Are your names public? Where do you live?
Estimate on when shares will be made public?
Are your names public? Where do you live?
want my bloodtype? :)
Hi,
It can't be bought yet, right? Why are there some buy orders already?
And, sorry for the question but I'm a newbie with the AE, we buy shares -> if they go up/down we can make/lose money. Apart from that, will we get payouts regularly (once every X amount of time)?
Thabnks!
Are your names public? Where do you live?
want my bloodtype? :)
No. But you know, if this is gonna work as I think it should be, then you will get millions of NXT. So, who are you guys? :)
Are your names public? Where do you live?
want my bloodtype? :)
No. But you know, if this is gonna work as I think it should be, then you will get millions of NXT. So, who are you guys? :)
You can call me stark, nice to meet you ;)
You dont have to...But Ola trust me to manage the process well. Ultimately that is why the board is in place.Are your names public? Where do you live?
want my bloodtype? :)
No. But you know, if this is gonna work as I think it should be, then you will get millions of NXT. So, who are you guys? :)
You can call me stark, nice to meet you ;)
Nice to meet you. So why should we trust you? ;)
You know ola in reallife? :)You dont have to...But Ola trust me to manage the process well. Ultimately that is why the board is in place.Are your names public? Where do you live?
want my bloodtype? :)
No. But you know, if this is gonna work as I think it should be, then you will get millions of NXT. So, who are you guys? :)
You can call me stark, nice to meet you ;)
Nice to meet you. So why should we trust you? ;)
You know ola in reallife? :)You dont have to...But Ola trust me to manage the process well. Ultimately that is why the board is in place.Are your names public? Where do you live?
want my bloodtype? :)
No. But you know, if this is gonna work as I think it should be, then you will get millions of NXT. So, who are you guys? :)
You can call me stark, nice to meet you ;)
Nice to meet you. So why should we trust you? ;)
Sorry that I ask so many questions. But I think 90% of all assets are scams right now. I don't want to invest into scams. I want to genuinely trust the asset issuer. :)
That sounds good. :) Thank you for your patience.You know ola in reallife? :)You dont have to...But Ola trust me to manage the process well. Ultimately that is why the board is in place.Are your names public? Where do you live?
want my bloodtype? :)
No. But you know, if this is gonna work as I think it should be, then you will get millions of NXT. So, who are you guys? :)
You can call me stark, nice to meet you ;)
Nice to meet you. So why should we trust you? ;)
Sorry that I ask so many questions. But I think 90% of all assets are scams right now. I don't want to invest into scams. I want to genuinely trust the asset issuer. :)
Nope I don't, That is why no assets are released for sale until Ola releases a client
That sounds good. :) Thank you for your patience.You know ola in reallife? :)You dont have to...But Ola trust me to manage the process well. Ultimately that is why the board is in place.Are your names public? Where do you live?
want my bloodtype? :)
No. But you know, if this is gonna work as I think it should be, then you will get millions of NXT. So, who are you guys? :)
You can call me stark, nice to meet you ;)
Nice to meet you. So why should we trust you? ;)
Sorry that I ask so many questions. But I think 90% of all assets are scams right now. I don't want to invest into scams. I want to genuinely trust the asset issuer. :)
Nope I don't, That is why no assets are released for sale until Ola releases a client
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
200th of Pokerstars is not laughable, but NXT would need to be priced much higher before it happens. Either NXT is not ready for funding such large scale projects yet or projects need to start small with less funding and grow with NXT, in fiat market cap, that is.
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
200th of Pokerstars is not laughable, but NXT would need to be priced much higher before it happens. Either NXT is not ready for funding such large scale projects yet or projects need to start small with less funding and grow with NXT, in fiat market cap, that is.
I have to agree here. You're not going to raise almost 1/3 of all NXT in existence. This project needs downsizing. Start small, grow big.
Is there a budget plan for the funds raised from the crowdsale/ICO suppose you sell out the 60 million tokens?
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
200th of Pokerstars is not laughable, but NXT would need to be priced much higher before it happens. Either NXT is not ready for funding such large scale projects yet or projects need to start small with less funding and grow with NXT, in fiat market cap, that is.
How about doing a Dutch Aution to see how much the community is willing to pay for these 60 million tokens?
I have agree with the "overpriced" sentiment. I was hoping for something more rational.
You're putting all of the risk on the investors, and regardless if the project is succesful or not, you - the founders - will be well of.
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
200th of Pokerstars is not laughable, but NXT would need to be priced much higher before it happens. Either NXT is not ready for funding such large scale projects yet or projects need to start small with less funding and grow with NXT, in fiat market cap, that is.
I have to agree here. You're not going to raise almost 1/3 of all NXT in existence. This project needs downsizing. Start small, grow big.
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
200th of Pokerstars is not laughable, but NXT would need to be priced much higher before it happens. Either NXT is not ready for funding such large scale projects yet or projects need to start small with less funding and grow with NXT, in fiat market cap, that is.
I have to agree here. You're not going to raise almost 1/3 of all NXT in existence. This project needs downsizing. Start small, grow big.
I also agree. Come on now.. 1/3 of all NXT. If that were to succeed, it would be no way to ever get ROI measured in NXT.
Hi am very new around here and have not been a nxt asset holder for that long either, I work for Poker Stars and after reading through all the proposals etc I have to honestly say that allthough a decentralized poker platform of this kind is the future I dont think that the people behind this project have done enough homework most things discussed are not interpreted correctly. The IPO is severely overpriced considering the risk as far as Im concerned. I look forward to reading the next online poker idea for nxt :) Look forward to reading you all again soon
I would glady like a dutch auction like for Jinn.
Especially since the ask is very large.
I would glady like a dutch auction like for Jinn.
Especially since the ask is very large.
I would like that too....but the asset exchange isn't built for that. There also no time to focus on those mechanics manually
I would glady like a dutch auction like for Jinn.
Especially since the ask is very large.
I would like that too....but the asset exchange isn't built for that. There also no time to focus on those mechanics manually
Maybe ask help from community, CfB or Triangle may at least tell you the difficulty behind this or pointing the right people to help you. It might not be that difficult to do so after all.
I would glady like a dutch auction like for Jinn.
Especially since the ask is very large.
I would like that too....but the asset exchange isn't built for that. There also no time to focus on those mechanics manually
Maybe ask help from community, CfB or Triangle may at least tell you the difficulty behind this or pointing the right people to help you. It might not be that difficult to do so after all.
This is true but there is so much effort behind the current strategy already, that and anonymous early investor who where made to formulated the strategy to the fundraising and have made decisions based on that. To change this course would likely be a breach in my personal agrrement and would delay the project even more than it is...if someone comes up with a proposal toindependently with escrows, that may be doable..but again I have to talk to contractors
If not all token are sell during the 30 days. What will you do with them (the one not sell)?
EDIT: Will you burn them to genesis?
So if I understand well,
55% of profit is redistribute to AE shareholder only if all token are sale? Otherwise, it will be less than 55%.
So if I understand well,
55% of profit is redistribute to AE shareholder only if all token are sale? Otherwise, it will be less than 55%.
55% is for crowdsale
5% is for free giveaway
2% to bounty publications
in the future net profits are distributed based on token holding ownership percentage
if you own .5% you get .5% of net profit
the DAO owns 10% so it will only retain 10% of net profits
So if I understand well,
55% of profit is redistribute to AE shareholder only if all token are sale? Otherwise, it will be less than 55%.
55% is for crowdsale
5% is for free giveaway
2% to bounty publications
in the future net profits are distributed based on token holding ownership percentage
if you own .5% you get .5% of net profit
the DAO owns 10% so it will only retain 10% of net profits
Ok, thanks, you should specify in the first post that 1 token is 1/100,000,000 of the net profit.
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
whats laughable is the unsubstantiated complaint, care to provide any professional counter analysis subsequently followed by a valuation. I think it will be more productive to provide one..
the project will be done unless you don't believe smart contracts will be implemented. the dev believes so
100 mln tokens @0.000221btc (~3 NXT) = 300 mln NXT? Seriously? Who would have that kind of money to buy tokens? ;)Another not so realistic project valuation. While it has great potential, assuming that the demo client worth 200th of Pokerstars is laughable.
Unless I'm mistaken it's not even possible at this point to finish the project without smart contracts or something similar, that doesn't even exist yet.
whats laughable is the unsubstantiated complaint, care to provide any professional counter analysis subsequently followed by a valuation. I think it will be more productive to provide one..
the project will be done unless you don't believe smart contracts will be implemented. the dev believes so
I don't need to provide a professional analysis, that's your job. I only have to voice my opinion of your valuation, first on the forum, then on the Asset Exchange. I'm done with the first one.
the people that run NxtPoker, are they anonymous? Thanks
the people that run NxtPoker, are they anonymous? Thanks
Nxtpoker is to be run by a community of token holders, some are are anonymous some aren't. The board carry out the wishes of the token holders, some are some arent anonymous
the people that run NxtPoker, are they anonymous? Thanks
Nxtpoker is to be run by a community of token holders, some are are anonymous some aren't. The board carry out the wishes of the token holders, some are some arent anonymous
and what about the people organizing this crowdfunding? How many are not anonymous?
Thanks for the info. Good to know.
Total Tokens :: 100,000,000
Token price: TBD ( 0.000521btc to 0.000221btc per token roughly )
55% of tokens to nxt community
QuoteTotal Tokens :: 100,000,000
Token price: TBD ( 0.000521btc to 0.000221btc per token roughly )
55% of tokens to nxt community
Hello, if my calculation are correct, I just realize that you are asking in your crowdfunding between ~25-50% of all the NXT that exist.
If this is the case and correct, do you realize that this is not possible to achieve?
Because, this would need that, on average, everyone that own NXT should put ~25-50% of their Nxt crypto portfolio with NxtPoker token. Which, I believe, will be far from happening.
Nevertheless, it still offer 55% of tokens to nxt community, even with the use of escrows and BTC.
Nevertheless, it still offer 55% of tokens to nxt community, even with the use of escrows and BTC.
The tokens are not offered only to the Nxt community. Actually, the Nxt community may decide to invest nothing in this project (hopefully, it will not).
We will try to reach as much potential investors as possible - all the crypto communities, the poker communities, VCs and anyone willing to invest. The more people we attract outside of the nxt community, the better for the project and Nxt as well. Anyone outside of the Nxt community may just buy BTCs and invest with them, so the NXT liquidity is not an obstacle.
@nxtpoker is interviewing developer candidates, while Stak is busy with organization. They will soon post more information and you will find the answers of many questions.
Isildur23
Yes.Nevertheless, it still offer 55% of tokens to nxt community, even with the use of escrows and BTC.
The tokens are not offered only to the Nxt community. Actually, the Nxt community may decide to invest nothing in this project (hopefully, it will not).
We will try to reach as much potential investors as possible - all the crypto communities, the poker communities, VCs and anyone willing to invest. The more people we attract outside of the nxt community, the better for the project and Nxt as well. Anyone outside of the Nxt community may just buy BTCs and invest with them, so the NXT liquidity is not an obstacle.
@nxtpoker is interviewing developer candidates, while Stak is busy with organization. They will soon post more information and you will find the answers of many questions.
Isildur23
In the end, is everything end up in Nxt token?
Will the beta be published this friday as announced?
I CANT WAIT!
Did the crowdsale happen? I added this asset onto my wallet and see no Sell orders or Buy orders?
Did the crowdsale happen? I added this asset onto my wallet and see no Sell orders or Buy orders?
Not yet. Waiting for client first..
Did the crowdsale happen? I added this asset onto my wallet and see no Sell orders or Buy orders?
Not yet. Waiting for client first..
I'm glad that this asset is not selling into the hype.
There is competition now, Pangea. Which will put the price of Nxtpoker into perspective.
There is competition now, Pangea. Which will put the price of Nxtpoker into perspective.
There is competition now, Pangea. Which will put the price of Nxtpoker into perspective.
If you look at the videos it's no real competition.
youtube.com/watch?v=C1YyatjUp8A
Also 5kBTC shameless acts to get other Cryptos to the SuperNET.. All in all I really hope that Pangea and NxtPoker can achieve their goals. But my favorite is NxtPoker. But time will tell. :)
youtube.com/watch?v=C1YyatjUp8AI would appreciate that if someone that is head of an organization supposedly to help all of NXT is not actively disparaging the competition.
Also 5kBTC shameless acts to get other Cryptos to the SuperNET.. All in all I really hope that Pangea and NxtPoker can achieve their goals. But my favorite is NxtPoker. But time will tell. :)
Now, I make no secret that I am biased for Pangea, but I think any logical person will agree that for NXTpoker to be valued at 50 times Pangea would require some incredible amount of market penetration. Also, how did you solve provably random cards while generating verifiable hole cards?
James
Privacy is quite important for any large money endeavors, like large stakes poker. Pangea will build on top of SuperNET so will benefit from its infrastructure and also has a built in mechanism for customer acquisition from cross selling and other similar demographic users, eg. neoDICE.
Now, I make no secret that I am biased for Pangea, but I think any logical person will agree that for NXTpoker to be valued at 50 times Pangea would require some incredible amount of market penetration. Also, how did you solve provably random cards while generating verifiable hole cards?
James
EXACTLY. But it doesnt' get through for some people. I guess that Nxtpoker really must be the new Pokerstars. That's how insanely good it must be. And Pangea is a child's play by the same measurement.
can we get a table screenshot? :)
youtube.com/watch?v=C1YyatjUp8AI would appreciate that if someone that is head of an organization supposedly to help all of NXT is not actively disparaging the competition.
Also 5kBTC shameless acts to get other Cryptos to the SuperNET.. All in all I really hope that Pangea and NxtPoker can achieve their goals. But my favorite is NxtPoker. But time will tell. :)
I can understand that you have a stake in NXTpoker, but to be saying things like "shameless acts" and "no real competition" makes it look like you are quite biased and that the community wont be able to trust your statements are not influenced by your financial holdings. So maybe when lobbying for NXTpoker, you should make clear the amount of your NXTpoker stake.
Now, I make no secret that I am biased for Pangea, but I think any logical person will agree that for NXTpoker to be valued at 50 times Pangea would require some incredible amount of market penetration. Also, how did you solve provably random cards while generating verifiable hole cards?
James
hello, any updates? I thought we would see something around Nxt Birthday, but saw nothing. Thanks
hello, any updates? I thought we would see something around Nxt Birthday, but saw nothing. Thanks
+1
are you going to try to comply to regulations?
Well Stated I look forward to updates, count on my supportare you going to try to comply to regulations?
Writing harmless software is still freedom of speech and that is all I am doing, if things get draconian with people trying to make a sandwich a rock, I will regulate myself out of the jurisdiction. There are developers spread over the globe in training gearing up to take over anyways
yep and thanksWell Stated I look forward to updates, count on my supportare you going to try to comply to regulations?
Writing harmless software is still freedom of speech and that is all I am doing, if things get draconian with people trying to make a sandwich a rock, I will regulate myself out of the jurisdiction. There are developers spread over the globe in training gearing up to take over anyways
NxtPoker is a fair and decentralized global poker app using cutting edge p2p web technologies, an internal consensus mechanism and mental-like poker cryptographic schemes to implement provably fair gaming. NxtPoker is poised to take on the global multi-billion dollar poker industry using multiple competitive advantages. With gamification, the competitive advantages and other incentive schemes to improve churn rate, NxtPoker will become the leader in the poker industry potentially surpassing $3 billion in annual revenues. Profits to token holders will be authorized and dispersed automatically by NxtPoker board. Profits are generated from tournaments, rakes, private table fees and other business models. Current established centralized entities are limited in their global reach or ability to provide an objective and level paying field, NxtPoker is poised to take on the competition and fill in the Gaps. http://www.nxtpoker.org
Account ID :: 10690038163511375508 [ NXT-FXNN-4B7R-VJ9J-B7PQA ]
Total Tokens :: 100,000,000
Token price: TBD ( 0.000521btc to 0.000221btc per token roughly )
Valuation methodology : Market comparables (second opinion incoming)
We get to the valuation ranges by calculating a fully distributed value and estimating a companies implied value through analysis of similar companies operating and trading metrics. So in essence by applying multiples derived from comparable companies to similar but superior DAO/ App metrics we can extrapolate the range of initial company valuation. We could also determine value by estimating market capture, marketing and potential conversion rates and improved churn based on superior technology and incredible value proposition to poker players.
Tokens being offeredobsolete/restructured
60% of tokens to nxt community, crypto and other knowledgeable donors
55% of tokens to nxt community, crypto and other knowledgeable donors
25% tokens to Devs | board | workers
15% to Group of anonymous donor angels | friends | Family at initial stage
Further Detailed breakdown or token distribution
Further Detailed breakdown
55% of tokens to Nxt community, crypto and other knowledgeable donors
15% to Group of private anonymous donor angels | friends | Family at initial stage
30% -> 10% (DAO activity fund)
-> 7% (free distribution to be revealed as crowdsale draws nigh) see thread ::https://nxtforum.org/stark-industries-%28nxtdice%29/marketing-5288/
-> 6% (7 devs: 3 full time, 4 part time)
-> 3.5% (7 board members)
-> 3.5% (7 workers initial)
Duration of Crowsale
Duration last approximately 30 days
Distribution of tokens
Tokens are to be distributed after the completion of the crowd sale phase
Management of Proceeds
Operating budget to be held in multisig btc address
The rest of the funds to be held by trusted escrow or trustworthy NXT core dev, till board have access to NXT account control or phasing
Board manages fund using multisg account measures to control funding of initiatives to improve game experiences and protect token holder interests
(http://i.imgur.com/LNuZap2.png)
More to come
-Stay tuned
What's the status of the project?
Shame that you have moved away from the nxt platform.
Thanks, fully understand that nxt doesn't have SC yet. I had a scan read of the white paper still looks very interesting.Shame that you have moved away from the nxt platform.
Well its not moved completely, we hope the governance: voting etc will remain on the Nxt platform. But we need smart contracts and the Nxt Devs plan to implement smart contracts further down the line. Look at it this way, Nxt community can promote the app with use of Nxt, since theoretically any currency can be used, it just depends on who can promote best.
Edit : remember this is a DAO across all communities, but but any one of the communities could emerge as the top controllers. You control by access to tokens and the free distribution has started, see here : https://nxtforum.org/stark-industries-(nxtdice)/marketing-5288/
Can there be a discussion where knowledgeable peoples are present?We've answered several questions at our Reddit thread (/r/Pokereum/ I'm not allowed to post external links, but it's been posted above), feel free to jump in there. Or if you like, you can ask questions here.
Totally.Really, because all i get is MIA no responses.
Totally.Really, because all i get is MIA no responses.
Are there really people working on this project, or just screen shots and time lines getting pushed forward?
Would be nice to have a discussion so poker players can understand. Not sure at all how you plan to offer a community a decentralized product they have no say in the creation of. You cannot solve/implement this from this perspective.
Are there real people here? This is what I want to know...years into this, and still NO RESPONSE.
just question
yu use nxt or etherum?
thanks
just question
yu use nxt or etherum?
thanks
Nxt for the Pokereum DAO org to start...
The DAPP itself is built on ethereum smart contract system. But nxt is planned to be incorporated for payments considering tools like shapeshift and the edollar for stability (http://makerdao.com/index.php?topic=1626.0)
Its just a matter of who promotes their currency the best using the Pokereum DAPP
just question
yu use nxt or etherum?
thanks
Nxt for the Pokereum DAO org to start...
The DAPP itself is built on ethereum smart contract system. But nxt is planned to be incorporated for payments considering tools like shapeshift and the edollar for stability (http://makerdao.com/index.php?topic=1626.0)
Its just a matter of who promotes their currency the best using the Pokereum DAPP
thank you
when i can invest in asset id?
thanks
ok i waitjust question
yu use nxt or etherum?
thanks
Nxt for the Pokereum DAO org to start...
The DAPP itself is built on ethereum smart contract system. But nxt is planned to be incorporated for payments considering tools like shapeshift and the edollar for stability (http://makerdao.com/index.php?topic=1626.0)
Its just a matter of who promotes their currency the best using the Pokereum DAPP
thank you
when i can invest in asset id?
thanks
Sorry not at the moment...There is much more to put out before any crowdfunding effort from internal consensus. You could earn free tokens bounties for marketing though.
ok i waitjust question
yu use nxt or etherum?
thanks
Nxt for the Pokereum DAO org to start...
The DAPP itself is built on ethereum smart contract system. But nxt is planned to be incorporated for payments considering tools like shapeshift and the edollar for stability (http://makerdao.com/index.php?topic=1626.0)
Its just a matter of who promotes their currency the best using the Pokereum DAPP
thank you
when i can invest in asset id?
thanks
Sorry not at the moment...There is much more to put out before any crowdfunding effort from internal consensus. You could earn free tokens bounties for marketing though.
thank you and good luck for yur project ;)
??? ??? ???Totally.Really, because all i get is MIA no responses.
Are there really people working on this project, or just screen shots and time lines getting pushed forward?
Would be nice to have a discussion so poker players can understand. Not sure at all how you plan to offer a community a decentralized product they have no say in the creation of. You cannot solve/implement this from this perspective.
Are there real people here? This is what I want to know...years into this, and still NO RESPONSE.
Ya its not fair that I highlighted "no response", however, I was more looking for dialogue, on the subject. Seems to be what might be called some form of "internal" dialogue, and then a lot of public "please be patient". I found though that there is generally a more immediate response to negative posts.??? ??? ???Totally.Really, because all i get is MIA no responses.
Are there really people working on this project, or just screen shots and time lines getting pushed forward?
Would be nice to have a discussion so poker players can understand. Not sure at all how you plan to offer a community a decentralized product they have no say in the creation of. You cannot solve/implement this from this perspective.
Are there real people here? This is what I want to know...years into this, and still NO RESPONSE.
That's not really fair, considering you PM'd me twice and I responded in both instances in <3h (screencast.com/t/1RMoDxPwbeO8). I suppose I shouldn't indulge PM's moving forward in order to avoid this mixup in the future.
:(
Ya its not fair that I highlighted "no response", however, I was more looking for dialogue, on the subject. Seems to be what might be called some form of "internal" dialogue, and then a lot of public "please be patient". I found though that there is generally a more immediate response to negative posts.
I think we decided we would move the discussion to the reddit forum, it seems I deleted my posts/comments/questions when it seemed there was little to no dialogue to be found.
One clarification is that you seem to admit you are attempting a decentralized poker platform, rather than the "decentralization of poker" which are similar but different. That was something we weren't connecting properly on.
Respectfully, I read through and responded to all your posts (including Reddit if memory serves correctly). As I recall, my last response called out an issue with one of your assumptions about our project, and I asked for further clarification to see if I misunderstood something you said. If the posts you deleted weren't responded to, you could have poked me instead of assuming the worst. I probably just missed it, I'm certainly not purposefully ignoring you...
If you have constructive input to offer, I'm all ears. Deleting a post on Reddit doesn't really help though (i.e. I can't go back now to reply). We want to offer any clarifications we can on our project, but as innovator256 pointed out, we're juggling a lot of balls right now. So early in the project, I don't see why near real-time responses are so important to you...
Obviously, there's been some kind of mixup. Please repost your questions here or on Reddit and we'll get to them. It won't be in real-time,
Let’s assume bots are real, and can play perfect equilibrium poker. Profitable poker games might necessarily fill up with bots, that can then collude both as nodes and on the table. Then much of the real world bitcoin economics applies, as to the risk/rewards/costs of creating bots and bot rings.
IF these bots/nodes can be put in a decentralized equilibrium AND they could also create/maintain private games…then players could pay rake to this lower level bot infested ring, in order that they may organize and create their own intended poker game (or variants of :) ).
This way bots have incentive to hold up the network AND to be honest as a jury pool. Players are free to create their own games and fields, provided they pay the necessary market equilibrium costs.
Cepheus (SEE-fee-us) is the first computer program to play an essentially perfect game of poker.
Cepheus plays heads-up limit Texas hold’em poker. This is the game that was popularized by a series of high-stake matches chronicled in the book, The Professor, the Banker, and the Suicide King, by Michael Craig in 2005. A perfect solution to the game is a strategy that is guaranteed to not lose money in the long run. While Cepheus does not play perfectly, it is so close to perfect that even after playing an entire lifetime of poker against it — over 60 million hands — it is impossible to tell the difference. It is essentially perfect.
but if your questions/input are worthwhile then timing shouldn't be a big factor.And this:
It would be great to have more poeple as part of the pokereum DAO who actually took time to read and understand the whitepaperNot sure if they apply or are directed at me. I cannot say I can be useful, but I can say I would like to be.
Let’s assume bots are real, and can play perfect equilibrium poker…and
Cepheus (SEE-fee-us) is the first computer program to play an essentially perfect game of pokerThat’s a really huge assumption. I know of Cepheus, but there are a number of reasons why this isn’t a real-life situation yet:
Cepheus follows a pre-computed strategy which requires 12 terabytes of compressed storage. Reading the necessary information from disk and decompressing it to answer your strategy query takes a bit of time. If the page is busy, it may take a while to process your request.While it can play a very good game of poker in a controlled environment, it’s not ready to unleash into the real world of poker just yet…
IF these bots/nodes can be put in a decentralized equilibrium AND they could also create/maintain private games…Players in the Pokereum network cannot make their own public tables. They may join public tables through our table matching system, or they may host private games. To play in a private game, your account must have an existing relationship (i.e. “be friends”) with the host. Hosts of private games may not invite random people, and there’s no way to publicize your table. So, for this to be a concern, you will have to manually mature/cultivate real-life connections with other players on the network (for each bot account), or augment your current poker bot to also be a socialization bot too (if you cracked that nut, you’ve got way more profitable places to be running your bots than online poker).
then players could pay rake to this lower level bot infested ring, in order that they may organize and create their own intended poker game (or variants of )We don’t plan on having players within the network collect rakes, and I don’t see this happening any time soon. The whole concept of the rake comes from the premise that the hosting party is adding value to the players sitting at a table. At a casino, that’s the free drinks, security, and professional dealer; in conventional online poker this is the software used. Pokereum will set and collect it’s rakes on the premise that our network adds value by a) having lower rakes than other online venues, b) providing a trustless system that can’t be tampered with by “internal staff/admins,” and c) making it super easy to participate in online poker from anywhere using a number of different cryptocurrencies. We obviously offer extra value-adds through UI, social mechanisms, fair table matching, opening doors to mainstream DAO concepts, etc. Personally though, that A-B-C list is what I tell people the core value is to *mainstream players*.
Profitable poker games might necessarily fill up with bots, that can then collude both as nodes and on the table. Then much of the real world bitcoin economics applies, as to the risk/rewards/costs of creating bots and bot rings.You really need to read and understand our point on Sybil resilience (Trustworthiness and Sybil Resilience). Each player in the Pokereum network is graded on a number of metrics to establish how trustworthy they are. The idea of “flooding the network with bots” trivializes the work and time required to build this reliability score on a per-client basis. This is a huge part of what it takes to build a trustless system: the mechanics involved that let you earn your rep can’t be bypassed or circumvented. Yes, you could try to game the system, but the costs (in time and money) to do that directly affect the ROI for potential cheaters. I can only think of two real-world scenarios in which we’ll see something like this happen, and neither seem very likely/realistic:
I am not clear on how a bot is likely to have a lower trust score than a human.I can’t give you the exact form by which we calculate a TS, but the factors will include how well funded accounts are, how old they are, how accounts perform in games, how accounts perform during match-making process (i.e. pre-game and out-of-game activity), etc. Our metrics are tuned to human behaviour in and out of games, and even the statistically best poker software won’t be able to emulate honest human activity.
Or in other words why is is financially difficult to set up a bot with a bankroll but not for a human. So far all I seem to gather is that the human must also tie up a considerable amount of money? How does this work in relation to 1 play playing multiple tables.There’s more to setting up a bot than just opening an account on a poker platform. You’ve got to have the software and hardware infrastructure, which as I indicated for something like Cepheus is pretty expensive:
It was also only possible thanks to nearly a CPU millenium of computation provided by Compute Canada and Calcul Québec.So the point here is: you aren’t going to run a reliable poker bot on some random computer sitting at home. The lookup tables alone are over 14TBs. Sure, it’s not an insurmountable cost, but when you add up the CPU and storage needs, then imagine trying to scale them out, the costs of running just a few instances of Cepheus-quality software will be tens of thousands of dollars per month.
How does this work in relation to 1 play playing multiple tables.A player can not be in more than one game at a time, so it’s a non-issue.
One other point I meant to make, and I hope you do not feel you must defend yourselves, but if its random seating only then it is quite a niche solution, since much of poker involves choosing your seat and who you play with.It’s not purely random, that’s why I don’t call it random seating, I’ve been saying “matching system”. The matching system does allow for some input from users (you don’t just log in and get thrown into a table).
… but I hope you don't feel you have to defend a position.
In the paper and your words there seems to be described a function in which it is "not likely" profitable for a "bot" and of course this must then be in relation to the profitability of the field.
If you are not considering a certain average level of profit standard then you might attract a field that is not very profitable…
… but if you choose parameters that ensure profitability (ie sliding rake in a centralized model) then you can actually do the math to prove or show it is or isn't profitable for a bot that just plays "x" strategy (and therefore doesn't compute all permutations and so needs some fraction of computing power than if it did). This all of course related to hardware costs, maintenance, electricity etc (much of this is of course worked out already with bitcoin).
Another thing too, I MUST seek to understand what it is that is up for "stake" and its duration, or in other words a poker player must understand how much money they are to tie up in order to secure there role. Then on the other hand, it just needs to be shown this money is less than today's standard of bankroll.
What I did say is that the costs of running advance automated poker bots is going to ruin ROI for anyone trying to game the system. When talking about stuff like this, it's really important not to jump too quickly into connecting ideas that aren't really connected. I mean, common... Lots of people make their livings (or lose then :D) playing poker online. I'd be pretty silly if I tried to say you couldn't.This is where you have missed a key truth about the poker economy. There are players that TRY to make a living by depositing and playing, but there are also pros that play a given strategy that will net a certain profit/hour. This alludes to the fact that there is a hidden underlying profitability of each field.
If you are not considering a certain average level of profit standard then you might attract a field that is not very profitable…It seems to me your team has dubbed this metric not very important, but if it happens to be that the average level of profitability from the perspective of a poker pro (ie there hourly roi) falls below a certain level, you will not have poker field that will support the economy of it.
We really don’t care about what strategies players employ in games. That’s none of our business, and personally, I don’t have a vested interest in any specific player winning at any given table at whatever time of the day… That is way too finely detailed, and also kind of outside my purview.I think I understand, and that I must point out you speak from a developers perspective and not a poker players perspective. Because if it happens to be that the other players' strategies are so good that the average pro or decent or intelligent player can not profit then again you cannot have a field that will support this economy. So the strategy in this sense of the other players does in fact matter, in relation to thing such as rake (in a centralized model), and the overall make up of the player field (ie if "players" start using superbot software of some form, and whether or not bot farms arise).
Let me ask you something in retort: why should I care what strategy a player uses in a trustless poker network?
My personal opinion (and not necessarily that of the Pokereum team) is: bot or not, how you play poker doesn’t concern me at all so long as you aren’t cheating.
This shouldn’t be a tricky topic, the terms used are pretty standard for poker players. Generally speaking:What seems tricky about this is that we have not defined how much a player will need to have as a stake in the network and in relation to the money on the table. Its not clear what the difference in velocities between good winning pros is in relation to weak losing players. So I really like the foundation of the entire paper but I think that we can further define these things and show that theoretically the perfect balance and overall game theory is solvable and provides a solution. (ie a pro can only accept so much in this regard as well, but it shouldn't be difficult to make it more favorable than centralized models).
You have stake in the network when you have money in your account
You have stake in a game when you have money on the table (which ultimately came from your account)
I think I understand, and that I must point out you speak from a developers perspective and not a poker players perspective. Because if it happens to be that the other players' strategies are so good that the average pro or decent or intelligent player can not profit then again you cannot have a field that will support this economy. So the strategy in this sense of the other players does in fact matter, in relation to thing such as rake (in a centralized model), and the overall make up of the player field (ie if "players" start using superbot software of some form, and whether or not bot farms arise).
What is a centralized rake model? Who said anything about centralized rakes?At present time we have different definitions of this, regardless I used it as an example.
Please don’t mistake my disinterest in chasing this rabbit as being defensive – it’s just that I see any attempt at molding/shaping player behavior in games as a red herring. It’s not just impossible to do, it’s got a lot of negative blowback potential. Maybe other members of the Pokereum team will disagree with me on this… but I doubt it.
…. Carrying this forward, it can be shown whether or not a bot ring will arise mathematically.
At present time we have different definitions of [centralized rake model], regardless I used it as an example.
My advice DON'T FEED TROLLS !!I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but I get the feeling your right. This started as a great opportunity to answer questions about risk regarding Sibyl resilience on the Pokereum network, but it’s quickly deteriorating.
BIG DISCLAIMER: I’m about to throw down some personal opinions that may be controversial on the topic of online gaming (and not limited to just online poker). What is about to follow is entirely my own personal perspective and is in no way a reflection of the Pokereum project, it’s team, or in any way an indication of the principles, philosophies, or ideals of either.
Quote from: ”John Smith”…. Carrying this forward, it can be shown whether or not a bot ring will arise mathematically.
So what? All you are telling me is that
- You aren’t reading the whitepaper in it’s entirety. You are jumping from one section to another and treating each section as being independent and separate from the other. If you did read the whole thing and understood it, you’d see that flooding the network with player accounts that are strung up on marionette (the principle, not the software) controls that negatively affects the networks jeopardizes all the stake from all the bot accounts you’ve matured and invested in on the network. It’s self-defeating.
- You have a principle theory that you are having a really hard time putting together as a thesis, and you are letting it twist your understanding of everything related to poker (including/especially Pokereum). I’ve taken some time to look you up (and some of your other accounts) and I’ve visited your site. I’m not saying your theories are wrong or bad, but as any scientist/researcher will tell you: a theory is only as strong as it’s ability to be explained/articulated. Even a good theory doesn’t relate or pertain to everything in it’s field (i.e. the special theory of relativity is excellent, but it has nothing to do with magnetic properties of stellar plasma…)
You keep talking about bots bots bots. As long as they aren’t colluding, why should I care about bots? If bots are as easy to set up as you suggest, and as profitable as you suggest, then everyone is going to run out and get themselves a bot. The playing field doesn’t change – parity in players, and the matching system that screens players for a table is still going to get equitably-performing accounts sitting at the same table. Bots are a red herring because they either are easy + profitable so everyone will have them, or they are super challenging and expensive so they’ll have a relatively low (or non-existent) presence in the population.
In the latter case, they are really no different than really great human players. They’ll gain rep and wins, and constantly move up the food chain in our matching algorithms to sit at the top-talent tables anyway.
So… honestly, who cares?Quote from: ”John Smith”At present time we have different definitions of [centralized rake model], regardless I used it as an example.
We can’t have “different definitions” of this because I have no definition of a “centralized rake model” because I have no clue what you mean. I know what "centralized" means, I know what "rakes" are, and I know what "models" are, but when you mash them up with no context, you lose me.
The fact that you can’t just give a straight answer when I ask you to define what that means lends credence to innovator256’s challenge that you’re just trolling me/us. If that's the case, then it's pretty rude & discourteous considering I've approached all your posts with an open mind and willing to discuss how Pokereum can address your concerns. I hope that's not the case and you're just too impatient to organize your thoughts before posting...
If you want to argue the merits of your thesis, I’m happy to help; but you have to clean it up, write it out as a proper thesis paper, and then send it to me. I’m happy to critique it and help you refine it then. However - if you don’t’ think your ideas are worth putting the time and work into formalizing them, what do you think that tells me about your ideas when you're asking me to consider them? I took the time to work on that whitepaper (in conjuction with others, of course). That's why I'm in a position to field questions on our proposition from people like you. If you want to be on this side of the Q&A, you've got to pay your dues...
So don’t try to hijack a project discussion thread as a way of validating your theories just because the project “is poker”. We’re trying to do something cool that we think people will really like, and we’d like to keep our threads focused on our project – not yours.Quote from: ”innovator256”My advice DON'T FEED TROLLS !!I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but I get the feeling your right. This started as a great opportunity to answer questions about risk regarding Sibyl resilience on the Pokereum network, but it’s quickly deteriorating.
John Smith:If you want to keep my attention and continue to respond to your posts, you are going to have to put more time and effort into your posts. I'm a really busy guy, and I'm starting to feel like you aren't treating my time & attention with the consideration it deserves. If you want to post replies, be direct, articulate, and stop making assumptions about things.
PS: I can assure you that unless you run off on a biology or contemporary/modern art tangent, there is NOTHING you can post that I won't understand. At the risk of sounding quite immodest - it's just not going to happen.
BIG DISCLAIMER: I’m about to throw down some personal opinions that may be controversial on the topic of online gaming (and not limited to just online poker). What is about to follow is entirely my own personal perspective and is in no way a reflection of the Pokereum project, it’s team, or in any way an indication of the principles, philosophies, or ideals of either.I did read the whitepaper, multiple times, I am seeking to understand it.
Quote from: ”John Smith”…. Carrying this forward, it can be shown whether or not a bot ring will arise mathematically.
So what? All you are telling me is that
- You aren’t reading the whitepaper in it’s entirety. You are jumping from one section to another and treating each section as being independent and separate from the other. If you did read the whole thing and understood it, you’d see that flooding the network with player accounts that are strung up on marionette (the principle, not the software) controls that negatively affects the networks jeopardizes all the stake from all the bot accounts you’ve matured and invested in on the network. It’s self-defeating.
- You have a principle theory that you are having a really hard time putting together as a thesis, and you are letting it twist your understanding of everything related to poker (including/especially Pokereum). I’ve taken some time to look you up (and some of your other accounts) and I’ve visited your site. I’m not saying your theories are wrong or bad, but as any scientist/researcher will tell you: a theory is only as strong as it’s ability to be explained/articulated. Even a good theory doesn’t relate or pertain to everything in it’s field (i.e. the special theory of relativity is excellent, but it has nothing to do with magnetic properties of stellar plasma…)
You keep talking about bots bots bots. As long as they aren’t colluding, why should I care about bots? If bots are as easy to set up as you suggest, and as profitable as you suggest, then everyone is going to run out and get themselves a bot. The playing field doesn’t change – parity in players, and the matching system that screens players for a table is still going to get equitably-performing accounts sitting at the same table. Bots are a red herring because they either are easy + profitable so everyone will have them, or they are super challenging and expensive so they’ll have a relatively low (or non-existent) presence in the population.
In the latter case, they are really no different than really great human players. They’ll gain rep and wins, and constantly move up the food chain in our matching algorithms to sit at the top-talent tables anyway.
So… honestly, who cares?
At present time we have different definitions of [centralized rake model], regardless I used it as an example.Centralized rake model involves rake leaving the game to a third party etc. the opposite being a game in which the rake does not leave the players community. We could certainly go into this further, perhaps sites with servers rather than p2p.
We can’t have “different definitions” of this because I have no definition of a “centralized rake model” because I have no clue what you mean. I know what "centralized" means, I know what "rakes" are, and I know what "models" are, but when you mash them up with no context, you lose me.
The fact that you can’t just give a straight answer when I ask you to define what that means lends credence to innovator256’s challenge that you’re just trolling me/us. If that's the case, then it's pretty rude & discourteous considering I've approached all your posts with an open mind and willing to discuss how Pokereum can address your concerns. I hope that's not the case and you're just too impatient to organize your thoughts before posting...What does it mean to be "formal" to you? To have an abstract? Is it the indentation or the fonts?
If you want to argue the merits of your thesis, I’m happy to help; but you have to clean it up, write it out as a proper thesis paper, and then send it to me. I’m happy to critique it and help you refine it then. However - if you don’t’ think your ideas are worth putting the time and work into formalizing them, what do you think that tells me about your ideas when you're asking me to consider them? I took the time to work on that whitepaper (in conjuction with others, of course). That's why I'm in a position to field questions on our proposition from people like you. If you want to be on this side of the Q&A, you've got to pay your dues...
So don’t try to hijack a project discussion thread as a way of validating your theories just because the project “is poker”. We’re trying to do something cool that we think people will really like, and we’d like to keep our threads focused on our project – not yours.Yes and y'all invited me to the discussion.
:)Quote from: ”innovator256”My advice DON'T FEED TROLLS !!I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but I get the feeling your right. This started as a great opportunity to answer questions about risk regarding Sibyl resilience on the Pokereum network, but it’s quickly deteriorating.
John Smith:If you want to keep my attention and continue to respond to your posts, you are going to have to put more time and effort into your posts. I'm a really busy guy, and I'm starting to feel like you aren't treating my time & attention with the consideration it deserves. If you want to post replies, be direct, articulate, and stop making assumptions about things.
PS: I can assure you that unless you run off on a biology or contemporary/modern art tangent, there is NOTHING you can post that I won't understand. At the risk of sounding quite immodest - it's just not going to happen.Good that means we can levate rheomodes which might prove useful.
BIG DISCLAIMER: I’m about to throw down some personal opinions that may be controversial on the topic of online gaming (and not limited to just online poker). What is about to follow is entirely my own personal perspective and is in no way a reflection of the Pokereum project, it’s team, or in any way an indication of the principles, philosophies, or ideals of either.You don't have a solution for the players if this is the attitude, regardless of any disclaimers. This would scare the shit out of the players. Besides, bots are probably super easy and relatively cheap.
You keep talking about bots bots bots. As long as they aren’t colluding, why should I care about bots? If bots are as easy to set up as you suggest, and as profitable as you suggest, then everyone is going to run out and get themselves a bot. The playing field doesn’t change – parity in players, and the matching system that screens players for a table is still going to get equitably-performing accounts sitting at the same table. Bots are a red herring because they either are easy + profitable so everyone will have them, or they are super challenging and expensive so they’ll have a relatively low (or non-existent) presence in the population.
In the latter case, they are really no different than really great human players. They’ll gain rep and wins, and constantly move up the food chain in our matching algorithms to sit at the top-talent tables anyway.
So… honestly, who cares?
Now you will just be censored for name calling and swearing troll. Since I cannot ban you.You also seemed to have censored the part where I told you to contribute.
sorry I don't want to waste my time contributing to lunacy...There is no productive discussion here, just an effort to disrupt and shed light on your blog.Listen, NOBODY wants this to succeed more than me.
I'll tell you who cares. Every singe poker player you want to use this software. It will ALWAYS be the first question they ask you "How do you deal with collusion and bots?" And I'm not talking about colluding bots, I am talking about a plethora of bots that tip the scales of profitability into an unbeatable game. Random seating doesn't seem to defeat this in any manner.
I'm not sure if I am not understanding something here or if you are dismissing something that seems obvious. Poker players are looking for an economy, you are providing a platform with a seemingly limited one.
Centralized rake model involves rake leaving the game to a third party etc. the opposite being a game in which the rake does not leave the players community. We could certainly go into this further, perhaps sites with servers rather than p2p.Uh…. No. What you are describing is a rake.
Rake is the scaled commission fee taken by a cardroom operating a poker game. It is generally 2.5 to 5 percent of the pot in each poker hand, up to a predetermined maximum amount.There’s nothing centralized or modeled about it. That’s just what a rake is: what the host takes for running the game. Are you suggesting that a team who puts there time, money, and brainpower into creating a fully trustless poker network shouldn’t be collecting rakes to fund improvements and new releases/features for the network?
What does it mean to be "formal" to you? To have an abstract? Is it the indentation or the fonts?
Yes and y'all invited me to the discussion.You were invited to ask questions about our project, not to discuss your theories. Please tell me I don’t have to explain the difference…
My understanding of the issue of dialog here is that you and your team have approached this solution from a developers perspective. Everything I have contemplated, whether you give a shit or not, or think or it foolish or not, is from the players perspective...Stop saying that – it’s getting on my nerves. Have you considered AT ALL the possibility that you don’t understand what we’re posting (or doing) and this is why you keep saying we aren’t thinking about players? That maybe this big complex concept you’ve put months (or years) into developing and refining was just a small nut we cracked in a few hours? Because honestly, from where I’m sitting that’s what it sounds like.
you are about 80% out of line from the players wants, 20% you see eye to eye with the average intelligent player. But when you shift it to align, the pieces seem to match perfectly.Great, stats! Source please! [without sources, I’m going to assume when you say “players” you mean “me”]
From the players perspective it seems to be effectively random, in that they do not get to choose their own seat. I don't fully understand the algorithm, but for my understanding and questions that doesn't seem so pertinent. Part of poker, is choosing your own seat. There are games that you don't choose your own seat, but they are a niche game, as many players would not accept that lack of option. This is why I keep using the word random, its a natural slip because I don't have the same perspective as you, so different words are important in different ways to me.
Collusion and bots are two separate problems; and I’ve already said multiple times that our matching system is not random.
You’re ignore chunks of things I say (for example: “our matching system isn’t random”). By picking and choosing what you remember from what I say, you are creating gaps/holes that don’t exist.
As for players: that hasn’t been my observation at all. The overwhelming majority (not all) of poker players aren’t looking for an economy. They’re looking to play a game they enjoy (poker) in an environment where they don’t have to risk misplacing trust. There is a small percentage of players that approach online poker from a purely business standpoint, but their population is so low that they couldn’t support the $12Billion market on their own.This is a leak. You cannot ignore this, it is simple economics. Poker is a game of skill, and the players field is getting more and more intelligent over time, you have to address this.
It matters not whether you can do it cheaper, but rather the profitability of the game you offer. And rake can also be essentially (or in the "effective" definition) value leaving the game to 3rd parties. And yes it generally is and certainly can create a centralized model/economy for the game. Today's game is exactly in that state, and your project is titled with the word "decentralized" (admittedly we don't fully share the same perspective or definition of that either).Quote from: ”John Smith”Centralized rake model involves rake leaving the game to a third party etc. the opposite being a game in which the rake does not leave the players community. We could certainly go into this further, perhaps sites with servers rather than p2p.Uh…. No. What you are describing is a rake.Quote from: ”Wikipedia”Rake is the scaled commission fee taken by a cardroom operating a poker game. It is generally 2.5 to 5 percent of the pot in each poker hand, up to a predetermined maximum amount.There’s nothing centralized or modeled about it. That’s just what a rake is: what the host takes for running the game. Are you suggesting that a team who puts there time, money, and brainpower into creating a fully trustless poker network shouldn’t be collecting rakes to fund improvements and new releases/features for the network?
Any player capable of thinking two days ahead knows that paying rakes are fundamental to keeping the thing they like around and fresh, and are always happy to pay something. The question we raise is: can we do it cheaper than everyone else (answer: yes, we think we can).
I'm not being a smart ass, you obviously have parameters of formality and I need them in order to write something in the form you are demanding of me. And it seems clear you have to explain the difference, because I am simply being sincere.Quote from: ”John Smith”What does it mean to be "formal" to you? To have an abstract? Is it the indentation or the fonts?
- Don’t be a smartass; you aren’t winning me over with that approach.
- I already answered that question in my last post: write a thesis paper.
Quote from: ”John Smith”Yes and y'all invited me to the discussion.You were invited to ask questions about our project, not to discuss your theories. Please tell me I don’t have to explain the difference…
Yes you cracked me in a few hours. Yes I put out probabilities to describe what I am saying, I am a pro poker player, not highstakes I just live off the game, so I try to accurately describe things with probabilities.Quote from: ”John Smith”My understanding of the issue of dialog here is that you and your team have approached this solution from a developers perspective. Everything I have contemplated, whether you give a shit or not, or think or it foolish or not, is from the players perspective...Stop saying that – it’s getting on my nerves. Have you considered AT ALL the possibility that you don’t understand what we’re posting (or doing) and this is why you keep saying we aren’t thinking about players? That maybe this big complex concept you’ve put months (or years) into developing and refining was just a small nut we cracked in a few hours? Because honestly, from where I’m sitting that’s what it sounds like.Quote from: ”John Smith”you are about 80% out of line from the players wants, 20% you see eye to eye with the average intelligent player. But when you shift it to align, the pieces seem to match perfectly.Great, stats! Source please! [without sources, I’m going to assume when you say “players” you mean “me”]
if thats true..why don't you address the points in the paper as it relates to your question rather than making assumptions time and time again. Or dedicate time to understanding the solutions in the paper if you really care.Rather than side stepping all the explanations given by patrickgamer to keep discussing points that are null and void...I am not attacking your project, you do not need to defend anything.
As for rudeness this is like the pot calling the kettle black. All your disruptive activities over time will prompt some kind of reaction sometime
There are games that you don't choose your own seat, but they are a niche game, as many players would not accept that lack of option. This is why I keep using the word random, its a natural slip because I don't have the same perspective as you, so different words are important in different ways to me.I see. Well, let’s agree to disagree on this. We don’t think picking a table (I say seat, but you are assigned to a table, not a “chair”) is all that important when looking at online play with strangers (unless you’re cheating). HOWEVER – if we’re wrong, the market will show that after launch. So far, you’re the only one we’ve heard from who has an issue with this.
Quote from: ”patrickgamer”As for players: that hasn’t been my observation at all. The overwhelming majority (not all) of poker players aren’t looking for an economy. They’re looking to play a game they enjoy (poker) in an environment where they don’t have to risk misplacing trust. There is a small percentage of players that approach online poker from a purely business standpoint, but their population is so low that they couldn’t support the $12Billion market on their own.This is a leak. You cannot ignore this, it is simple economics. Poker is a game of skill, and the players field is getting more and more intelligent over time, you have to address this.
It matters not whether you can do it cheaper, but rather the profitability of the game you offer.
I'm not being a smart ass, you obviously have parameters of formality and I need them in order to write something in the form you are demanding of me. And it seems clear you have to explain the difference, because I am simply being sincere.Okay, in good faith, go read irsc.edu/students/academicsupportcenter/researchpaper/researchpaper.aspx?id=4294967430 and covingtoninnovations.com/mc/howtowrite/howtowrite.pdf
Yes you cracked me in a few hours. Yes I put out probabilities to describe what I am saying, I am a pro poker player, not highstakes I just live off the game, so I try to accurately describe things with probabilities.You didn’t have to tell me that. It’s painfully obvious you are coming from a perspective of personal experience; but that just strengthens my point that you are a bit biased and your assumption that you represent the general poker population is off-key.
Its simply a partial solution from a poker players' perspective. For example there are many coaching videos and strategy threads on picking your player pools and opponents, it is part of poker. Not being able to pick such things is a certain niche of the game.Quote from: ”John Smith”There are games that you don't choose your own seat, but they are a niche game, as many players would not accept that lack of option. This is why I keep using the word random, its a natural slip because I don't have the same perspective as you, so different words are important in different ways to me.I see. Well, let’s agree to disagree on this. We don’t think picking a table (I say seat, but you are assigned to a table, not a “chair”) is all that important when looking at online play with strangers (unless you’re cheating). HOWEVER – if we’re wrong, the market will show that after launch. So far, you’re the only one we’ve heard from who has an issue with this.
The bell curve doesn't fully describe what is profitable from the players' perspective.Quote from: ”John Smith”Quote from: ”patrickgamer”As for players: that hasn’t been my observation at all. The overwhelming majority (not all) of poker players aren’t looking for an economy. They’re looking to play a game they enjoy (poker) in an environment where they don’t have to risk misplacing trust. There is a small percentage of players that approach online poker from a purely business standpoint, but their population is so low that they couldn’t support the $12Billion market on their own.This is a leak. You cannot ignore this, it is simple economics. Poker is a game of skill, and the players field is getting more and more intelligent over time, you have to address this.
This is what I’m talking about. What is a leak? What am I ignoring? That players get better? I’m not ignoring that, it’s just a self-correcting phenomena. The simplest example is bell-curving. The player population in any poker network is always going to follow a relatively normal distribution, and absolutely nothing I’ve read/seen/heard/felt/smelt (including your posts and your website) suggests that’s going to change in our lifetime. Stop saying random incomplete sentences. Take the time to formulate your thoughts properly, or I’m not going to put the time in to read them.
Yes I caught up on the links, I understand now, you wish to throw a mountain in front of me, I would climb it if I felt you would possibly deem it as acceptable/relevant. Regardless I need to understand or fully know your formulas to do such a thing.Quote from: ”John Smith”It matters not whether you can do it cheaper, but rather the profitability of the game you offer.
Only if you are approaching it from an economic theory perspective (i.e. YOUR perspective). I’ve already refuted your supposition that your perspective is shared by the bulk of players. My observations, research, and evidence suggests your assumption/presumption is flawed. You haven’t convinced me otherwise. Write the thesis paper, convince me, and then I’ll consider the notion that everyone who plays poker is doing it your way.Quote from: ”John Smith”I'm not being a smart ass, you obviously have parameters of formality and I need them in order to write something in the form you are demanding of me. And it seems clear you have to explain the difference, because I am simply being sincere.Okay, in good faith, go read irsc.edu/students/academicsupportcenter/researchpaper/researchpaper.aspx?id=4294967430 and covingtoninnovations.com/mc/howtowrite/howtowrite.pdf
I think rather you have not at all understood my intent, purpose, or insight.Quote from: ”John Smith”Yes you cracked me in a few hours. Yes I put out probabilities to describe what I am saying, I am a pro poker player, not highstakes I just live off the game, so I try to accurately describe things with probabilities.You didn’t have to tell me that. It’s painfully obvious you are coming from a perspective of personal experience; but that just strengthens my point that you are a bit biased and your assumption that you represent the general poker population is off-key.
The bell curve doesn't fully describe what is profitability from the players' perspective is.No, it actually does describe profitability in poker very well. It's been analysed several times by a few independent teams.
Yes I caught up on the links, I understand now, you wish to though a mountain in front of me, I would climb it if I felt you would possibly deem it as acceptable/relevant. Regardless I need to understand or fully know your formulas to do such a thing.Don't chastise me for asking you to put the same amount of effort into your theories that we put into ours. If you want your ideas to be treated as equals with ours, you're going to have to earn it. Like I said, if you don't think your ideas are worth the time/effort to formalize, then they probably aren't worth my effort to learn about them.
I think rather you have not at all understood my intent, purpose, or insight.Yeah, I get it. You have an idea - it's really important, and it'll help us take our project to the next level by avoiding the pitfalls of other, similar projects. This isn't rocket-science, we all understand what you're saying. We just aren't convinced that these ideas of yours are as ground-breaking and you think they are.
My understanding is the players in general will avoid this economy.I doubt it, everyone the team speaks with doubts it too. Still, there's no point debating it. Time will tell.
I also wonder if you straightened out Vitalik's complaints when he said it looked game-able.Vitalik never said our system was gameable. I'll caution you to be very careful of paraphrasing other people's comments. Use direct quotes/citations or don't use the person at all. Someone who considered you more of a FUD poster would see that as purposefully misusing a popular name for your personal agenda...
Quote from: VitalikSo, this mechanism is still only as strong as the p2p poker chain itself, as if malicious actors take over >50% of the p2p poker chain then they can put multiple sets of hashes into the ethereum blockchain (unless you're not just using hashes and putting all the data in, in which case why not just use the ethereum blockchain to store the entire state?)Quote from: patrickgamerTo elaborate a bit on the 50% vulnerability - our plan is to use stake as a measure of trust for each proof of work. If our sample of the network (i.e. juror pool) returns anything but 100% conformity, we resubmit for full network validation.
So, 50% attack doesn't work in the traditional sense. You'll also note, further down the paper, that the stake isn't just a function of asset value, but of velocity as well. So an attack would require cultivation of 50% of the network by velocity, maintaining this ahead of the natural network members.
Bonus: a full network consensus may also be used to identify members of the attacking/colluding pool.
I am a huge supporter of this, obviously, and I want it to succeed. I don't care if you destroyed me in an hour. You and innovator are too defensive, I am still simply hoping to understand, I guess contributing is already out of the question.No one destroyed anyone as far as I can see, and me asking you to slow down and organize your thoughts more clearly doesn't make me defensive.
I'm not sure, maybe I am not well studied on the subject. I understand there is to be a bell curve in edge and winning distribution. But my understanding is there are factors that are involved in a players hourly $winrate. It doesn't seem to me a bell curve describes this. A crude example might be a game of 100% rake vs a game with 0%, players could have the same winning distribution but different profit rates. Another crude example would be if the game was 99% bot's that play maximally exploitative.Quote from: John SmithThe bell curve doesn't fully describe what is profitability from the players' perspective is.No, it actually does describe profitability in poker very well. It's been analysed several times by a few independent teams.
Probably is the interesting word I think. But I simply meant your tone suggests you would not mean to read my "thesis" anyways, which is fine and makes sense.Quote from: John SmithYes I caught up on the links, I understand now, you wish to though a mountain in front of me, I would climb it if I felt you would possibly deem it as acceptable/relevant. Regardless I need to understand or fully know your formulas to do such a thing.Don't chastise me for asking you to put the same amount of effort into your theories that we put into ours. If you want your ideas to be treated as equals with ours, you're going to have to earn it. Like I said, if you don't think your ideas are worth the time/effort to formalize, then they probably aren't worth my effort to learn about them.
This I am interested in, and I guess my understanding is that this is a formula, to relate the stake needed to run a mass amount of colluding nodes, and whether or not it can be done with bot software (and hardware I guess too). I am not trying to do FUD, I think that your paper did not go into the specifics of this and I mean to understand them.Quote from: John SmithI also wonder if you straightened out Vitalik's complaints when he said it looked game-able.Vitalik never said our system was gameable. I'll caution you to be very careful of paraphrasing other people's comments. Use direct quotes/citations or don't use the person at all. Someone who considered you more of a FUD poster would see that as purposefully misusing a popular name for your personal agenda...
For reader's benefit, this is the direct quote:Quote from: White PaperQuote from: VitalikSo, this mechanism is still only as strong as the p2p poker chain itself, as if malicious actors take over >50% of the p2p poker chain then they can put multiple sets of hashes into the ethereum blockchain (unless you're not just using hashes and putting all the data in, in which case why not just use the ethereum blockchain to store the entire state?)Quote from: patrickgamerTo elaborate a bit on the 50% vulnerability - our plan is to use stake as a measure of trust for each proof of work. If our sample of the network (i.e. juror pool) returns anything but 100% conformity, we resubmit for full network validation.
So, 50% attack doesn't work in the traditional sense. You'll also note, further down the paper, that the stake isn't just a function of asset value, but of velocity as well. So an attack would require cultivation of 50% of the network by velocity, maintaining this ahead of the natural network members.
Bonus: a full network consensus may also be used to identify members of the attacking/colluding pool.
Vitalik's concern had nothing at all to do with the gaming aspect of the project, and was entirely focused on the integrity of the blockchain technology we're working with. I think my response sufficiently addressed his concern.
I have no doubt p2p decentralized poker is inevitable, to me then there is only one solution as the implementation of mental poker.Quote from: John SmithI am a huge supporter of this, obviously, and I want it to succeed. I don't care if you destroyed me in an hour. You and innovator are too defensive, I am still simply hoping to understand, I guess contributing is already out of the question.No one destroyed anyone as far as I can see, and me asking you to slow down and organize your thoughts more clearly doesn't make me defensive.
We are all glad that you are a supporter of the project. It means that even in the face of disagreement, you still see the same value prop that we are so excited about.
That said, I will say that your inability to process critical feedback and your one-track-mind approach to learning about our project probably wouldn't make you a good fit with the team right now. Our biomass forcus right now is on collaberative thinkers, and the project (and so by extension the team) doesn't have to chase down perriferal concepts/theories. However, things (and people) change with time. Maybe sometime down the road when the project isn't quite as focused we could rekindle the discussion.
I would have expected, though, that you'd rather spend your time and energy refining your own theories before giving your time to another project. If/when you do, feel free to send me the thesis. My offer of reviewing it still stands.
Probably is the interesting word I think. But I simply meant your tone suggests you would not mean to read my "thesis" anyways, which is fine and makes sense.I already said I would review it; three separate times in just the last 24 hours. If that's not enough... well then, there's nothing I can do about that. I'm not going to argue with you about whether I intend to do something I said I would.
This I am interested in, and I guess my understanding is that this is a formula, to relate the stake needed to run a mass amount of colluding nodes, and whether or not it can be done with bot software (and hardware I guess too).We are talking about blockchain and network stake, you're talking about game stake. No amount of game stake will let a puppeteer successfully collude on the network. The probabilities are astronomically low. If you think you can beat those odds, you'd make more money playing the NY super lotto.
How can I understand this better, for example what game will I play and what will it require of me in this regard?Okay, I've explained this to you a few times on a few different boards. For readers' benefit here, this will be the last time I walk you through this...
I want to understand an example of how much money I must put up in order to play and be counted in this regard.You bet what you want to bet, as you would at any poker game. I'm afraid I completely don't understand your line of questioning. It reads, as someone who doesn't know what you're getting at, as though you are asking how much money you HAVE to bet to play. That of course, is dependant on you. You pick the amount you're willing to put on the line, and then we match you with others.
Sorry if you feel slighted by me, but your line of questioning is starting to grate on me.I realize you don't appreciate my delivery/grammar, but I think the "slight" is more than just my feeling. What's more is innovators comments have me in a state of disgust and dishearten-ment.
You bet what you want to bet, as you would at any poker game. I'm afraid I completely don't understand your line of questioning. It reads, as someone who doesn't know what you're getting at, as though you are asking how much money you HAVE to bet to play. That of course, is dependant on you. You pick the amount you're willing to put on the line, and then we match you with others.I am asking about the stake in the network in fact it seems to function like a bankroll, and I am curious how the actual numbers might look etc. And I don't need rapid condescending answers or insults to my character or intelligence. I have calmly and consistently stated I am looking to understand.
There is no minimum or maximum related to funding your account, of course if you aren't willing to bet much, you won't win much, and if you go too high or too low, you may have trouble finding players willing to wager your amount. SO... it pretty much works like you'd expect.
Seriously JS: If my discourse with you is classified as condescending and rude, then really you won't like working with me.We don't have this problem because I won't be involved with innovator.
I'm really trying to meet you in middle ground, and even now in your last post you continue to push an agenda of economics and your theories on the subject, despite my repeated attempts to explain that this thread is not the place for that.I'm worried that my points seem irre-levant because we have not yet understood their purpose.
Put another way: it's not Pokereum's objective to create a business space for your career. It's our goal to provide a trustless (and awesome) poker network for players to play and have fun, leveraging the awesomeness of decentralization and cryptocurrencies. You want me to tell you that Pokereum is the place where you, as a professional with preexisting strategies and approaches of play, can maintain your business on our network. I don't know - I can't say, and it's really for you to determine post-launch. Factors such as player competencies, appetite for wagers, etc. are all outside of our control.This seems to support my 'fear'.
We could try to shape our player base to suit a particular end (like maximizing ROI for professional players) but we aren't going to do that. It's not the team's concern.This truly shows me I have insight in this regard.
SO... for the final time: if your interest in Pokereum is strictly career-based, then honestly nothing in this forum can (nor should) be of interest to you. The only thing that will mater is what the player ecosystem looks like after launch. Our philosophy on trustless systems is a peripheral concern to professional players (in as much as, "okay it's safe, so I can trust my playtime here"). Our belief in operating as a DAO has no impact on your earnings. Our management of anti-collusion and anti-cheating is a reassurance in security. That's about it. Everything else in your last post was already addressed, and if you haven't caught on yet, then I can't help further. Not because I don't want to, but because I really don't know how else to explain it. If another reader on this thread wants to chime in and see if they can bridge the gap, please do. But so help me... if it's yet another alias of JS I will start ignoring posts altogether.I don't suppose you put your paper up so others would agree. I see a collusion problem solved by a form of seating where the players do not get to choose their table. I don't see how another site could not just implement this already. I see a site like stars with 100k+ players online at one, and then a site like seals which gathers about 200 max. You are offering a subset of poker with a barrier to enter, and I wonder if you intend it solely for cash based play (I mean can it all facilitate organized seating for an mtt?) .
Sorry if you feel slighted by me, but your line of questioning is starting to grate on me.Quote from: John SmithI want to understand an example of how much money I must put up in order to play and be counted in this regard.You bet what you want to bet, as you would at any poker game. I'm afraid I completely don't understand your line of questioning. It reads, as someone who doesn't know what you're getting at, as though you are asking how much money you HAVE to bet to play. That of course, is dependant on you. You pick the amount you're willing to put on the line, and then we match you with others.
There is no minimum or maximum related to funding your account, of course if you aren't willing to bet much, you won't win much, and if you go too high or too low, you may have trouble finding players willing to wager your amount. SO... it pretty much works like you'd expect.
Seriously JS: If my discourse with you is classified as condescending and rude, then really you won't like working with me. I'm really trying to meet you in middle ground, and even now in your last post you continue to push an agenda of economics and your theories on the subject, despite my repeated attempts to explain that this thread is not the place for that.
Put another way: it's not Pokereum's objective to create a business space for your career. It's our goal to provide a trustless (and awesome) poker network for players to play and have fun, leveraging the awesomeness of decentralization and cryptocurrencies. You want me to tell you that Pokereum is the place where you, as a professional with preexisting strategies and approaches of play, can maintain your business on our network. I don't know - I can't say, and it's really for you to determine post-launch. Factors such as player competencies, appetite for wagers, etc. are all outside of our control.
We could try to shape our player base to suit a particular end (like maximizing ROI for professional players) but we aren't going to do that. It's not the team's concern.
SO... for the final time: if your interest in Pokereum is strictly career-based, then honestly nothing in this forum can (nor should) be of interest to you. The only thing that will mater is what the player ecosystem looks like after launch. Our philosophy on trustless systems is a peripheral concern to professional players (in as much as, "okay it's safe, so I can trust my playtime here"). Our belief in operating as a DAO has no impact on your earnings. Our management of anti-collusion and anti-cheating is a reassurance in security. That's about it. Everything else in your last post was already addressed, and if you haven't caught on yet, then I can't help further. Not because I don't want to, but because I really don't know how else to explain it. If another reader on this thread wants to chime in and see if they can bridge the gap, please do. But so help me... if it's yet another alias of JS I will start ignoring posts altogether.
I think Einstein had a saying for that...so bloody unnecessary. Let it be known: I want nothing to do with you, or anyone associated with you.
Why so sensitive?Questioning peoples sanity because we don't like what they say or how they say it is despicable. It's also extremely dismiss and disrespectful.
You emailed me telling me how you normally get kicked out of communities due to your unstable/esoteric nature resulting in disruption.
To the audience note the objective take and witness the next set of irrational outbursts...
I don't know if ya'll know but poker has been largely unplayable recently across many sites. Many admit its ddos attacks, Poker Stars won't.Quote from: TopPair2Pair;46675800Evolving area or revolving door…?
So this is why the rake is soo high???? lol. damn you ddossers !!Quote from: J.SmithyConsidering the truth of it, its not really funny though is it? It has already been extensively shown that third parties used for security and trust are themselves security leaks that end up costing the players dearly. The centralized poker model cannot help but facilitate this especially in relation to its counterpart.
It’s true to that recent re-levation of ddos attacks is not only natural evolution but also very founded in well understood economics. As technology grows (for example as other “institutions” gain attack proof security mechanisms ie bitcoin for banking/currency), there will be more and more such pressure on weaker but bountiful institutions such as poker stars and other successful sites.
In this regard sites function no less like that of a bank, and thus require no less than the security measures and mechanisms that an online banking system would need (if nothing else such security leaks provide a perfect channel for money laundering/fraud etc.).
There are in fact two possibly (and likely/efficient solutions) but unfortunately for the centralized model they are not so accessible but for the players. The first involves moving poker to a p2p type platform, and the 2nd involves paying enough of the attackers to hold up the system so that they might prefer to do so rather than attack it. Then there only needs to be a certain limited amount of “bounty” offered in relation to creating a large enough pool that would protect the game (ie 50+% decentralized in it’s own NE).
If it can be shown (and I am sure it can) that the cost of securing the game in this fashion is feasible and especially more feasible than the current rake exiting the game (especially for this purpose) is equally favorable (or more so), then there can be an equilibrium shown that will necessarily suggest a theoretical solution (which would then necessarily fit current known “working” experiments) .
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vxjxE-7QMAvo95UzhWftWJ3Ke_gAoNLTQQEudNeUQeY/edit (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vxjxE-7QMAvo95UzhWftWJ3Ke_gAoNLTQQEudNeUQeY/edit)
QuotePokereum: An Efficient Smart Contract Dependent Decentralized Poker PlatformIn the above solution (prob the link won’t work but its a 30 page leading paper on the subject, already in coding stage and nearly finished apparently), which is the most prominent of today’s present circumstance, there is nearly exactly this solution, except these author’s have not discussed the profitability of the game with regards to effective rake or the possibility of bots or “super-software” that might exploit such a profitable game.
Abstract. A secure peer-to-peer (p2p) version of traditional online poker would allow trustless and provably fair poker games.
I think though, that with all of these things together, we do in fact have enough parameters to derive and solve an equilibrium solution, which could be not only exciting for all of the players of today and the future, but could also be used to put pressure on the current status quo standards of the game.
Lastly and most interestingly there seems to be a middle ground adjustment the centralized site models and current status quo sites could take that might extend their own sustainability and profitability, but one wonders if they will stumble upon this adjustment or whether they would care if presented it. Seems quite obvious now though, the centralized model (especially with “servers”) has a limited time, probably less than a year if they continually refuse to adopt ideal payment processing systems for the players benefit.
As Gzesh points out not being able to secure the game in this regard (ie ddsos attacks) might not be directly related to the security of the players roll’s but knowing that with a superior payment processing option available, that allows player’s zero threat to security in regards to their rolls (and at zero cost), but it certainly cannot be said by any individual knowledgeable on such security systems, that lack of proper security in one area does not cast doubt on all others in which that company is contracted to secure.
It really doesn't make sense though...The very premise of the effort is from the player perspective, from user experience, to security, confidence based on provable fair platform, to facilitating a gamified incentivized return customer mechanism detailed in the whitepaper.No it makes sense, its just a different and difficult perspective than you are used to. You did not design pokereum from the players perspective, you built it from the pseduo/de facto players perspective that poker sites and media have been projecting on the players. I understand you don't understand me, but I have put forth a lot of material backing up my perspective. I am a full time player. I have over 100k games behind me, albeit at small/mid stakes, but understand I AM the players perspective.
I promise to engage if you can do this:I have already explicity stated I will not be working with you now or in the future, nor anyone associated with you. I would appreciate it if you put back up my post saying "fuck you". I would also appreciate, if we wind up on a project together in the future, if you let me know (even pseudonomously) so I can leave that group too. Perhaps I am worthless and its not a loss, but I am just being clear.
Post your questions one at a time and I will address them, please do not go off tangent. Also address my response to your answers directly. Without this and with your style of discussion, is hard to dialog without wasted effort and I am not sure if there can be one , which is what we have been getting at... At most 5 short sentences to start. Then maybe a productive outcome can ensue...None of my words are difficult for those who are sincere. Nothing is tangential. I have 200+ articles on the decentralization of poker and its surrounding literature, FROM THE PLAYERS PERSPECTIVE, under the blog titled "THEWEALTHOFCHIPS". It would be far more helpful, if ya'll assumed it was on topic and READ what I write to you, rather than the assumption its off topic because you THINK its off topic. As for your sentiments. I have explained very clearly, you need to THINK about the economics of the game and especially from the players perspective (I can already hear you assuming that's a tangent ffs). Bots and superhuman software DO in fact exist, and IS a relevant issue:
Ideal Introductions refers to a sort of subset of Bohmian dialog or some form of preparation depending on what drives reality, our axiomatic views, and what our perspective is. It simply refers to the optimal ways to prepare for such a “meeting” of strangers or persons of X% of missing information. How can two parties communicate most effectively in order to fulfill the most gainful direction of dialog?
Can both “players” interact so receptively that neither trumps the others important content? How can we cut through our biases and preconceived notions at lightening speed? Should we rely on technology such as facebook feeds or job profiles for this?
Can we each recognize the importance of “Ideal Introductions”?
Understanding this might implicitly reduce our understanding and implementation of the minimum protocols for duck duck goose.
You did not design pokereum from the players perspective, you built it from the pseduo/de facto players perspective that poker sites and media have been projecting on the players,You've said that now multiple times. It tells us:
Everyone has the right to their own opinions, but not all opinions are equal.QuoteYour situation reminds me of this a lot. If you want to validate yourself and your ideas, you have to put in the work to formalize them. You said it'll be a waste of time - I say it can't possibly be more of a waste of time than getting banned by a bunch of other boards and posting randomly in other people's threads to try to get attention...
As for this thread, your theories are just the one-off opinion of some random guy with no qualifications or credentials (being a poker player isn't enough considering the type of argument you're trying to make).
As I've said before: this thread is for fielding questions about Pokereum, not validating your ideas. You can start your own thread about your ideas if you want, but I'm sure it'll be bereft of activity because, really, no one cares until you've got something to back it all up.
If what I'm saying here is condescending or rude, then so be it. If nothing else, I hope it shows the rest of the NXT community and readers here that the Pokereum team is being patient, considerate, and willing to field questions that are even peripherally related to our project. I think all my answers have been thoughtful and well-prepared.
Now....I'd really like to hear from some other people who have more direct questions about our project and get this thread back on track!
Again if you start with the assumption I am wrong, stupid, and off topic nothing I write will make sense. I never said you are a media puppet etc, nor anything of that sort. You have designed a model based on the recreational players perspective, which is the perspective sites/etc. use to market their product to player. You have NOT designed this from a POKER PLAYERS perspective.Quote from: John SmithYou did not design pokereum from the players perspective, you built it from the pseduo/de facto players perspective that poker sites and media have been projecting on the players,You've said that now multiple times. It tells us:
- That you think we are some kind of puppet that are played by media strings and have no regard for players. This is the complete opposite of everything we're trying to do. Obviously, if I haven't gotten through to you that everything with decentralization, UI, etc. are all from player perspectives then... let's just disengage b/c you aren't going to get it.
I am however the most knowledgeable player on this subject BY FAR. Pseudo-economics would be suggesting bots aren't real, and that if they are they aren't a consideration. Recs AND Pros will avoid this project like the plague for that. And again its not self-centred and conceited for me to point out such an obvious error of "perspective".
- You insist that anything not in perfect alignment with your own views means it's not in alignment with player views. That's the pinnacle of conceit and self-centred thinking. That is why I don't think you'd be a good fit for the team, and that's also why your posts are so easily dismissed. You aren't the only player engaging us, and yet you're the only one with this emphasis on pseudo-economics.
I am not making a statement about others capabilities, I am simple explaining and pointing out that which I can clearly see.[li]
- It's a betrayal of your line of thought in purporting that you are the only person capable of thinking through player problems and solving them. No one reading this post has to be psychic to read between your lines and see that, for all the grief you're giving i256 you're being just as condescending.
[/li][/list]
Your last few posts makes it really clear how frustrated you are that other people are not listening and not taking you seriously. I understand that, but I've already told you how to fix it. Stop being lazy. Anyone can jump on a board and start spewing whatever they want. I'm reminded of what my first-year philosophy teacher said once:You can say all you want you would read it. But your attitude clearly shows you would not with any sincerity. How quickly you turn my words into the ridiculous accusation that you are a media puppet etc. Much of my points are very well articulated and explained in many ways. Many peoples from around the world from other projects and other areas of the industry are finding them quite helpful and intelligible. Like I pointed out before, you clearly have not read a single word of mine with any sincere intent. Also, what of rheomodes?Quote from: patrickgamer's first year philosophy teacherEveryone has the right to their own opinions, but not all opinions are equal.
Your situation reminds me of this a lot. If you want to validate yourself and your ideas, you have to put in the work to formalize them. You said it'll be a waste of time - I say it can't possibly be more of a waste of time than getting banned by a bunch of other boards and posting randomly in other people's threads to try to get attention...I don't think specific fonts and indentations is going to open your mind, nor should it it be a requirement for dialogue.
As for this thread, your theories are just the one-off opinion of some random guy with no qualifications or credentials (being a poker player isn't enough considering the type of argument you're trying to make).Yes I don't have credentials and qualifications so my opinion is worthless and random. I have already come to understand this attitude of you and your team.
As I've said before: this thread is for fielding questions about Pokereum, not validating your ideas. You can start your own thread about your ideas if you want, but I'm sure it'll be bereft of activity because, really, no one cares until you've got something to back it all up.You won't find anyone more relevant than I.
If what I'm saying here is condescending or rude, then so be it. If nothing else, I hope it shows the rest of the NXT community and readers here that the Pokereum team is being patient, considerate, and willing to field questions that are even peripherally related to our project. I think all my answers have been thoughtful and well-prepared.
Now....I'd really like to hear from some other people who have more direct questions about our project and get this thread back on track!
Dude: please clean up your posts. Do a post preview and make sure you're properly closing quotes and such, otherwise it's a mess to try to read.;)
What's the status, how far are you from a working solution.?
Somewhere in the keiser-report, episode 762, the guest (Nick Williamson, CEO of Pythia) said that they had a working prototype of decentralized poker. Is he talking about your project? (I wasn't allowed to post the link)
What's the status, how far are you from a working solution.?
Somewhere in the keiser-report, episode 762, the guest (Nick Williamson, CEO of Pythia) said that they had a working prototype of decentralized poker. Is he talking about your project? (I wasn't allowed to post the link)
Quick question, this is the closest thread to my question that I can find, sorry. I'm looking for anyone that has any information on whether importing hands from a site like hhsmithy.com into PT4 or HM2 will be detectable by the poker site, like Stars or PartyPoker. I have not found any cases of this being detected yet, which is surprising given how much of an advantage you get. Any information would be helpful, thanks guys!
will the crowd-funding happen according to old plan?
When can I start playing poker with your software?
When can I start playing poker with your software?
Is pokereum still being developed?
When can I start playing poker with your software?
I have waited very long and watched this space before moving, taking my time and not issuing and selling worthless assets that have no potential for realistic Profits/dividends, the time is now and you are welcome to inquire more. I am even semi public follow me and ask questions here :https://twitter.com/cryptoInnovator
If not, I will gladly leave you die hard nxters alone. Congrats to cfb on tangle...
I have waited very long and watched this space before moving, taking my time and not issuing and selling worthless assets that have no potential for realistic Profits/dividends, the time is now and you are welcome to inquire more. I am even semi public follow me and ask questions here :https://twitter.com/cryptoInnovator
If not, I will gladly leave you die hard nxters alone. Congrats to cfb on tangle...
It is a very interesting project!
Can't we make some copy/pasta of it and adapt it to NXT so we run our own poker stuff ?
I think you'll make even more money see how low NXT is actually ! And these games are always a massive hit.
I have waited very long and watched this space before moving, taking my time and not issuing and selling worthless assets that have no potential for realistic Profits/dividends, the time is now and you are welcome to inquire more. I am even semi public follow me and ask questions here :https://twitter.com/cryptoInnovator
If not, I will gladly leave you die hard nxters alone. Congrats to cfb on tangle...
It is a very interesting project!
Can't we make some copy/pasta of it and adapt it to NXT so we run our own poker stuff ?
I think you'll make even more money see how low NXT is actually ! And these games are always a massive hit.
Well you could, but it would be of no use...also I doubt the Nxt devs would write custom transaction types to support just one application into the core of Nxt software...You would need to write your own meta scheme on top of nxt. A good example is the supernet project and you can see that it doesn't touch NXT core at all even though it is of great benefit to Nxt
I have waited very long and watched this space before moving, taking my time and not issuing and selling worthless assets that have no potential for realistic Profits/dividends, the time is now and you are welcome to inquire more. I am even semi public follow me and ask questions here :https://twitter.com/cryptoInnovator
If not, I will gladly leave you die hard nxters alone. Congrats to cfb on tangle...
It is a very interesting project!
Can't we make some copy/pasta of it and adapt it to NXT so we run our own poker stuff ?
I think you'll make even more money see how low NXT is actually ! And these games are always a massive hit.
Well you could, but it would be of no use...also I doubt the Nxt devs would write custom transaction types to support just one application into the core of Nxt software...You would need to write your own meta scheme on top of nxt. A good example is the supernet project and you can see that it doesn't touch NXT core at all even though it is of great benefit to Nxt
Is the smart contract really still dead for NXT?
You state in your white paper that you may move from ethereum to NXT once this is made.
It may be a smart move!
try to provide access to the whole cryto economy united for easier mainstream adoption
try to provide access to the whole cryto economy united for easier mainstream adoption
This is something I'd like to read more often ;)
This is in relation to the statement I made above, if anyone would like early access or early backing to our grand scheme, similar to the infamous supernet, but with actually deflationary mutual fund like dapps, funneling actual profits to one set off tokens, Pokereum is just one of the dapps funeling into one set of 100 million tokens, there are others too already with working prototypes on the precipice of unvieling ;) someone say slack? :)...let me know, show some support or you can tell me to piss off...
I have waited very long to see what the angle of attack is and how Pokereum fits into the grand scheme of things...It has materialized and we are ready, even though some of our team has been decimated over the months.
Just to be clear, this is an Ethereum MEGA project, but I was there at the very beginning of NXT so I have a special attachment for the model type of community nxt brings. We can all work together if you want. There are one set of tokens which already have value (I am sure one of our early backers can testify to this if he or she chooses to :-* quote this if you see this post to confirm... ) multiple dapp projects, free bounties (marketing, development, comunity org etc..) Early backing discounts, things I hoped Nxt would have enabled through smart contracts. Nevertheless I think Nxters can benefit from early involvement now if they so choose to.
This is the plan :
If there is enough support I will write some discounts into smart contract tokens to interested parties, then get a list of people willing to be active for bounties and someone here can keep track of these interested people. Then we can have a more clear discussion and give early access.
I have waited very long and watched this space beofore moving, taking my time and not issuing and selling worthless assets that have no potential for realistic Profits/dividends, the time is now and you are welcome to inquire more. I am even semi public follow me and ask questions here :https://twitter.com/cryptoInnovator
If not, I will gladly leave you die hard nxters alone. Congrats to cfb on tangle...
Edit : Forgot to add that...if there is any significant support / commitment at all, I will post the site here first before any other communities which is a pointer to all the information location ( explanation, demos, discussion etc...) I discussed above. Thanks
This is in relation to the statement I made above, if anyone would like early access or early backing to our grand scheme, similar to the infamous supernet, but with actually deflationary mutual fund like dapps, funneling actual profits to one set off tokens, Pokereum is just one of the dapps funeling into one set of 100 million tokens, there are others too already with working prototypes on the precipice of unvieling ;) someone say slack? :)...let me know, show some support or you can tell me to piss off...
I have waited very long to see what the angle of attack is and how Pokereum fits into the grand scheme of things...It has materialized and we are ready, even though some of our team has been decimated over the months.
Just to be clear, this is an Ethereum MEGA project, but I was there at the very beginning of NXT so I have a special attachment for the model type of community nxt brings. We can all work together if you want. There are one set of tokens which already have value (I am sure one of our early backers can testify to this if he or she chooses to :-* quote this if you see this post to confirm... ) multiple dapp projects, free bounties (marketing, development, comunity org etc..) Early backing discounts, things I hoped Nxt would have enabled through smart contracts. Nevertheless I think Nxters can benefit from early involvement now if they so choose to.
This is the plan :
If there is enough support I will write some discounts into smart contract tokens to interested parties, then get a list of people willing to be active for bounties and someone here can keep track of these interested people. Then we can have a more clear discussion and give early access.
I have waited very long and watched this space beofore moving, taking my time and not issuing and selling worthless assets that have no potential for realistic Profits/dividends, the time is now and you are welcome to inquire more. I am even semi public follow me and ask questions here :https://twitter.com/cryptoInnovator
If not, I will gladly leave you die hard nxters alone. Congrats to cfb on tangle...
Edit : Forgot to add that...if there is any significant support / commitment at all, I will post the site here first before any other communities which is a pointer to all the information location ( explanation, demos, discussion etc...) I discussed above. Thanks
I would like to confirm that I purchased 1 million Pokereum tokens under the original NXTpoker roadmap, and subsequently purchased another ~750K tokens in two batches after the change from NXT platform to Ethereum. All three purchases came with nice early-bird discounts, which I believe are still available, although reduced from the levels I received ~12 months ago now that the Pokereum launch date is imminent.
I've been around NXT since (almost) the beginning, and have been fortunate enough to be an early investor in many NXT related projects over the last 24 months, and I believe NXT has a very bright future ahead (I always like the 'NXT is the Linux of crypto' analogy - great tech, great community, decentralised & open development).
Having said that, I initially decided to get into NXT as a hedge against Bitcoin, and I see Ethereum based projects like Pokereum as a hedge against NXT & Bitcoin. None of us know how the future will play out. As a NXTer I was initially disappointed when I heard the news that NxtPoker was not going to be possible within the current smart contracts roadmap for NXT, but later I came to see this as a benefit to me personally as it diversified my crypto portfolio into another strong crypto contender, Ethereum, which at that stage I had not invested in.
My strategy with crypto has always been to build a diversified portfolio that gives me the best chance of satisfying my investment goal - "if crypto takes off, I do well", so that means holding a diversified range of coins & assets that have good chances of achieving mainstream success. I prefer that strategy to betting everything on one crypto project. I think many crypto investors are the same. Speculators and traders will dance with anything 'hot', but investment is a long-term game, and with crypto it makes sense to invest in quality projects with good people behind them.
Pokereum ticks a lot of boxes in my otherwise heavily NXT oriented portfolio:
- Poker has obvious mass adoption appeal
- Ethereum platform is a good hedge for NXT
- Pokereum is a good hedge for Pangea (I also own a good sized investment in Pangea)
So I hodl Pangea on NXT, and Pokereum on Ethereum - whatever happens (and I honestly believe both projects will succeed) I have my decentralised poker bases covered! Decentralised Poker as the first crypto 'killer app' seems very likely in the next phase of crypto development over the next 1-2 years.
I'm more than satisfied with all my dealings to date with innovator256, and I'm happy to confirm any further details to any interested parties.
I'm more than satisfied with all my dealings to date with innovator256, and I'm happy to confirm any further details to any interested parties.Could you please inform us what milestones are achieved by Pokereum project? Did you see working prototype? Source code? Video of the gameplay?
There is a total of 100 million tokens of this mega umbrella project one of which is pokereum dapp, there is another dapp with a working prototype and potential for other new ones, funneling profits to one set of tokens. The Price is 0.000221btc/token and there is also only 5 million tokens left for anymore backer activity, the other 85% goes toward DAO budget activity...So you estimate the marketcap of Pokereum at 7000000 USD. What can you show to the investors to claim so high marketcap? It is bigger than marketcap of NXT and it is 10% of Ethereum to compare with.
Also I thought nxters love free stuff? These tokens already have value that will be confirmed by early backer last price smart contract claim.Could you please elaborate what is this value the tokens have? I do not understand this "early backer last price smart contract claim" - it does not make any sense to me. And where is this "free stuff"? Can I have some of this "free stuff"?
I'm more than satisfied with all my dealings to date with innovator256, and I'm happy to confirm any further details to any interested parties.Could you please inform us what milestones are achieved by Pokereum project? Did you see working prototype? Source code? Video of the gameplay?
I do not know anything about Pokereum progress so far but you should be really aware of anything going on. So please let us know what is the current progress from your point of view.
When can I start playing poker with your software?
Is pokereum still being developed?
Yep very much so, but entirely under Ethereum, and under a grand new scheme ;)...Although I doubt nxters would support. Looks like most here suffer under the rabbit tunnel vision of "Nxt maximalism" and fail to see the innovation that Ethereum brings, when in fact we can all work together...I once pleaded with devs to make smart contracts a priority....
In any case there could still be a portion of the Grand new scheme and its tokens which pokereum is a part of, sold through The Nxt asset exchange...All depends on interest though. And I hope I don't get crucified for making the factual statement above...
When can I start playing poker with your software?
Is pokereum still being developed?
Yep very much so, but entirely under Ethereum, and under a grand new scheme ;)...Although I doubt nxters would support. Looks like most here suffer under the rabbit tunnel vision of "Nxt maximalism" and fail to see the innovation that Ethereum brings, when in fact we can all work together...I once pleaded with devs to make smart contracts a priority....
In any case there could still be a portion of the Grand new scheme and its tokens which pokereum is a part of, sold through The Nxt asset exchange...All depends on interest though. And I hope I don't get crucified for making the factual statement above...
I'd be interested in buying a small amount of pokereum if sold on NXT asset exchange. Would there still be discounts for smaller investors, or do we have to wait for an exchange? I think you'd find interest from NXTers but people want details.
I'm more than satisfied with all my dealings to date with innovator256, and I'm happy to confirm any further details to any interested parties.Could you please inform us what milestones are achieved by Pokereum project? Did you see working prototype? Source code? Video of the gameplay?
I do not know anything about Pokereum progress so far but you should be really aware of anything going on. So please let us know what is the current progress from your point of view.
There is a total of 100 million tokens of this mega umbrella project one of which is pokereum dapp, there is another dapp with a working prototype and potential for other new ones, funneling profits to one set of tokens. The Price is 0.000221btc/token and there is also only 5 million tokens left for anymore backer activity, the other 85% goes toward DAO budget activity...So you estimate the marketcap of Pokereum at 7000000 USD. What can you show to the investors to claim so high marketcap? It is bigger than marketcap of NXT and it is 10% of Ethereum to compare with.Also I thought nxters love free stuff? These tokens already have value that will be confirmed by early backer last price smart contract claim.Could you please elaborate what is this value the tokens have? I do not understand this "early backer last price smart contract claim" - it does not make any sense to me. And where is this "free stuff"? Can I have some of this "free stuff"?
When can I start playing poker with your software?
Is pokereum still being developed?
Yep very much so, but entirely under Ethereum, and under a grand new scheme ;)...Although I doubt nxters would support. Looks like most here suffer under the rabbit tunnel vision of "Nxt maximalism" and fail to see the innovation that Ethereum brings, when in fact we can all work together...I once pleaded with devs to make smart contracts a priority....
In any case there could still be a portion of the Grand new scheme and its tokens which pokereum is a part of, sold through The Nxt asset exchange...All depends on interest though. And I hope I don't get crucified for making the factual statement above...
I'd be interested in buying a small amount of pokereum if sold on NXT asset exchange. Would there still be discounts for smaller investors, or do we have to wait for an exchange? I think you'd find interest from NXTers but people want details.
Any response here? I thought Pokereum would launch before Pangea but now I'm not sure ....
When can I start playing poker with your software?
Is pokereum still being developed?
Yep very much so, but entirely under Ethereum, and under a grand new scheme ;)...Although I doubt nxters would support. Looks like most here suffer under the rabbit tunnel vision of "Nxt maximalism" and fail to see the innovation that Ethereum brings, when in fact we can all work together...I once pleaded with devs to make smart contracts a priority....
In any case there could still be a portion of the Grand new scheme and its tokens which pokereum is a part of, sold through The Nxt asset exchange...All depends on interest though. And I hope I don't get crucified for making the factual statement above...
I'd be interested in buying a small amount of pokereum if sold on NXT asset exchange. Would there still be discounts for smaller investors, or do we have to wait for an exchange? I think you'd find interest from NXTers but people want details.
Answer1Thanks for elaborated response. I was playing with ethereum tutorial recently... Do you have a sample of your backend smart contract? I'd like to have a look at it. Nothing fancy - any piece of code will fit.
Answer2
Not sure about the asset exchange due to the low response. So it might be through an ethereum wallet directly...in the mean time you could get together with blackyblack1 and make a list of interested parties for bounty payouts?No thanks.
Answer1Thanks for elaborated response. I was playing with ethereum tutorial recently... Do you have a sample of your backend smart contract? I'd like to have a look at it. Nothing fancy - any piece of code will fit.
Answer2
It looks like a piece of ad board software. Are you sure it is poker related code?Answer1Thanks for elaborated response. I was playing with ethereum tutorial recently... Do you have a sample of your backend smart contract? I'd like to have a look at it. Nothing fancy - any piece of code will fit.
Answer2
Sorry I barely check this thread, but this here is an depreciated example form a while alittle while ago : https://gist.github.com/innovator256/77ccd8e86846221471e8
Its just an interface api, for regitering new users, chaecking if a user exists, updtaes, logging to the actual blockchain and similar functions....Let me know if you'd like a tutorial on our slack :) we actually have some devs on are still in the learning process
It looks like a piece of ad board software. Are you sure it is poker related code?Answer1Thanks for elaborated response. I was playing with ethereum tutorial recently... Do you have a sample of your backend smart contract? I'd like to have a look at it. Nothing fancy - any piece of code will fit.
Answer2
Sorry I barely check this thread, but this here is an depreciated example form a while alittle while ago : https://gist.github.com/innovator256/77ccd8e86846221471e8
Its just an interface api, for regitering new users, chaecking if a user exists, updtaes, logging to the actual blockchain and similar functions....Let me know if you'd like a tutorial on our slack :) we actually have some devs on are still in the learning process