Search content
Sort by
Showing 7 of 7 results by natri
Whoa, I didn't know about that difference! But how one can roll "0" then? I think some people were reporting they got "0", and wetsuit said rolling "0" is possible? That's why I decided it's the usual rounding.
If rolling 0 is possible, the total number of outcomes is 10001. Regardless of rounding in that calculation procedure, there is no actual proof the probability of rolling a certain number is equal among all range.
So, the final rolled number is random, but not equally random (as of 1/10001 or 1/10000 probability for each outcome).
Well, not to have anything else to say over this faucet. It pays regularly and consistently.
Too bad I was too lazy to deal with bitcoin when I first discovered it years ago, there was a faucet giving out sth like 0.5 BTC for free and BTC was worth only few cents
Hey guys, I'm back!
I've gotta say I spent quite some time working things out, and this time I've manually obtained numbers from exactly 1000 rolls! Yes, 1k rolls, every single one recorded and written down in my excel file for later analysis. And I've gotta say the results don't surprise. Running chisquare test gave again a quite confident rejection of the null. Numbers probabilistically don't seem random.
Some info you might wonder (my test size of 1000 rolls):
MAX value: 9986
MIN value: 3
Median: 4815
Mean: 4832,296
9056 values never occurred, 885 singles, 53 duplicates and 3 (!!) triplicates.
Some numbers are even complete obvious duplicates of what I got in my past rolls. I am VERY strongly inclined to believe the probability of certain values is much MUCH higher than some others (here we esp. wonder about 9998,9999 and 10000 - who has ever even seen those?!).
You indeed did not change the roll outcome and you used the same server and client seeds (all correct), however, even with completely random inputs (client seed, server seed) the final outcome is most likely not a random number ranging from 0-10000, I am quite confident in that.
I've gotta say I spent quite some time working things out, and this time I've manually obtained numbers from exactly 1000 rolls! Yes, 1k rolls, every single one recorded and written down in my excel file for later analysis. And I've gotta say the results don't surprise. Running chisquare test gave again a quite confident rejection of the null. Numbers probabilistically don't seem random.
Some info you might wonder (my test size of 1000 rolls):
MAX value: 9986
MIN value: 3
Median: 4815
Mean: 4832,296
9056 values never occurred, 885 singles, 53 duplicates and 3 (!!) triplicates.
Some numbers are even complete obvious duplicates of what I got in my past rolls. I am VERY strongly inclined to believe the probability of certain values is much MUCH higher than some others (here we esp. wonder about 9998,9999 and 10000 - who has ever even seen those?!).
The javascript based roll verifier is now online at http://roll-verifier.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/. I shall link it via the website shortly.
You indeed did not change the roll outcome and you used the same server and client seeds (all correct), however, even with completely random inputs (client seed, server seed) the final outcome is most likely not a random number ranging from 0-10000, I am quite confident in that.
I will check more thoroughly into it when I have some spare time. Gonna post my results here.
I have an idea for you: try to do it in various browsers, as it's possible that Javascript math.random implementation is to blame. Which one did you use for your test, by the way?Google chrome.
But you said you made only 500 rolls? Or did you mean some bigger test? You need more rolls to get 3rd and 4th prizes (at least 1250-5000).
That last statement ("I've never rolled more than 9993 on any of my multiplier or regular rolls on neither faucet") I referred to all of my plays on either freebitco.in and freedoge.co.in which total way over 2000 rolls so by calculating 1-(9993/10000)^2000+ the probability should be 75%+.
Doesn't change the number much though Well, yeah. When it comes to large numbers, statistics shall prevail
I will check more thoroughly into it when I have some spare time. Gonna post my results here.
But you said you made only 500 rolls? Or did you mean some bigger test? You need more rolls to get 3rd and 4th prizes (at least 1250-5000).
That last statement ("I've never rolled more than 9993 on any of my multiplier or regular rolls on neither faucet") I referred to all of my plays on either freebitco.in and freedoge.co.in which total way over 2000 rolls so by calculating 1-(9993/10000)^2000+ the probability should be 75%+.
Ok, lets assume prob for rolling 10k is 1/20000. But by simply checking the freebitco.in WEBSITE STATS, there was currently 538,271,966 played and 394.52490422 BTC earned, if we consider that you can ONLY win top roll price (huge undervaluation) and probability is 1/20000 to earn ONLY 0.1 BTC (undervalued) -> the expected earned value of BTC should be 2700 BTC (way more than 394).
And if we say that all ppl were extremely unlucky we can check;
variance=npq=538271996*1/20000*19999/20000
sqrt(var)=164
99.7% rule (3 std deviations): Still users should earn at LEAST: 2700-3*164= 2200 BTC, and this is with only top win of 0.1 btc.
Those rolls include both free and multiply rolls, and multiply rolls are way more in number.
Alright, that explains it sufficiently enough then
But why is there such a huge discrepancy when generating a roll. Notice the frequency of occurrences inside the 5001-6000 bracket. I am not trying to accuse or anything but the randomness procedure might well be flawed.
Posting results:
Number Expected Observed (O-E)^2/E
1-1000 50 45 0,5
1001-2000 50 42 1,28
2001-3000 50 50 0
3001-4000 50 39 2,42
4001-5000 50 52 0,08
5001-6000 50 77 14,58
6001-7000 50 51 0,02
7001-8000 50 41 1,62
8001-9000 50 42 1,28
9001-10000 50 61 2,42
EDIT: No proof or whatsoever, but I somehow also got a gut feeling that some individual numbers appear with way higher frequency than the others...
But you said you made only 500 rolls? Or did you mean some bigger test? You need more rolls to get 3rd and 4th prizes (at least 1250-5000).
That last statement ("I've never rolled more than 9993 on any of my multiplier or regular rolls on neither faucet") I referred to all of my plays on either freebitco.in and freedoge.co.in which total way over 2000 rolls so by calculating 1-(9993/10000)^2000+ the probability should be 75%+.
Ok, lets assume prob for rolling 10k is 1/20000. But by simply checking the freebitco.in WEBSITE STATS, there was currently 538,271,966 played and 394.52490422 BTC earned, if we consider that you can ONLY win top roll price (huge undervaluation) and probability is 1/20000 to earn ONLY 0.1 BTC (undervalued) -> the expected earned value of BTC should be 2700 BTC (way more than 394).
And if we say that all ppl were extremely unlucky we can check;
variance=npq=538271996*1/20000*19999/20000
sqrt(var)=164
99.7% rule (3 std deviations): Still users should earn at LEAST: 2700-3*164= 2200 BTC, and this is with only top win of 0.1 btc.
Hey guys. I love this faucet however I think it is deceiving in terms of payoff and it's probability of high winnings.
Rolling a number between 1-10000 would imply a 1/10000 probability of hitting 10000, however, I think it is much lower.
Anyways, I've actually tested the randomness of rolls and the result was that rolls ARE NOT RANDOM, p=0,004 (sample 500, chi-squared).
This low p means it's almost impossible that I made error of type I, so rolls actually aren't random at all...
More info regarding my testing procedure here: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/28dtaa/wondering_freebitcoin_provably_unfair/
So, I would love if the rolls were truly random, even if it meant a lower top prices. Right now, it just seems deceiving to the point of scamming...
(btw, I've never rolled more than 9993 on any of my multiplier or regular rolls on neither faucet, probability of which should be over 75%...)
Raising false hopes, huh?
Rolling a number between 1-10000 would imply a 1/10000 probability of hitting 10000, however, I think it is much lower.
Anyways, I've actually tested the randomness of rolls and the result was that rolls ARE NOT RANDOM, p=0,004 (sample 500, chi-squared).
This low p means it's almost impossible that I made error of type I, so rolls actually aren't random at all...
More info regarding my testing procedure here: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/28dtaa/wondering_freebitcoin_provably_unfair/
So, I would love if the rolls were truly random, even if it meant a lower top prices. Right now, it just seems deceiving to the point of scamming...
(btw, I've never rolled more than 9993 on any of my multiplier or regular rolls on neither faucet, probability of which should be over 75%...)
Raising false hopes, huh?