y4x.com: BTC awarded on first block that has a bid - page 5.

BitcoinHoarder

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 103

Quote from: Nite69 on December 01, 2012, 04:25:38 PM

Quote from: BitcoinHoarder on December 01, 2012, 04:02:06 PM

Quote from: Nite69 on December 01, 2012, 03:28:55 PM

Quote from: BitcoinHoarder on December 01, 2012, 02:19:07 PM

Ok I'll run 0.01 for a few and see what happens.

#9 seemed to get some action, and you got some profit also, congrats! It was at 0.1 initial bid, thought (by accident?).

That was set at .1 and I had the next one at 0.01.

Ok, but the site said "initial bid 0.01000000 BTC" for both bids.

One thing; there seems to be some delay before the initial bid is seen on blockchain.info. I think it depends on when the payment reaches that site. AFAIK, you should be able to force some of the connections to the network; if so, you could assure you have direct connection to blockchain.info to get your payment in the list quickly. Not sure if this is possible, thought.

I am connected to blockchain.info for the broadcast. I actually see the 0.01 immediately (it's already there by time I click the link to check).

Nite69

sr. member

Activity: 477

Merit: 500

Quote from: BitcoinHoarder on December 01, 2012, 04:02:06 PM

Quote from: Nite69 on December 01, 2012, 03:28:55 PM

Quote from: BitcoinHoarder on December 01, 2012, 02:19:07 PM

Ok I'll run 0.01 for a few and see what happens.

#9 seemed to get some action, and you got some profit also, congrats! It was at 0.1 initial bid, thought (by accident?).

That was set at .1 and I had the next one at 0.01.

Ok, but the site said "initial bid 0.01000000 BTC" for both bids.

One thing; there seems to be some delay before the initial bid is seen on blockchain.info. I think it depends on when the payment reaches that site. AFAIK, you should be able to force some of the connections to the network; if so, you could assure you have direct connection to blockchain.info to get your payment in the list quickly. Not sure if this is possible, thought.

BitcoinHoarder

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 103

Quote from: Nite69 on December 01, 2012, 03:28:55 PM

Quote from: BitcoinHoarder on December 01, 2012, 02:19:07 PM

Ok I'll run 0.01 for a few and see what happens.

#9 seemed to get some action, and you got some profit also, congrats! It was at 0.1 initial bid, thought (by accident?).

That was set at .1 and I had the next one at 0.01. I wasn't home for the last two runs and everything appears good. The timing algorithm is that it runs five auctions that begin ten minutes after each other and then a four hour gap. That one was #9 and #10 so there is a four hour gap now (10 is evenly divisible by 5).

Nite69

sr. member

Activity: 477

Merit: 500

Quote from: BitcoinHoarder on December 01, 2012, 02:19:07 PM

Ok I'll run 0.01 for a few and see what happens.

#9 seemed to get some action, and you got some profit also, congrats! It was at 0.1 initial bid, thought (by accident?).

BitcoinHoarder

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 103

Ok I'll run 0.01 for a few and see what happens.

Yuhfhrh

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Nite69 on December 01, 2012, 10:58:51 AM

Ok, sounds good. Some thought how possibly get more traffic to your site:

1. Tweet account with alarms some time before next game starts (maybe worthless, if you have regular times)
2. Some http code to be shared so others could include your game to their site.

When I think the psycology behind my own participance on the game, I think the initial prize could be smaller. With 0.1 initial bid, I hesitated participating to the game. When someone bidded 0.2, I ended up stopping, because I was afraid I could lose much.

With 0.001 or 0.01 bids, I could play that just for fun. Now the cost is a bit too big (~1€). Also with lower initial bid, the users who has only free BTC they have collected by watching youtube videos, could also play.

I think in the end it would not drop the income; when there are enought players, the bid will rise just as high as the players have guts to rise it.

One possibility to test good initial bid is just try several amounts. First game 0.1, next 0.01 etc?

Of course, these are just one player's thoughts..

Agreed

Nite69

sr. member

Activity: 477

Merit: 500

One more thing; you should warn not to use web wallets, such as Easywallet.org or instawallet.org. They do not necessary have correct sending address.

Nite69

sr. member

Activity: 477

Merit: 500

Ok, sounds good. Some thought how possibly get more traffic to your site:

1. Tweet account with alarms some time before next game starts (maybe worthless, if you have regular times)
2. Some http code to be shared so others could include your game to their site.

When I think the psycology behind my own participance on the game, I think the initial prize could be smaller. With 0.1 initial bid, I hesitated participating to the game. When someone bidded 0.2, I ended up stopping, because I was afraid I could lose much.

With 0.001 or 0.01 bids, I could play that just for fun. Now the cost is a bit too big (~1€). Also with lower initial bid, the users who has only free BTC they have collected by watching youtube videos, could also play.

I think in the end it would not drop the income; when there are enought players, the bid will rise just as high as the players have guts to rise it.

One possibility to test good initial bid is just try several amounts. First game 0.1, next 0.01 etc?

Of course, these are just one player's thoughts..

BitcoinHoarder

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 103

Quote from: Nite69 on December 01, 2012, 09:57:49 AM

Quote from: dooglus on December 01, 2012, 12:36:59 AM

It is easier to win when you're the only one playing... Wink

That's very true.. maybe there should be some intelligency to optimize game at times when there is more players?
For example, normally at regular intervals, but if there is more than 1 player, then start next immediately?

The algorithm currently calls for beginning games everyday at 2am and 2pm UTC/GMT. When a game ends another begins 10 minutes later for a total of 4 games. There is 2 rounds of games, 8 total games in a day. If the game gets players then those parameters will be tweaked to allow for more games.

EDIT: A couple minor changes to how return addresses are detected. We shouldn't have any problems sending to part of a multi-address transaction. Also, I am waiting for more confirmations because I want people to be able to look back and confirm that the correct winner was determined. So even though blockchain.info shows the winner confirmed the payout will not occur until more confirmations have come in.

Nite69

sr. member

Activity: 477

Merit: 500

Quote from: dooglus on December 01, 2012, 12:36:59 AM

It is easier to win when you're the only one playing... Wink

That's very true.. maybe there should be some intelligency to optimize game at times when there is more players?
For example, normally at regular intervals, but if there is more than 1 player, then start next immediately?

Nite69

sr. member

Activity: 477

Merit: 500

some competition please! I'm getting free bitcoins!

Nite69

sr. member

Activity: 477

Merit: 500

Using these tagged addresses might not be a good idea ;-)

http://blockchain.info/address/1K9Wv6xRKE5HdnK2jQ1W1d2Tza3iSwQ8gB

BitcoinHoarder

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 103

Quote from: ThePok on November 30, 2012, 07:19:23 PM

OK its not so cool after all....big miners could easily cheat ;/

I actually didn't think that was cheating.. part of playing the game is while the window is open you should mine with your ASICs so you can control the next block Wink

BitcoinHoarder

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 103

Quote from: dooglus on December 01, 2012, 12:36:59 AM

Edit: the obvious solution is to wait for 6 confirmations before paying out the winner. Reorgs almost never rewrite that much history. Can your script handle starting a new game while the previous one is still awaiting confirmations to be sure you got the correct winner and prize amount?

I currently have it written that 1 confirmation is enough, so yes, orphaned blocks should be considered. However, the rules do not state that it's the first block that survives the main chain, it's just the first block my server gets its hands on. So a block is a block, even if it is eventually orphaned. My thought for now is to leave it with 1 confirmation.

dooglus

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1333

Quote from: BitcoinHoarder on November 30, 2012, 11:29:39 PM

Nice win! Yea playing a one man game though... Grin

It is easier to win when you're the only one playing... Wink

Have you considered what happens in the event of a blockchain reorganisation? It's not unheard of for some blocks that have been found to be replaced by completely different blocks with different sets of transactions.

See http://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks for a list of when this has happened. It happens on a daily basis, and can easily change the result of your game. History gets rewritten and the big payment that you thought hadn't made it into the first block now is in the first block...

Edit: the obvious solution is to wait for 6 confirmations before paying out the winner. Reorgs almost never rewrite that much history. Can your script handle starting a new game while the previous one is still awaiting confirmations to be sure you got the correct winner and prize amount?

BitcoinHoarder

full member

Activity: 146

Merit: 103

Nice win! Yea playing a one man game though... Grin

I will check the polling script for how it is determining the return address. I admit its a protocol that can leave you doing research

I have thought about how to do continuous games considering its automated... I think what I'm getting to is that when a game is closed the system sets the next one to start five minutes later. That way a game can safely run on and still be continuous.

dooglus

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1333

Quote from: dooglus on November 30, 2012, 09:14:46 PM

In other news, I won!

I just noticed that you didn't pay the winnings to the address that I sent my bid from, you paid it to the address that the change from my bid went to.

In general that might be a dangerous way to do it. You can't be sure what's change and what is a payment to someone else in the same transaction.

Suppose I sent my bid to you and paid a debt to a friend in the same transaction. Then my transaction would have 3 outputs and you couldn't tell which was my friend's address and which was my change address.

It's better to pay the winnings to any one of the addresses in the inputs of my winning bid transaction.

My bid:

Your payment to me:

dooglus

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1333

Quote from: ThePok on November 30, 2012, 07:19:23 PM

OK its not so cool after all....big miners could easily cheat ;/

Interesting. I guess they could. Just exclude any transaction of higher value to the same address.

I don't see a way around that, either.

In other news, I won!

Not that anyone else was playing mind you...

ThePok

full member

Activity: 131

Merit: 100

This is the next big thing after SatohsiDice!!

EDIT

OK its not so cool after all....big miners could easily cheat ;/

dooglus

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1333

I've been offline since my last post and missed the first 3 games. Now I see I have a 2 hour wait for the next game. I wonder if you could maybe run the games continuously just by putting in a very small initial bid for the times you wouldn't usually run a game.

You could have on your site a list of the next 10 games and their corresponding initial bid sizes so people can wait for the upcoming 'big' 0.1 seeded game if they like, or play right now in the 0.001 seeded game. You could run a 0.001 game every block and it would only cost you about $2 per day to do, assuming you lost every time.

A problem with doing it that way is you can't tell people how long until the next 0.1 BTC game since it depends on how long it takes for the current game(s) to play out.

Topic: y4x.com: BTC awarded on first block that has a bid - page 5. (Read 13044 times)