There was lottocoin (dead?), casinocoin (still around?), and chancecoin (got noticed recently and went up).
I don't fully understand them, but doesn't look much fun to me.
I mean, you're not watching paint dry, you're just waiting for the next block, but still. (and ideally, you will wait for maturity as well, which is several confirmations later.)
Topic: What prevents casino "pre-rolling"? (Read 2347 times)
Client seeds will always be required. Either in the form of a transaction id from a deposit, or some user input. There might be a way, and that is to use a third party random number, like from random.org.
It's a lot easier to just ask it from the player and use that.
On a downloaded client, if it is open source, your client can generate the seed unpredictably and fairly. I think the same can be said of client-side javascript.
I vaguely recall an effort to make a bitcoin-based gambling network/"coin"/client a year or two ago. Anyone know of any related efforts?It's a lot easier to just ask it from the player and use that.
On a downloaded client, if it is open source, your client can generate the seed unpredictably and fairly. I think the same can be said of client-side javascript.
I'd guess the owner/op operates a platform in conjunction which acts as an exchange for BTC/LTC/DOGE/whatever for these GambleCoins. Transactions would be bets. Nonce comes from PoW mining and confirmations work "normally" to determine validity or previous blocks' bets.
I mean, sure, I could put up a service, but no one is going to pay me. Donate maybe, but as a "professional service"? The market is not yet big enough.
I just don't think this will work in any capacity in bitcoin gambling. The very act of certification requires trust in this 3rd party. How can we trust a third party to not be bribed by the operators?
disagree! just take a look at some members of bitcointalk and you will see that they are highly trusted.
I mean, sure, I could put up a service, but no one is going to pay me. Donate maybe, but as a "professional service"? The market is not yet big enough.
I just don't think this will work in any capacity in bitcoin gambling. The very act of certification requires trust in this 3rd party. How can we trust a third party to not be bribed by the operators?
I really hope that we can start a serious discussion with some more ideas if it makes sense to have a Provably Fair Police. I cant be of help, but as soon I will have my own btc casino online I will be a customer and will be willing to pay for it (Provably Fair Police service).
maybe a monthly or yearly fee as an operator and a fee for players who want to have a casino be checked if they were cheated by any operator.
I am a big fan of the Provably Fair option.
maybe a monthly or yearly fee as an operator and a fee for players who want to have a casino be checked if they were cheated by any operator.
I am a big fan of the Provably Fair option.
Who's going to pay us, when anyone can be the police for free? When a significant portion of players act like police while playing. Dicebitcoin got caught several times cheating, and the players did that on their own.
I mean, sure, I could put up a service, but no one is going to pay me. Donate maybe, but as a "professional service"? The market is not yet big enough.
Do I look like I'm joking? (Ok, sorry, maybe I might look like.) But jokes are half meant. You have enough volunteer Provably Fair Police operators all over.
I had thought about making my own mini group like you mentioned, last year, some time in 2013. We'll have to either think this through a bit, or there's a whole bunch of us all making independent audits of all concerned sites.
That's the beauty of this Provably Fair gaming movement. Sites have to show, using the same basic formula or a variant of it, how their games are fair for the players, and anyone and everyone can do verification.
So we could organize a group of people, but there will be others out there who will do this independently, and of course, all the media outlets will do their own research on new and successful game sites, just like what Forbes did for bitzino a long time ago.
I notice that there are several review sites already.
I had thought about making my own mini group like you mentioned, last year, some time in 2013. We'll have to either think this through a bit, or there's a whole bunch of us all making independent audits of all concerned sites.
That's the beauty of this Provably Fair gaming movement. Sites have to show, using the same basic formula or a variant of it, how their games are fair for the players, and anyone and everyone can do verification.
So we could organize a group of people, but there will be others out there who will do this independently, and of course, all the media outlets will do their own research on new and successful game sites, just like what Forbes did for bitzino a long time ago.
I notice that there are several review sites already.
I really hope that we can start a serious discussion with some more ideas if it makes sense to have a Provably Fair Police. I cant be of help, but as soon I will have my own btc casino online I will be a customer and will be willing to pay for it (Provably Fair Police service).
maybe a monthly or yearly fee as an operator and a fee for players who want to have a casino be checked if they were cheated by any operator.
I am a big fan of the Provably Fair option.
Do I look like I'm joking? (Ok, sorry, maybe I might look like.) But jokes are half meant. You have enough volunteer Provably Fair Police operators all over.
I had thought about making my own mini group like you mentioned, last year, some time in 2013. We'll have to either think this through a bit, or there's a whole bunch of us all making independent audits of all concerned sites.
That's the beauty of this Provably Fair gaming movement. Sites have to show, using the same basic formula or a variant of it, how their games are fair for the players, and anyone and everyone can do verification.
So we could organize a group of people, but there will be others out there who will do this independently, and of course, all the media outlets will do their own research on new and successful game sites, just like what Forbes did for bitzino a long time ago.
I notice that there are several review sites already.
I had thought about making my own mini group like you mentioned, last year, some time in 2013. We'll have to either think this through a bit, or there's a whole bunch of us all making independent audits of all concerned sites.
That's the beauty of this Provably Fair gaming movement. Sites have to show, using the same basic formula or a variant of it, how their games are fair for the players, and anyone and everyone can do verification.
So we could organize a group of people, but there will be others out there who will do this independently, and of course, all the media outlets will do their own research on new and successful game sites, just like what Forbes did for bitzino a long time ago.
I notice that there are several review sites already.
Hi elm. Shall I start recruiting? I will be Provably Fair Police Director General Dabs.
Hi Dabs
I am not joking. IMO it would be nice to have someone or a group who will check all btc gambling sites regarding their Provably Fair offering. also if a player is complaining against an operator that he is cheating.
with a Provably Fair Police a cheating operator will think twice before trying to cheat.
Hi elm. Shall I start recruiting? I will be Provably Fair Police Director General Dabs.
we need a Provably Fair Police
You should always change your client seed. except for that, verify your rolls.
Can a site do that automatically? I mean change the client seed.
The client seed is supposed to be set by the client (gambler), so that the bet results cannot be controlled by the gambling site.
If your notice your client seed getting changed automatically by the site, it is possibly a sign of cheating.
You should always change your client seed. except for that, verify your rolls.
Can a site do that automatically? I mean change the client seed.
Are you talking about Baccarat?
Yup basically!
You should always change your client seed. except for that, verify your rolls.
then the question i ask is why. if their server seed doenst change, changing your client seed does nothing other than to provide a psychological assurance that you are getting the "Most" random of random events. it certainly doesn't have any effect otherwise.
You should always change your client seed. except for that, verify your rolls.
how about a game like Casino war or something, but instead of playing the cards dealt (which could involve some sort of preshuffled trickery), the bettors bet on which one of the two sides will win.
Are you talking about Baccarat?
I'm conducting an experiment. It is my version of a purposely rigged game, but it is honest and fair (because the rules state how the winner(s) will be determined.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/provably-rigged-lottery-game-winner-gets-40-times-his-bet-806190
It is actually happening in real life where I am, except its a whole bunch of communities and they don't know all the bets (because there is no blockchain or leaderboard or anything). So I'm curious if anyone in this forum will participate.
how about a game like Casino war or something, but instead of playing the cards dealt (which could involve some sort of preshuffled trickery), the bettors bet on which one of the two sides will win. Could a game like this be done with server seed only? I'm guessing no, because just like dice, the house could pick a server seed based on users betting behavior, even if the better/user makes the decision on when to reset server seed. (altho the casino would be dumb to implement as this could be easy to exploit for the user, making it a vulnerable game for the casino)
I think this dynamic changes slightly tho once you introduce multiplayer to this. If you allow multiple players to bet on the outcome, some will wager one side whereas some will wager on the other side. The house has less of an incentive to use player betting behavior as something to try to exploit. Althought, I guess, it could just take in the total wagered over all players, and treat that as "one player" and base any exploity decisions on that as a whole. Again, not optimal for the house because it is vulnerable to being exploited, and random outcomes is probably a nash eq for this game as well.
In both cases, the risk is still there for the operator to play the game with an advantage, something that still plagues all the provably fair games today anyways.
How do you guys feel about this type of game (where users get to bet on the outcome, instead of betting on what they are initially dealt). Does that change the necessary inputs for provably fair (types of seeds needed, etc)
I think this dynamic changes slightly tho once you introduce multiplayer to this. If you allow multiple players to bet on the outcome, some will wager one side whereas some will wager on the other side. The house has less of an incentive to use player betting behavior as something to try to exploit. Althought, I guess, it could just take in the total wagered over all players, and treat that as "one player" and base any exploity decisions on that as a whole. Again, not optimal for the house because it is vulnerable to being exploited, and random outcomes is probably a nash eq for this game as well.
In both cases, the risk is still there for the operator to play the game with an advantage, something that still plagues all the provably fair games today anyways.
How do you guys feel about this type of game (where users get to bet on the outcome, instead of betting on what they are initially dealt). Does that change the necessary inputs for provably fair (types of seeds needed, etc)
I suspect that picking rolls randomly would be near optimal for the site, but am not sure.
Yeah, there is quite a simple proof that random rolls, or playing a random hand in rock-paper-scissors is in fact the nash. That is to say, it's the only non-vulnerable strategy to a player knowing how the site picks its moves.
Imagine a game of rock/paper/scissors where you play against the site.
The site needs to prove that it has picked its move before you play, by giving you the hash of its move (plus some junk so you can't reverse the hash), but doesn't need to use a client seed, since there's no "bad deal" the site can give you.
The site needs to prove that it has picked its move before you play, by giving you the hash of its move (plus some junk so you can't reverse the hash), but doesn't need to use a client seed, since there's no "bad deal" the site can give you.
So far, we have the following types:
1. rock paper scissors (lizard spock?)
2. raffle / lotto that has its own bankroll (not like mine, which was a player supplied pot.)
3. hi lo / left - right / pick something, same idea as #1 I guess.
The move could actually be derived from the "secret" or "junk" so it computes to a particular move using a different hash. (the secret is hashed with SHA256, but the move is calculated using HMAC-SHA512.)
Quote
I suspect that picking rolls randomly would be near optimal for the site, but am not sure.
That is probably the best thing for any site. You use less AI (it doesn't need to think), less CPU resources, just let it pick randomly.
I dont trust any site, just because they got backed by fans long ago, they will spread positive outlook on the casino and later take advantage of them when they dont expect or dont proove to do so, those are the true con artists.
True, but when someone had the chance to scam a 5-figure (in unit of btc) and didn't take it, it should be pretty safe to consider that person trustworthy.
He could be waiting for it to become 6-figure. That is how HYIP works.
But he gave the 5-figure sum back to its owners. That is not how HYIP works.
What I find interesting is that the dicebitco.in people gave back a high 4-figure sum (6 or 7k I think?), but still seem to be widely regarded as scammers. How many coins do you have to hold and return before you're considered trustworthy I wonder...
i'm trying to think of games which don't require a Client seed and still be provably fair. does anyone have any examples of those types of games?
Either single or multi player/realtime types?
Either single or multi player/realtime types?
Imagine a game of rock/paper/scissors where you play against the site.
The site needs to prove that it has picked its move before you play, by giving you the hash of its move (plus some junk so you can't reverse the hash), but doesn't need to use a client seed, since there's no "bad deal" the site can give you.
If the site can figure out your betting pattern, it can beat you, but that's not cheating - that's what you would expect any decent opponent to do.
You only need to use a client seed when the site isn't allowed to pick its move/roll/outcome.
It's conceivable that someone would make a hi/lo style dice game where the site deliberately tried to beat the player by analysing his playing style. So long as everyone knows that that's the game they're playing that's fair enough, and no client seed is needed; the site would publish a hash of its next roll before each bet, but not allow the user to affect the roll with a client seed.
It might be fun to play such a game - bet low stakes H, H, H, H then increase the stake and bet L, hoping to catch the site out.
I suspect that picking rolls randomly would be near optimal for the site, but am not sure.
Jump to: