Jufo - Re: English Harbour, and your statement "... personally I bought the official explanation ..." I agree that what English Harbour, and the Wizard, described is indeed the accurate explanation. That is, "shit happened". And, as I summarized, I think that all parties did a pretty good job at clearing up the debris.
Re: "... the tension between us ..."
I felt it necessary to create my
Rather Pointed Response (in which I state "A data point of one doesn’t support a conclusion, but rather reinforces the need for further data.") to
Your Previous Post (in which you used the "Red Alert" words cheat or cheating 4 times) was because I didn't want this to become a "the sky is falling" problem.
That is, as with the previous "facepalm" graphic, ultimately I'm one of the people that has to remove their hand from their face and get on with the business of dealing with the problem. If the scope of the problem is "the sky is falling", well, I don't know what to do there, where to start. (If true, and the sky is indeed falling, then it's just bomb shelter time.)
Personally, I don't think that the sky is falling. For sure there are problems, but they are solvable.
Re:
... every time a casino operator asks me to TRUST them or their judgement, it makes me cringe a little.
... I'd like to see a solution offered where TRUST is not an issue, that I don't have to take that blind leap of faith and just hope that everything is going to be fair and above board.
As a fellow human being, living in the same world as anyone reading (or contributing to) this thread, I think that "leaps of faith" are just unavoidable.
Anyone that downloads an application from a web site and installs that application on their computer has taken what I would consider to be a huge leap of faith. Anyone that even browses the internet without having every form of blocker known to mankind (script blocker, Flash blocker, cookie blocker, ad blocker, port blocker, virus blocker, spyware blocker, malware blocker) turned on and set to "Black & Decker Mode" (which is how I browse, actually) is taking a leap of faith.
So, if "leaps of faith" are unavoidable, the question becomes "How far do I have to jump?" And the best answer to that one is, I think, "As little as possible."
I thus disagree with your statement "There ARE solutions which quarantee fair results with NO trust between player and casino needed." only because of your use of the word "NO", as in zero, nada, zip, squat.
I was aware of the FairDice project. I wasn't aware of the Randomness Control at BetVoyager Casino, so I went to have a look.
My first thought was "Wow, what a great idea". So, I had a look in greater detail, saw their Flash movies that detailed exactly how it worked for Roulette and Oasis Poker, thought about it some more, and like that.
After doing all of that, I concluded that it just won't work for a Casino application that is deployed entirely through Flash, like Galewind's product. (Anything that we deploy is easily "crack-able" on the Client, because those are "the rules of the game" when it comes to web site applications and browsers.)
I thought about it some more, and then said "Wow, maybe it is a great idea, but what a miserable way to play some rounds of Pontoon." If I had to do all of the copying and pasting and clicking and checking, I'd find myself asking "What the hell am I doing here, playing Pontoon, or running compliance audits of their game processing algorithms?"
Yes, I realize that I would only do this for a short time, until I had built up some trust (woops, there's that word again) in their games, and then maybe once in awhile after that. But still ...
I then put on the "Cynical Player Hat" for a bit, and tried to figure out how this system could still be bypassed by the Casino application. For example: "How do I know that the translator application for the checksum I received didn't first communicate with the game server and get the number (or cards, or what have you) that they actually sent me rather than what they said they sent me?"
So again, we find ourselves back to the issue of Trust. And again, the question becomes "How far do I have to jump?"
BTW - As with your chart on the 99.5% return curve, about which you stated "I wish to point out that I am not in way saying that something like this exists or is even likely to exist." - I'm also not saying that this is what is happening within the BetVoyager Casino application. I'm simply taking a Sunday drive along the "Cynic's Speculation Thruway" here.
Chris