1010900+ entries in 0.789s
mircea_popescu: lol i re-read
the list, seems
to me unlikely he had any shares.
mircea_popescu: those people are significantly more on
the ball
than i am
mircea_popescu: there's a big ass independent audit
thread in btctalk, want me
to dig it ?
mircea_popescu: OneEyed im not an expert on
the entire
thing
tbh, i just list em.
OneEyed: I
thought *they* payed it :)
OneEyed: But ok,
the .0005 is deduced
OneEyed: I should win almost every
time (97.9% of
the
time)
mircea_popescu: and it substracts 0.0005 in all cases
topay miner fees
OneEyed: to
the 97.9% win address, with an expected gain of 1.004x when I win
OneEyed: Either I'm doing something wrong with SatoshiDice, or something is wrong on
their side…
GamblingMan: Great. I'm expecting your
test
to return somewhere in
the 45-55% range.
OneEyed: Shit,
transactions not accepted
to memory pool, sucker, after some of
them. I'll have
to wait a bit
to get 100 of
them
GamblingMan: What is
the stated return on
the website for
that address?
OneEyed: Let's do
this with 100 x 0.001 runs from 1B7xUkzFcwsaviJQL1XfRJazj4zXC764i7
OneEyed: So you're
talking about
trying it with 1dice9wVtrKZTBbAZqz1XiTmboYyvpD3t?
GamblingMan: Run a
test, publish it, and prepare
to be flamed.
GamblingMan: I actually returned an average of 48%
through all of my
testing...
GamblingMan: If you use
the address with
the highest odds.
GamblingMan: Stating odds
that are misleading and
then claiming
they're guidelines, is what makes me use
the word scammer.
OneEyed: Ohhh,
the min bet is 0.001, I
thought it was 0.01, so
the
test could be done with 500 send for .75 BTC
GamblingMan: When in fact
their guidelines are 100% inflated.
GamblingMan: I was
told
that
the stated odds "are just guidelines"
GamblingMan: OneEyed: I
tried once. Everyone bashed me and reacted like people did in here when I mentioned it.
OneEyed: GamblingMan: you should publish your results
then, people would be interested in
that.
GamblingMan: That is why I figured I'd invest with
them.... But
then
the claimed dividend payment was less
than 1/3 of what I was expecting after
talking
to mircea.
GamblingMan: Their best claimed return address actuall returns less
than 48% consistently in my
tests
that were performed over a several week period.
OneEyed: Why would I play a game where
the odds are against me,
GamblingMan: If you want
to see for yourself
that SD is scamming, go ahead and
test.
GamblingMan: OneEyed: I've already performed several
tests. I know what
the result will be.
GamblingMan: Their claimed returns for shareholders match
their claimed returns
to users.
OneEyed: GamblingMan: if you send me what is needed
to play 100
transactions, I'll do it (one line script) and you'll be able
to observe
the results
GamblingMan: Satoshi Dice is a
terrible site
to use,
terrible company
to invest in, and it is listed on a
terrible exchange.
GamblingMan: copumpkin: Only if
the casino claimed
they repaid 98% and I lost 50% consistently.
copumpkin: so you're seriously
telling me "I went
to a casino and played for days, and I lost money! mommy mommy
they're scamming"
OneEyed: copumpkin: what do you mean?
They work from
the memory pool, since
they work in 0-confirmation mode
OneEyed: copumpkin: don't
they know
the random numbers in advance?
GamblingMan: Show me 1 independent
test
that ever gives an above average return with more
than 100 bets in
the sample.
OneEyed: copumpkin:
they could inject
their own
transcations at appropriate places
copumpkin: GamblingMan: nope, but isn't it verifiable on
the blockchain?
they don't provide
their own randomness
OneEyed: GamblingMan: how are
they scamming users? Or shareholders?
GamblingMan: copumpkin: Have you ever made 100 best on SD and seen what
the actual vs. claimed return is?
midnightmagic: I'm going
to go away now. Feel free
to get in
the last word. Or
two.
GamblingMan: Seems like Satoshi Dice got
tired of scamming users and decided
to go for shareholders.
GamblingMan: Turns out
that was a horrible financial decision.
OneEyed: GamblingMan: you have everything you need
to compute
the expected returns yourself, did you do it?
jcpham: itake offense
to
the accusation
midnightmagic: GamblingMan: SatoshiDice is a distributed denial of service attack
that
the creators have convinced users
to do
to
themselves, while stealing
their money, and forcing
the users
themselves
to bloat
their own blockchain .dat files.
They are exploiting a human cognitive bias
to do so, and are
therefore evil.
GamblingMan: Not sure why I
thought it wasn't a scam, being listed on
the Mpex
OneEyed: Ok, so eating a big plate of French fries makes you more efficient while you're digesting
than eating a salad, right? Can't believe
this :)
GamblingMan: They're flooding
the market with shares and cutting
the hell out of
the dividend.
GamblingMan: Why did
the dividend fall
to below
that of most high yielding assets on
the NYSE?
midnightmagic: OneEyed: I'm saying fats crush appetites better
than carbs do, and
that comparison is a good example of a false analogy.
GamblingMan: Is
the site dying, was it misrepresented, did
the volume of bets drop significantly?
GamblingMan: I want
to hear someone's opinion on what happened.
GamblingMan: Lets free for all
talk about Satoshi Dice and how
the dividend yesterday sucked ass.
OneEyed: midnightmagic: are you saying
that eating fat food compared
to a light meal does not divert blood for digestion?
midnightmagic: GamblingMan: Didn't you read what
the channel founder said? Free-for-all in here.. lol
midnightmagic: OneEyed: Also not
true, as
the insulin spike of even complex carbs is very very bad for you.
GamblingMan: So nobody wants
to
talk about assets in here?
OneEyed: midnightmagic: on
the long
term, yes, not while you're digesting
midnightmagic: OneEyed:
That's not a fact. Fats it
turns out may be better for humans, including human brains.
OneEyed: Smoovious: nor eat fat food,
they make you
think slower because more blood is diverted
to
the stomach, and less
to
the brain (true fact)
OneEyed: Smoovious: you wrote "get my best". So I guess you never stay late with friends either, because you could be
tired.
OneEyed: You could delay
the chemo until your next vacation for example, it's not like you would die
tomorrow. Why should it care
that you're
trying
to buy 5 more years of life in 15 years?
GamblingMan: I bought some because mircea_popescu claimed it was
the highest paying asset on
the GLBSE, but it looks like it is actually
the lowest....
OneEyed: Smoovious: yeah, so if you are
tired because of
the chemo you're
taking
to fight your cancer, you're fucking with your employer, and he should get rid of you, right?
GamblingMan: Looks like
the dividend is less
than 6% a year!
OneEyed: Smoovious: but would for example a librarian endanger other people by having drunk a little
too much, or should he be helped
to avoid
that it happens again?
GamblingMan: I bought some shares
thinking it would pay a decent dividend...
GamblingMan: What's up with
the Satoshi Dice dividend yesterday?
OneEyed: Smoovious: of course, if it endangers yourself or other people, I can get
that!
OneEyed: Here, it is written "under
the influence of intoxicating liquor"
OneEyed: (does drinking
two glasses of wine make you intoxicated and unable
to
teach? - depend on
the person I guess)
OneEyed: By "drunk" I mean "intoxicated", not "so drunk
that
they vomit all over
the place"
OneEyed: Smoovious: I've seen drunk people be very good
teachers, at least in conferences :)
OneEyed: I'm not saying
that's a reasonable plan, 5 strikes also seem a lot
to me. But you should
try
to put yourself into other people shoes before judging. Do you really
think
the
teacher unions would battle
to obtain such a
text just for free, out of
the blue, without any discussion, just because union
teachers get drunk all
the
time maybe?
femtotube: what
the going price for 1 Mh/s now days?
OneEyed: Smoovious: sure, as people who get depressed,
they can just work
this out
themselves, no need for help,
that's not a disease
OneEyed: Smoovious:
this acknowledges it as a disease,
that can be cured, but is not easy
to. I guess if
the impregnated person was at risk of harming students in any way,
then other
texts and sanctions would apply.
midnightmagic: OneEyed: I found pirateat40 saying
that in my logs. It was on #btcst, 2012, 08/21, around 14:55:38 pacific
time.
OneEyed: Smoovious: you're realizing
that posting
this out of context and without any link makes it profundly ininteresting? Not
that
there is much discussion here.
midnightmagic: That, and
the inertia of how difficult I'd made reconstructing my offline wallet.
midnightmagic: Smoovious: In my case, I chose not
to participate at all, as sticking
to my Grand Plan was more important
to me.
OneEyed: midnightmagic: sure, people can be lying, maybe he didn't write
that, you can never be certain if you haven't witnessed it yourself
OneEyed: (I'm
trying
to get
thr gith link)
midnightmagic: Smoovious: For example, hedging against it in direct proportion
to your personal certainty.
midnightmagic: Smoovious: In reality, people should have been more cognisant of
the risks: you can't "assume it was" as
though you are certain. You just have
to evaluate
the risk and behave accordingly.
OneEyed: midnightmagic: you could find it on
the forum, I'm not sure I would be able
to find it in a reasonable
time, but you should look for yourself,
try "Trendon Shavers" "DBA" "English" if
the forum software lets you do
that