I think there is a legislation forum also. Read many posts and I have no idea of what they are talking about.

which is the #1 problem to the solution that noose wants to discuss but refuses to fully describe. ( p.s. we conveniently put this #1 problem aside so we could talk about marshmallows) and other stuff)

vast majority of possible players on the "solution" wont even understand it, much less put their hard earned dollars into it to play.

pitch away noose. please explain and sell your solution to pucmo. he wants to play on it but after your descriptions and discussion, still doesn't understand it.

Actually I see Josem is now the head of security of a new ico project that is in "internet poker" right now. I see they are claiming all the claims I made especially about serving all the jurisdictions.

He's a good explainer so hopefully he'll clarify.

And I'm not endorsing the project. I suspect its another cash grab with no underlying protocol.

what is this josem thing you speak of?

You continually want to conflate two independent things.

thingy #1. an online site using a crypto currency for cashiering.

thingy #2 a common, open source, pseudo coded, shared , p2p based backend solution thingy used by many operators.

I am quite sure thingy #1 is already happening and will continue to happen more and more.

I am leaning toward thingy #2 not happening in the foreseeable future.

Thingy #1 is not dependent on thingy #2.

There is value in thingy #1

I still have not seen any value in thingy #2 (unless I were to believe that thingy #2 suddenly makes online poker legal everywhere. p.s. I don't believe that)

I'd rather function with the dialogue on the premise that #2 dramatically reduces startup costs for emerging projects.

What I mean is, lets say we have a magic protocol that allows one to set up a new poker offering with a snazzy and user friendly experience for peanuts. We don't really agree on that, but I know knowledgeable persons in related fields (programming legal security crypto etc.) that are apt to believe of it.

A platform (metaphorically not software site in this sentence) that can create viable competition in the industry.

Keeping in mind, SOME projects WILL offer anonymous poker, and they CAN do so clearly. In fact there are many sites today that do. For example seals with clubs never really shut down (this is not a recommendation).

And there are many more that offer poker to anywhere via crypto. This isn't new.

But any ideas can use a core protocol, so you can have different sites offer different layers of kyc. I want to look at that landscape and see if we can solve the game theoretical problem of getting a coalition of sites that are working off the same core.

Im sure in your mind it does because thats how you want the world to be. there are some cost savings but they are insignificant.

we are hosting two servers on amazon cloud right now for development of a poker related software product. I think we pay like $10 a month. granted a site would need more to operate. lets say 100x. thats $1000 / month.

well your "protocol" is sounding more and more like a fully functionally site. this is one of many circles you speak around. which just puts more marshmallows in the bowl.

I've asked you three times to write a description of what you are proposal.
If the above is that description I meant to ask you to put it in business terms.

to make things less complicated please just list the 5 major features of this thingy you propose. each one 10 words or less.

Your understanding of the costs involved seem comparable to your understanding of the philosophy of law. You think you can place this with $1,000 a month?



It's not a business, and you should be more forgiving, you are lacking a deeper knowledge needed to immediately understanding the paradigm.

I've been patient with your name calling, memes, and ignorance.

I wonder if we will give the same scrutiny to the many emerging "p2p" and "decentralized" projects that are invading the community at this time. Our discourse on the subject has highlighted some important points regarding the integrity of what a project might entail.

It's very easy now to spin up a nice webpage, put together a team, code up a working poker engine with a snazzy UI, and to make claims on security.

But every project I see has no underlying protocol. They are claiming something they don't have which is a lack of integrity. They are asking for millions in return for a future product that none have convinced me they can provide.

They talk about rake, but they clearly don't understand it and so they have fancy automated smart contract protocols to distribute crowdfunded money but is there really proof that their system is designed not to serve the central authorities of the given project?

Other than a "stamp" of declaration, how is that decentralized?

Pokerstars makes changes the players don't like, but its their right, mandate, and model. These emerging sites are claiming EXACTLY to do what the legacy sites aren't doing in this regard. I'm learning each of new projects with the exact same internal structure as the legacy models.

I would say PS has more integrity than a site that claims to NOT operate like pokerstars but perfectly does.

From a computer science, security, and crypto economic standpoint, these projects are scams. And I could get many many highly reputed experts and active bitcoin and ethereum develops to sign off on this.

I see the new project here hasn't released their whitepaper (technical docs) but their crowdsale starts in a week. This is alarming as it takes more than a week for the technical experts to vet their security solutions. Only a company that isn't proud of their security algorithms would try to push a crowdsale through like this.

Another site doesn't have open source software. So their claim that their RNG is secure is only a claim, in the crypt community this is a scam.

These icos are attacks on the community's ignorance and I can and will get experts in the industry to publicly declare this.

yes stars has alot of servers. yes they are not free. yes they cost less than you think. and again can be hosted in the cloud for even less.

Please estimate % of stars opex that is spent on server hardware? (total cost of ownership)


touche on all counts and guilty as charged. marshmallow was pretty funny though. at least to me.

For now the 4th time I respectfully ask you to answer this.

You should write poker stars and tell them they can save on their building rent by using a cloud. Did you see the keypads for the doors they had? I think that security system alone costs more than what is in your head. Remember ALL of the security counts as costs. Not just server hardware.




A secure mental poker protocol provides:

The basis for no landbased architecture.
no landbased realestate
no land based corporate office
no land based physical security
no security staff.
no land based hardware

Is that enough that you won't say "5th time?

perfect.. thanks, let me add one more

no licences from gaming agencies to legally operate anywhere in the world.

Is that sarcasm?

There is the option for gaming licenses and new projects can choose to fully comply, or partially, or not at all. We can see this emerging already as there are many examples of emerging projects.

Did you notice in the video that Pokerstars must allow multiple and regular 3rd party audits? This is another cost.

A public open source protocol does not have costs for this. It is always audited as secure. And the audits are perfect public which is a far better standard than a closed door process.

Now emerging projects sell this feature to the players. Me and you know this isn't a good selling feature. However, its a major security benefit, which is not deniable.

I fail to see how you think this infrastructure could be replace by $1000 a month cloud service (which isn't secure or plausible from an auditing perspective). Did you parse through the videos at all?

please get off the $1000 a month thingy. it was a extreme example to make a point that you are grossly overestimating server hardware and all accompanying support stated in terms of % of total operator opex.

more important is this and where maybe you should do some more research


there would be no option for users of super protocol except not at all .

IF you dont me believe please call UKGC, NGC, or NJCCC and explain what you want to do and see what they say. or just to talk to someone you know that has direct working experience with them. they will tell you the same.

you would quickly learn that for an operator of the aforementioned super protocol, "comply or partially comply" is simply not an option in regulated jurisdictions and wont be for quite some time, maybe never for ALL important jurisdictions..

I have no idea what you are trying to say, and I could cite multiple projects that have this model and they well funded legal advisers. I think we are having a problem with the philosophy of jurisdiction again.

The protocol is open source RNG. It's a basis for security that remove the entire building in the videos I posted. This is the paradigm shift, and it is no different than what bitcoin provides for the banking system.

It can't be said that centralized Rng for x-site is more compliant than an open source provably fair protocol.

As for the projects that arise on it, they are able to choose what they offer and to whom and whether or not to comply in each jurisdiction or regulatory boundary.

It just seems so simple I don't know what you aren't seeing.

oh lord.

illt try one last time.

Blockchain is going to revolutionize the world. it will bring up all sorts of questions in multiple markets including what is a govt? what is their role? I really have no interest in getting into this much larger metaphysical discussion. I am only talking about operating a real money gaming site.


Your super protocol will also bring up these questions, but the people one would have to answer to is gaming commisions. and they honestly dont give a chit, and are the sole decider on such matters unless operator using the super protocol wants to operate outside gaming commission rules and laws. when they do that they will run into same problem Micon did.

if you cant agree with that then I cant help you.

My friend. Seals with clubs is still operating and still serving Americans. Micon was living in Nevada and operating his SERVER BASED business out of there. It is NOT a COUNTER argument and you are not correct in your assumptions.

We should probably retire our dialogue for now, perhaps someone that is more knowledgeable than you, that you RESPECT, will come along and you can see how they understand and ask questions.

Let me guess. Nooseknot is unemployed and bitter and trolling makes him feel better.

Condolences.

This is the second time you've called me a troll while doing nothing but trolled this thread in doing so

You are right. I don't have anything to give to this thread, so I will stop reading it now. Peace.

I'll post re Nooseknot here. I've had direct communication with him on this topic. While I may disagree with some of his expectations or descriptions regarding decentralized poker*, he is far from being a troll. I think he spends a lot of time looking at issues related to decentralized poker and find his comments and analysis worth the time to read.

Nooseknot is very enthusiastic on the topic, as are many other sincere folks in the field. That I happen to hold way less enthusiasm about poker as a blockchain-based p2p application may reflect a lack of understanding on my part, more than my holding any all-encompassing overview of what an emerging technology may offer.

(*I've spent a lot of time in looking at blockchain-based gaming applications. This goes back to reviewing the SatoshiDice model and 2013. I've developed a pretty good feel for the characteristics of different gaming channels and for which applications blockchain technology offers benefits to players and operators. )

Noooseknot knows some things, he's not right about everything, but has a pretty good batting average.

It would be awesome if a major software firm and casino chain could come up with a p2p poker solution which could be played in any country without breaking any countries laws and become the number 1 massive worldwide site and 'make poker great again' lol. I'm no expert on this stuff but it must be possible?
Its funny because in the old days of the internet there was pretty much no control over it, it was in the hands of the public but gradually governments and big companies have taken control of it. Now with the development of p2p and cryptocurrency it looks like control could start to shift back to the people again!

Why must it be possible? How would P2P suddenly make a game legal in countries where online poker is illegal?

Because they would not be playing on a server and the location of the server is the problem as far as I understand. That's why pokerstars NJ and italy can't play on the main world site isn't it? And also they would be playing in cryptocurrency rather than their own country's currency. Maybe it would still be technically illegal but I don't see how it could be enforced.