I got the stats from statbrain. It gets the data from multiple sources including Alexia. Unless you subscribe to Alexia it will not show traffic numbers.

The reason the domain name his site uses matters is because it's an indication of the financial investment that has gone into a site. A domain with a hyphen in the middle of the keywords is low quality.

So of course the domain a site has gives information about whether or not something is likely to be a scam. A site at www.dice.com automatically has more credibility than a site at just-dice.com if no other information is known about it.

Yup, sounds like an idiot.

So I don't expect you to understand this, because you're apparently advancing these "arguments" in earnest. Such arguments reduce your opinion, not improve it. Because you sound like an idiot.

OK let's go just by the numbers. Let's say you're right and the traffic numbers are not entirely accurate. Let's say he has triple the traffic those numbers say. That puts his site at 150,000 total unique and repeat visitors having placed 210 bets per minute per visitor. 3 bets a second per visitor.

That doesn't seem to leave much time for the people in the chat room to chat or people to deposit or cash out. Maybe Skynet has a terrible gambling problem and likes to shoot dice.

He already said that when he started the site he wasn't expecting as much interest in it as it has had.

Juk

I don't know if you've ever visited Just-Dice. It's a single page, which interacts with the use using node.js' socket.io package.

I'm surprised the bounce rate isn't much closer to 100%, since there aren't really any other "pages" other than a couple of boring plain-text stats pages, like https://just-dice.com/biggest.txt for instance.

Speaking of which, did you see that page recently?

Our biggest player, LiKaShing, who I gave the userid 1337, lost 2,190 BTC to the site yesterday in a frantic couple of hours' play.

Those poor investors, eh? Someone should save them.

Now of course you're going to say that that was me losing, that I'm giving back some of the coins I stole because you're on to my little scam. But that's the problem with paranoia; everything that happens can be viewed as further evidence for your theory. If he had won a bunch more, that's me stealing. When he loses a bunch, that's me covering my tracks. I deal with people like you in the on-site chat regularly.

Yes, I'm always ready to tell the truth. What do you want to know?

You've given me some web traffic statistics which may or may not be accurate. I don't keep track of visitor numbers or how long they stay on the page because I just don't care. I have counted unique hits in the past when people have asked for the data, usually because they are thinking of buying ad space. As I remember it I think we were getting something like 1500 unique IPs hitting the site per day the last time I looked.

633 bets per minute per visitor seems very unlikely, so either your data are wrong or your calculations are. Maybe both. I expect one source of error is that Alexa can't tell how long most people spend on the site. They can only spy on people who are foolish enough to have installed their spying software (or "toolbar") which probably isn't most Bitcoin users who tend to be more careful about what kinds of crap they install. Otherwise they don't tend to keep their coins for long.

I can tell you how much financial investment went into the site. Approximately $0. I wrote all the code myself, spent nothing on advertising, bought the best available domain name I could find ($10/year) and used the cheapest hosting I could find. You'll notice the site is very plain, lacking even a logo.

I can afford to buy an expensive domain name, especially if I steal investor funds to do so. Would that make the place more trustworthy in your view?

I don't think you know how this stuff works at all, really.

Anyway, I checked out statbrain on my own personal website. It estimates 122 monthly pageviews. I checked to see how often JUST the front page of my site was opened in january and the answer is 3,560. It's harder to figure out how often "actual pages" were opened (as opposed to images and stuff) because it's not easy to tell from a URL what sort of thing is being returned, but my site is not image heavy and had 145,000 requests served in january of 2014. If I had to estimate I'd say this represents 30,000 page views.

122 vs ~30,000

That's about the degree of accuracy to expect from statbrain.

And THAT'S assuming that it's even distinct page fetches per bet that you make - I don't actually know that this is the case with the dice betting site.

"The server can only handle a certain number of rolls per second. There are people running automated 'bot' programs that place tiny bets over and over. These were causing the whole site to slow down. In response to this, I introduced artificial delays to the roll, based on the amount being wagered. This slows down the 'dust bots' so that the site stays fast for real players. The delays are as follows:

bets of 0.00000000 BTC are delayed by 3 seconds
bets of 0.00000001 BTC to 0.00000009 BTC are delayed by 1 second
bets of 0.00000010 BTC to 0.00000099 BTC are delayed by 0.8 seconds
bets of 0.00000100 BTC to 0.00000999 BTC are delayed by 0.6 seconds
bets of 0.00001000 BTC to 0.00009999 BTC are delayed by 0.4 seconds
bets of 0.00010000 BTC to 0.00099999 BTC are delayed by 0.2 seconds
bets of 0.00100000 BTC or more are not delayed"


That information comes right from his website. Most of the bets on the site are small bets. With those delays he would need traffic 2000x what statbrain reports he is getting to make the volume of betting on his site even remotely realistic. Even then, he is openly admitting that "his" servers assigned through his hosting plan are incapable of handling that level of activity.

statbrain was off by at least a factor of 250 for me.

And if each bet on his site is not a seperate page load (and I would not be surprised if this is the case) then it's probably waaaay worse off for determining how many bets were actually made.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree and this particular line of inquiry is pointless and unconvincing.

But there's a hyphen.

He's delaying the bets on the site. There have been 532 million bets placed over seven months. So 60 seconds in a minute, 3600 seconds an hour, 86400 seconds in a day and 18,144,000 seconds in 7 months. 532 million bets divided by 18 million is 33 bets a second made on the site.

There is a bounce rate of 75 percent for the site. The average visitor who stays on the site stays for 2 hours and 32 minutes. So you don't need page specific numbers to see what pages they visited. You need the duration of the visit.

With the traffic given by stat-brain it came up with a result of 50,000 total unique and repeat visitors for the site over the entire time it has existed. If we multiply those stats by 250 you get 12.5 million visitors maximum having visiting the site. If each of those users stayed for 2 hours and 32 minutes on the site you multiply 152 minutes x 12.5 million visitors and you get 12 750 000 000 seconds. If you divide 532 million bets by 12,750,000,000 you have each user having to place a minimum of .04 bets per second for those numbers to be credible.

And it's proven to be true that website information becomes MORE accurate as a website increases in traffic not less. So if his site did in fact have those types of numbers the margin for error would go down not up. My point is that assigning a 250x variance to his website traffic is not really a fair comparison to your personal website. The reason is because you were undervalued from a point of 30,000 actual to 125. His site would need to be undervalued 250x from 196,000 actual to the higher number, which is much less likely.

At .04 bets per second per user the delays he is imposing would add substantially to that number. You have to remember that people have to cash-out and buy-in to the site and all that time counts toward the average time of a visit.

You have a player win-rate that has a 1 in 25 percent chance of happening on a website with improbable betting statistics for its traffic that is hosted on servers that could not handle the type of traffic that would be required that would make the numbers realistic.

If the site is using bots to increase the volume of betting then the investor return numbers become suspect because the return to the investors in the bankroll is influenced by all bets made if the house edge on those bets is 1 percent. So you would have to conclude that he has the willingness to give money away to investors for the benefit of making it look more successful on a site that he admits he boot-strapped on and spent nothing creating it.

You're starting from a set of stats that are completely horse-**** and expecting to get something usable out of them. You can't. There is no reason to believe that stat-brain has reasonable numbers for page views, unique users, or time-per-user. So the rest of your calculations just don't mean anything at all.

Well now I know for sure you are full of it because you used a hyphen.

Ok here are the numbers for 2plus2. Based on Alexa.com findings, twoplustwo.com has a global traffic rank of 6,637 and belongs to the top 100,000 most popular websites in the world. twoplustwo.com also reaches roughly 945,257 unique users each month and has 1,957 backlinks according to Alexa. The estimated monthly ad revenue is $ 22,328.88.

We estimate the website value of twoplustwo.com is currently at $ 535,893.00. Traffic and Revenue of twoplustwo.com is estimated to be decreasing within the last 3 months. The Site was launched at Sunday, 08 June 1997 and is 16 years and 7 months old. The domain twoplustwo.com is a .com domain with the name twoplustwo preceding it.

The Server of twoplustwo.com is powered by the Apache/2.2.3 (Red Hat) webserver software and the server is physically located in United States (Texas) and uses the IP address 69.20.56.132. The average loading time of twoplustwo.com is 2395 milliseconds - this is faster than 32% of all other websites. At the DMOZ open directory project we found no listing for twoplustwo.com at this time.

Updated: 01/27/2014 23:09, 0 minutes ago

Worldwide Rank Monthly Users* Monthly Pageviews*
6,637⇓ 945,257⇓
31,077 per day*
6,144,167⇓

Seems pretty accurate to me.

I have not seen your site but what is probably happening is that the counter that is calculating your traffic is counting your activity on the website in ways that stat brain wouldn't track. That is probably inflating your page view numbers and giving you the impression that the comparisons are not accurate.

His site operates as a single page. It has tabs on it for each feature including the chat. Can you post the statbrain profile of your site or give the web address of your website? Is it a personal blog type thing?

I'm not using a "counter" and the numbers are not inflated. I'm analyzing the web logs directly. It's a mostly-defunct personal site of mine (rustybrooks.com)

Why not try following the scientific method instead of trying to use obviously flawed statistics and trying to bend them to your will?

SatoshiDice reported its last public financial statement in June 2013, as it was still being traded on the Bitcoin-denominated stock-exchange MPEX before being sold to a private investor. In that June statement, it reported 372,712 bets placed over 30 days, which averages out to about 12,424 bets per day.

Source: http://arstechnica.com/business/2013...-transactions/

Just-Dice has done 2523809 bets per day or 203 TIMES MORE than Satoshi Dice. Satoshi Dice accounts for 25-50 percent of ALL bit-coin transactions according to that article.

Satoshi Dice has been mentioned in the New York Times,Wall Street Journal,Newsweek, etc.,etc.

So either Just-Dice.com is the biggest kept secret in the bitcoin world or the owner is not being honest about his website.

Isn't Satoshi dice the one that does a bitcoin transaction for every bet you make? just-dice doesn't do that, it's more like a poker site where you deposit money up front, gamble with it, and then withdraw at some point in the future.

Based on what?

Getting someone to deposit is more difficult than allowing them to bet from a pile of money they control. Satoshi dice is simply a way to bet on a site remotely without making a deposit. Multiple bets can be placed within a single transaction. So now all of the following need to be true:

1. He has to have bets placed on his site at 200x the rate of a dice site that has been mentioned in prominent news publications like the New York Times.

2. The reported traffic statistics on his site from sites that track them have to be inaccurate by at least 400-1 ratio.

3. Owners of bitcoin worth millions of dollars would have had to trust him by sending them to just-dice.com instead of a site where they could bet remotely and maintain control of their +million dollar pile of coins.

4. Then the whales have to win to such a large degree that it alters the results of the websites 530 million bets at a 1 percent advantage to create a situation that has a 1 and 25 chance of happening.

All of those things have to be true for the numbers on the site to provide a fair proposition for investors. So because all of those things in combination are so unlikely in a situation where the website were offering a fair proposition for investors, you can conclude that the website is more likely to be unfair for investors than it is to be fair for investors.

Give each of your 4 factors a probability. Use those probabilities to come up with a percentage chance the site is rigged. Show your work and include all prior assumptions.

Riggies gonna riggie

1. 1 in 10
2. 1 in 5
3. 1 in 3
4. 1 in 25

6864 to 1 chance the site is not rigged in some way. I used a betting calculator that does the math automatically.

I just had a funny thought. I should start a website that takes bets on his website being rigged. Ultimate ball busting website.

Uh, your betting calculator sucks