Quote from: RussianRaibow on February 20, 2016, 06:15:29 AM

I just came across your thread/site today. I really like this game/idea. I'm looking forward to trying to solve some of these. I was getting tired of the traditional gambling games, and this one isn't just luck. Thanks!

Quote from: Kepler510 on February 14, 2016, 11:27:02 AM

Your site is really awesome!. This site is very different from other gambling sites. You give a the newest games and fun, I really enjoyed and liked gambling. And may the fore you provide features that can support the users

Quote from: Tavos on February 02, 2016, 11:14:30 PM

Just checked out your game, seems like a fun and unique idea! Will be trying it out soon.

Quote from: cancerbola on February 04, 2016, 12:13:26 PM

BTW, do you know the reason I first came to Bitcointalk? To comment on this thread! Here.

Thank you!

Quote from: cancerbola on February 14, 2016, 08:17:43 PM

This is no fair! You said something along the lines of 'keep it simple' in the box where you put the answer; this had been the case for the potato chips...

Quote from: unamis76 on January 23, 2016, 10:15:52 PM

Looks like someone got it! Well, you clearly say "make it simple" on the answer field... And that's what 2nd and 3rd option tell us Cheesy

So how is 'planner' wrong, when you've got 'day planner' as a valid answer? Tongue

Fair enough that you didn't call it a diary or a journal, but a "red toyota" is right but a "toyota" is wrong when you clearly stated keep it simple? Reminds me of that replicate/replicabe accident a while ago...

Yes it's a pain sometimes. How detailed an answer is, is such an subjective thing so it's sort of expected that I will fail to always agree with the player-base in whether something was too detailed or not. Here's how I try to think: I generally try to take synonyms from wikipedia and such. And then I may add some even simpler ones. So for example in some other cases the equivalent of just "planner" could have been added, depending on whether I think it's too general. Wikipedia helps a lot because if often lists USA, British or Australian variants that I've never heard of.

So basically here's two examples:

Not enough info: plant / planner, pages
Correct answers: aloe, aloe plant, aloe vera plant / daily planner, personal planner, year planner, agenda
Too much info: plant in pot, aloe in pot / open agenda, empty agenda

In the case of chips as I said I would like to have had added more correct answers though.

You know, I might actually add a tip on the answer form that says "Check wikipedia" because I often use it to find synonyms or alternatives. Don't take this as a rule though. It doesn't HAVE to be from wikipedia.

Quote from: EngiNerd on February 14, 2016, 03:26:59 PM

Quote from: EngiNerd on February 14, 2016, 05:34:03 AM

I see what looks like dates in there (Wednesday - 24, Thursday - 25), maybe it's a calendar, schedule, or day-planner of some kind? I like the journal guess, I think that's what I would have guessed as well.

Haha damn, I totally had it right :-P If only I had the balls to make that guess...although I might have spelled it "dayplanner" or "day-planner" which wouldn't have counted I guess? That is one of the tough parts of this game, getting the spelling and/or syntax correct.

If anyone wants to tip me a little commission for helping them win the pot, just let me know and I'll give you my bitcoin address Wink

dayplanner would have been wrong, it's not a proper word I think. "day-planner" would have been converted to "day planner" and accepted though. Pretty sure I remove dashes and other symbols from answers.

Quote from: ObscurePen on February 14, 2016, 08:44:23 AM

Hi OP, I've got a question for you. You know the address name you give to the pictures, like apopheniabtc.com/processed/27f41fd9ca6c6b793f403f46f2c9490294ad590ddc97765bb0c7782b9cece868, the part where I bolded seems like a SHA 256 hash. Is it of any significance, like serving as an anti-tampering/probably fair proof?

Doesn't mean anything useful really. It's the SHA256 of the input file (the picture that was not black and white). I could start publishing those pictures but it wouldn't make anything provably fair. It would simply prove that I had this picture all along. It wouldn't prove that the processed versions are based on that picture from the start and it would certainly not prove that I don't cheat by giving the correct answers to a "friend" or that I don't play myself. Unfortunately I don't think the last point can be ever provably fair. Someone had suggested that I fix the first point and make it provable that the distorted images are based on the same image that you see "clearly" at the end. That could probably be done in a few ways but the possibility of me cheating sort of makes that feature useless. If I wanted to cheat I would cheat directly, no real point in me just making the game harder for legit players by changing pictures behind the scenes. What would that accomplish? Players can actually detect that if they for example store the picture every 15 minutes or so so that they get the whole series of changes and review them later. Huh

(PS: You will not be able to find my pictures on the internet by searching for the SHA)