given infinite time (so long as you keep playing regularly) there's no possibility that you'll lose every 50/50 bet you make, due to the nature of infinity.

It's the same as how 0.999 recurring is equal to 1.  It's not close, it's equal.  Given a finite number of 9's on the end it's a little less than 1.  But given an infinite number of 9's, it's equal to 1.  Can we agree on that bit?  (Edit: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999...)

I disagree.  The case where you have infinite time, infinite money and no house limit is in fact the ONLY time you're guaranteed that martingale betting will work for you.  As you say, the probability of N losses in a row is 1/2^N.  As N tends to infinity, 1/2^N tends to zero, meaning in the limit there is zero chance of losing forever.

Unfortunately in Bitcoinland nobody has infinite money because there's a hard limit of 21 million BTC.  So even if we figure out immortality, and convince Erik to remove the house limit, we're still screwed.


Right.  It's even very likely if you live in part of the world where coins don't exist (0 heads out of 0 flips == every flip landed heads.  And tails).  But "in your lifetime" usually implies less than infinite time.


Now you're scaring me.  Talking about probabilities and 'voodoo' in the same post?  Never bet more than you can afford to lose...

An 8 streak loss was the most I lost before this 11 streak one. This is after months of playing.