🏅 Top traders

b = 2

hash: 000000000000000000051a3a64aa85cdc218b71d67269e3980e9f592ade79c65

decimal: 488717953215489666476664565892138363829965747925785701
last digit + 1 = 2

@TobyBW Maybe we should avoid adding + 1, is that fine by you? :)

@levifinkelstein HAHAHAHAHA

lmao

@TobyBW Excellent! I'm personally also happy about this. I'll resolve in a minute or so.

So current score is Sum(total_yes)=4565 to log_6(sum(total_no)) = log_6(6710) = 4.9
And as 4565 > 4.9, it would currently resolve Yes.
Is that right? Am I missing anything?

@FedorBeets Hm, I'm using the website Levina sent and don't see block 789266... but, if b>1, as of how the positions are looking now, YES is basically guaranteed a win.

Reresolution criteria: b is the first bitcoin hash mined after 7:45PST mod10 +1. In other words, if the hash last digit is 5, b=6. Sorry again for all the chaos.

important to note that the hash will be changed from base 16 to base 10

@Heliscone https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc

@levifinkelstein the miners are conspiring to not mine any blocks

7 blocks in the 20 minutes before this and none in the past 10? a bit suspicious if you ask me

@TobyBW yeah I was just thinking the same thing

@levifinkelstein ok now this is getting annoying

@TobyBW When is the last time this long a time went between the blocks? they look so frequent earlier

@levifinkelstein

Ok I’ve been reading the comments and first of all, sorry for all the confusion. I was definitely not very clear. here’s what happened: I did mean for the very first roll b=7 to be the base, and it was just a slip up on my part rolling too early—I thought that saying the relevant roll is b=7 would be clear, but I can totally see why it wasn’t. I’m open to re-rolling and extending market resolution. If people think this is unfair, I’d be willing to hear reasoning for that as well. It would be hilarious to wait for a bitcoin hash, but maybe not this time….

Also, my thinking for b=1 -> NO was that since we are generating b from 1 to 10, the limit from the right is the valid one to look at. I realize this is hand wavy, so another explanation I liked was that 1^yes<NO which is basically a no resolution.

Thanks everyone for betting, and I’ll be very careful to avoid being this unclear again!

I was betting under the assumption that the number had been chosen before the market closed. Obviously due to my position I’d prefer if we used the originally intended number since it was randomly chosen, but I’d be fine with an N/A given all of this confusion.

@Heliscone We could always just do the first BTC hash after some specified time, the take mod 10 and add 1, and just take that as our number.

@TobyBW I was betting under the assumption that the number had not been chosen, perhaps we could reopen the market and roll the number now, then close in a day so that we're in accordance with the resolution criteria.

@levifinkelstein or to be specific, I thought it might have been chosen since it said it would be chosen 1 day before closing, but I assumed it was not public since the newest comment was 3 days old and the description didn't contain any info about the number.

If we are going to roll again/bitcoin it, I’d just prefer it happen sooner than later because I did put most of my cash balance in this want at least a 9/10 chance of getting it out soon lol.

@Heliscone The two reasons I didn't think it was already announced:

1. If b=7 then it's impossible to resolve NO. Essentially should have just resolved it there and then if that were determined.

2. The comment about "I'll roll it a day before close" (I figured, privately)

It's low stakes for me so I obviously won't be super upset, but it's not what I was expecting

Ok since most people want it to happen soon, and I don’t think anyone else is really arguing for it to resolve now, we can do the hash of the next BTC block after 10:45 (eastern time, in ~10 minutes) mod 10 and add 1. This is only unfavorable to people who bet YES above 90% (mostly just me). Like this if you agree.

Ah, these are all good points. I think the assumption that makes the most sense would be the one Genzy and Levina made, but I do realize that betting under b=7 is way different than betting under unknown b …

Also I do realize the pain of having most of your mana locked in a market, so I’m happy doing something that resolves sooner! I’m good with your idea of the bitcoin hash after 7:45 PST—seems to strike a kind of balance between disadvantaging you via reroll and advantaging the online people.

@Heliscone Is that official then?

Why did you decide on this without me 😡
I did bet knowing that b = 7, which was the case.

It did resolve to YES in the end, but I had a 1/10 chance of losing everything, in a market that was clear about a YES resolution, only to change the resolution criterion after the close?

@XComhghall Yeah. Such terrible handling. So N/A retroactively now?

@Gen I would have welcomed it if I were invited to your smoke filled room.

@XComhghall I’m not super against going N/A, but since it would have resolved YES either way, I don’t think this resolution was unjust to anyone involved. If it had reversed, then we might have had a different discussion, but it didn’t.

@XComhghall Just wanted to make you sweat a little 😁

@XComhghall Sorry, sorry, I did indeed want to get this over and done with quickly. I was okay with how it resolved, but next time I think I'll be more N/A-happy, and sorry again for mis-handling this.

This is why I was pretty happy it ended up resolving YES anyway: If people bet under unknown b, the re-resolution makes them happy. If people bet under b=7, it resolved YES anyway!

@Heliscone K. Thanks.

Yes. I am satisfied with the outcome. I was unhappy about the procedural part. I did not agree to subject my mana to a 1/10 chance again.

But as always, thank you for your work and your markets.