Profit - online casino with fairness control

alt2005 wrote: In short, a preliminary conclusion from all the information reviewed.

I don’t know where you were looking and what “all the info” means in your understanding.

SHA-256 hashes are unique signatures of any text string. Hackers and mathematicians wondered how realistic it is to find that several different strings have the same hash. They find something and loudly call it "collisions". Then ordinary people read it and say "SHA-256 can be faked".

Since you have decided to spread distrust of SHA-256, you need to be consistent.

1) From all the information you have reviewed, give a couple of real examples:

line-1 (original)
line-2 (selection)
same SHA-256 hash

2) Cite a real example of these two additions from your credible source for SHA-256:

In other words, for two existing documents, two appendices can be calculated, and if one is appended to the first document, and the other to the second, the resulting SHA-1 hashes for these files will be the same.

----
And then think about how a casino will pass off a random set of bits (line 2) as a slightly modified text string with a list of roulette spins (line 1)?

Writing "Another thing is that collisions can be prepared in advance..." in relation to character strings is completely illiterate.

DLK wrote:

alt2005 wrote: In short, a preliminary conclusion from all the information I've looked at.

I don't know where you were looking and what "all the information" is in your understanding

Not "all the info", but "all the info I've seen". If you're going to quote, then please don't distort, that's not nice.
All viewed info - in Russian means the info that I managed to view. Well, it is impossible to view all the information by definition.
Where exactly I looked (by the way, not only me) - I provided links and copy-pastas, so you know this very well.
And right here on this page there is quote at the top, by the way not mine

1) From all the information you've looked at, give a couple of real examples:
line-1 (original)
line-2 (selection)
same SHA-256 hash
2) Cite a real example of these two additions from your credible source for SHA-256:
In other words, for two existing documents, two additions can be calculated, and if one is appended to the first document, and the other to the second, the resulting SHA-1 hashes for these files will be the same.

Why should I give you any examples? It is enough that you were shown information from trustworthy sources. And I gave links to them. Well, and I copied the text, but you also like to copy-paste, don't you? And you need examples, so look for them, Google will help you.
And ask questions to these sources, not me. And shifting the blame to me is somehow unseemly.
To be fair, I must admit that I haven't seen such examples. Indian researchers Soumitra Kumar Sanadya and Palash Sarkar seem to have published them, but I didn't bother looking for them.
Here is a program for that algorithm, but only if you have free time and desire. Personally, I don't need it, since I don't plan to play online. So I'm not particularly interested in CC.

Since you decided to spread distrust towards SHA-256, you need to be consistent.

Interesting movie. You call the discussion of the topic "spread distrust"? If a person goes to play in an online casino with his own hard-earned money, doesn't he have the right to get as much information as possible?
Or maybe you are against it?

If you're going to make such claims, maybe you should read the posts first? I honestly said above that I don't see any reason not to trust KCh. If you don't skim the comments, you couldn't help but see this. Then why this attempt at trolling? It's unfortunate, it's unfortunate ))
After all, I don’t accuse you of promoting the KCh, do I?

And then think about how a casino will pass off a disjointed set of bits (line 2) as slightly modified
a text string with a list of roulette spins (line-1)?

You can think about what you understand. Neither you nor I are experts or professionals in hashing. Therefore, you can only read sources and try to form an opinion.

Write "Another thing is that collisions can be prepared in advance..." in relation to character strings
completely illiterate.

I partly agree here. But I myself expressed doubts about this, so your reproach is again not addressed.
And “partly” because neither you nor I can be 100% sure of this.

Forums exist to discuss controversial issues, not to throw mutual accusations.

The SHA-256 collisions found by hackers and scientists look something like this:



That's why I doubted that you had seen real examples of collisions.
The whole world works on SHA-256 electronic signatures, this topic has long been studied and adopted as a patented standard.

Your opinion "it is impossible to be 100% sure", "Indian scientists have found", "it is possible to program the selection of collisions", etc. in relation to meaningful text strings is complete nonsense.

Sorry for being so blunt. It's one thing when such doubts arise in a half-educated schoolchild who physically cannot grasp the topic of electronic signatures, and quite another when they arise in a literate adult.

fresh from profit and why i dont play there anymore
Length=99 Series=25, 16, 11, 19, 09, 09, 06, 05, 17, 28, 14, 22, 26, 11, 02, 32, 04, 16, 10, 08, 31, 18, 15, 31, 06, 01, 04, 21, 30, 04, 33, 13, 09, 26, 10, 35, 18, 09, 09, 22, 05, 05, 05, 15, 11, 27, 07, 10, 36, 25, 01, 01, 34, 03, 36, 18, 13, 34, 04, 08, 14, 13, 11, 03, 36, 29, 04, 27, 07, 00, 24, 13, 31, 24, 05, 25, 01, 28, 17, 27, 07, 30, 12, 10, 30, 26, 28, 08, 14, 24, 03, 01, 02, 30, 14, 16, 17, 34, 21 SecureWord=qjoTXi2MROj9nX22dOrRtVNT4in9yhu8

Whether to play roulette or not is a personal matter for each player; adaptive software does not participate in this decision at all.
As for the remark about the lack of adaptability, everyone has the right to their own imagination.
However, for several years I have been developing special rates that prove the presence of adaptivity in any software and this does not depend on the name of the casino.
Organizing a scenario for one or two shots with the goal of x2-x3 from the deposit makes no sense, it is better to go to work until retirement, and then live out the rest and rely on the injustice of the world order...
Another thing is how a "therapeutic leech" can introduce anesthesia into the algorithm, anesthetize the efforts of the adaptive and suck credits as needed, as much as is required for certain purposes...
I have chosen this path and am working on an anesthetic formula for the adaptive, because if this is not done, all wins will become random, and the adaptive antibiotic will improve its formula for counteracting the client.
Profit Adaptive has it and I have evidence for this statement, but I won’t publish it on the forum for obvious reasons.

Congratulations to our forum member Hw0hw0 on winning a prize!