noose is either obtuse or just trolling galfond on 2+2 as I've pointed this simple and most material fact to him three times which he continues to ignore in lieu of calling out RIOs alleged flaws.

It doesn't matter how many times you say it, its still wrong. The sell is to operators. It reduces their operation and especially start up costs by millions. The benefit to players is massively reduced rake.

You are still confused by the concept of back-end. I'm afraid I can't help you understand.

Get her on the forum, I want to speak to her please.

dear lord, someone please help.

p2p HW/SW infrastructure benefit reduces operator start up costs by an immaterial amount vis-a-vis the additional business risks it creates for customer acquisition and additional market education funds it will devour.

convinced now 100% noose is just trolling galfond.

trolls gonna troll

There is no problem of customer acquisition. The customer does not see the change.

All the customer sees is "PLAY POKER HERE! USA PLAYERS WELCOME!"

The back end of the technology isn't hidden, but it isn't meaningful or interesting to the average consumer. Just like Ruby or Python or C++ isn't.

I think the main barrier to entry is not the adoption of crypto, but how quickly users can convert that crypto into fiat.

At least in the early stages.

It's obvious the increasing trend will be poker players seek the most profitable sites.

already asked you if this "thing" would obfuscate the p2p nature of the architect from the player. you were vague with your answer.

If yes, then they are being deceitful .

If not, then player acquisition becomes way way more difficult.

You don't need to obfuscate something that isn't really interesting.

The average consumer just wants a product that does what it says it does. They don't care about the workings of it.

Bessie down at the casino who plays her quarter slots every weekend doesn't give a damn how the wheels turn, she just wants to hit the big one some day.

You could argue that the average poker player today is more informed than that, but I argue that it doesn't matter. Like Nooseknot is seemingly alluding to, you just need to acquire the masses.

Convince me this isn't gibberish.

sorry, by "thing" i meant the person or entity providing online poker game to players using the new and improved p2p arch.

Virtue Poker for example, fully disclosed it as their main value prop to players. ala their video.

Funny thing about value props, they have to actually have some value to the audience.

the noose conversation was interesting (he obv knows what he speaks of about half the time but his motivation ITT still unclear)

It did get me thinking more about OP and Virtue Poker.

One thing I cant wrap my head around aside from player acquisition problem.

With the ocean of opportunity out there right now for wide range of cutting edge etherum block chain solutions for problems in supply chain, medical, finance, govt, etc etc etc why waste time on poker?

These industries are orders of magnitude larger and less complex to attack.

Granted ConsenSys is the real deal and dumb of me to second guess what they focus on in the etherum world but just wow... why online poker vs the dozens of other more lucrative and less complex markets?

Yes, they are working on all sorts of things but any dollar / resource spent on online poker is one dollar / resource not spent on something else.

secure multiparty computations is the next big tech after bitcoin

Was/is bitcoin a "big tech"?

You are correct vesku, bitcoin isn't a technology, its a product.

noose skipped biz class the day they taught biz in biz school

Not sure by some of your posts if you have been into poker seriously or not. But this is simply not true. Most non professionals (and even some Pros) decide by other factors, profit being important, but many other factors as well. Even IF, you need recreational players to feed the system. If you wanna open a successful club, you need hot girls. Guys will follow wherever girls are.
With poker, you need the recreational guys and then you need to make pros feel well. It's that simple.

Your argument about lower rake is also that of an armchair economist. We have actually seen quite a few examples how lower rake is not a competitive advantage. Even rake-free sites didn't make it.

I could continue with cash outs and security of player funds. Another armchair argument, you greatly overestimate this. Players have accepted sub-standard behavior from sites up to masochistic levels. I will say instant cashouts are great and will increase trust, but look at all the advertising of sites, it's not a big deal.


I'm totally with you on p2p models having a great future, mainly bc (if what you say is true) server and legal costs get smashed. Your example with RIO is a very good one. But for virtue.poker and others to even stand a chance, other things have to happen first.

1) ETH smart contracts actually have to work reliably
2) ETH has to be able to scale
3) Virtue.poker has to work in practice, not as a theoretical concept
4) virtue.poker has to be able to scale without lagging
5) Somebody has to create a superior user experience

Also ignoring that people might wish to play in a stable currency

Lot's of "IF's". Technology has to mature first. They'll probably try to get good funding with an ICO now, i don't blame them, but oh well, this is at least 2years away.
Obviously, I'm happy to be wrong here.

etherum contracts are reliable. ethereum has already scaled and is worth billions. Virtue poker offers no protocol, but everything else, like a good ico scam. there is no reason for lag.

The user experience can be perfectly copied from legacy sites.

Yeah, you mean copy like copy-paste? You sound like somebody who has read too many books and done very little.

Which real world application is working on ETH using smart contracts?
Do you know how many xfers/sec a small poker room will have and more important - other applications on ETH competing for the same space on the blockchain. What's the price for the contract computation? Any rough calculations?

I'm just as optimistic on the sector, even interested in building something like this at some point. And eventually i hope cryptos will scale more, just like the Internet did.

But today, there are limits.

I've worked with multiple projects and done coding for p2p poker. I've played a working implementation.

The protocol is layer one, and bridges with multiple site implementations.
I don't want to cite/reference specific projects cause I think thats a bannable offense here. The protocol is a lightning channel secured with an escrow contract that effectively never gets called. So as I understand it can be done cheaply. It can also be done on different coins.
Bitcoin was meant not to scale. It's value scales not its tx/s on the first layer.

I didn't catch this the first time around and want to address a few points. Firstly I think much of your complaint is based on the current de facto monopoly environment the players have recently faced. There are "cognitive" costs to moving one's bankroll, fees, time involved, and signing up to new sites etc. Many players don't have any options or very many. All this because payment processor restrictions and regulations.

When the players boycotted, it would have been dramatically more effectively it were instant and costless to transfer bankroll off the site.

Also poker players grow more savvy as time goes on. We can see this through the history of the strategy for the game as it evolved. It can be said play is tending towards GTO. It must be then that the players will become more and more rake savvy over time.

So I think this plus the removal of the giant barrier to entry that new emerging sites and ideas have will really have a positive effect of the average player in terms of searching for more profitable games. And I think this will inspire a different marketing strategy more aimed at providing a fair skilled game with a proper balance of recs to regs.

And I don't agree that you should market to recs and they will attract the pros. I think good pros know how to attract recs. I just think in today's over raked environment its too dog eat dog. If there was more profit on the table I think pros would go back to providing entertaining for recs, rather than being sharks preying on fish.

I meant to comment on this cause its very relevant and more of this will come to the community: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...poker-1694368/

And to be clear I'm NOT advocating for this project (or any other ico): https://cashpokerpro.io/whitepaper.pdf?v7

I'm not going to spend time verifying this stuff, but this is what you look out for. A claim that a peg will hold its value and pays interest

But this is the part that fails technically:
There is a problem of "verification", because if you require the players at the table to do the verification one can refuse and then you can't see the hands to verify them with an external source. So there is a security problem to be solved. To outsource that security to a jury pool, does NOT solve the problem...

Outsourcing security is not a solution, its a way of hiding a problem and not solving it and basing a crowd sale around it. They haven't convinced me my email is safe with them so I'm not going to test the software atm. I don't see the likelihood of a working p2p protocol.

Their video doesn't have live footage of the product.

I'd imaging these points will be helpful as I've seen multiple projects do exactly that, to have everything ready for a crowd-sale except solutions and proof of concepts. I'm not even convinced a good protocol needs an ico....

And many people that are very familiar with crypto seem to share those anti ico sentiments.

If these two are both true then you will end up with massive undersupply or oversupply of tokens.

Imagine a live casino company where they just had a fixed number of chips that could never change no matter how much they expanded worldwide, yet these chips were pegged in value to a fixed amount of fiat currency.

if you are doing the exchanging yourself then oversupply would be less of a problem as you can just keep unused coins back.

I'm terrible at deciphering those kinds of schemes, but I have friend that usually does it for me I'll ask eventually. The pegs can be controled and automated though. I guess the idea there is to incentive players to keep bankrolls within the system, and in that it seems there is a rake for cashing out.

The difference here is that even gets the dividend if they hold value on the site. So its like the poker stars money gzesh mentioned, but it actually pays the customers to hold it?

No idea if I'm understanding.

I know of another project and their purpose is slightly different, I think to create a more stable chips, and then I think the rake gets burned. Not sure if thats relevant, but if you burn some of the supply everyone gets paid. I guess maybe thats two names for the same thing.

But its all supposed to be automated so that you don't have Keynesians wildly changing the inflation schedule ;p

Continues to be interesting technology discussions. Its awesome to learn more about blockchain tech stuff, ITT, but this is all just hypothetical discussion right? and not meant to be taken seriously for any commercial applications in online poker

Does anyone think an entity could even launch a successful old fashioned server based new poker site in today's environment ? As smart as galfond is, he couldn't do it ( or grossly underestimated the complexities).

Does anyone think that the value proposition to player of p2p is SO powerful that it changes the above in any way (I'd argue launching a new p2p site would be more diffcult.... much more difficult)


just one of many player adoption problems below....

Galfond is a good poker player and a likeable person. He's no business man as much as myself and everybody else is rooting for him.

You're right that launching a p2p site would be more difficult. This Nooseknot guy is completely delusional, although he still has valid points. But take it as interesting thoughts, not practical application.

Parity hack, DAO hack, no real world application using ETH smart contracts. This p2p stuff is definitely some time away.

I do think p2p poker is "the future" though. When is the key, and right now it's of theoretical nature, very early on. I love new ideas, you need to stay sharp to catch the next train.

So if you want to build a new poker site that has a chance of going big, you have to innovate. China apps are a very good example. That's real innovation in that they solved a real problem.
The world does not need another poker site that works just like the rest, even if it carries the face of a player you like.