Some very good points. However, the only problem I see with most 'provably fair' systems is that the person showing you something is provably fair is the person or organisation who created the system.
In dice-games for example, they show you lists of code and outcomes, but all these can be doctored for show. Within code, there can also be a hidden switch to alter the odds of a certain outcome based on the stake amount which could be manually flicked on and off.
The only way to bring about trust is to rely on a third-person independent auditor, but they could be in on the act too.
This brings us back, full circle, where at the end of the day, there has to be trust placed on people and I think this is the way it should be! Trust is built on one's experience of people's actions and I think this 'system' is difficult to beat.
Have a great weekend and I hope this post wasn't triggered by some scroat ripping you off.
We've planned to add hiveblocks into the equation as well, since one is created every 3 seconds it would take part of that signature and include it in the equation. This would be our 3rd party section I believe.
...which is where your superior technical knowledge trumps my naive trust in human nature!
It's sad that the crypto world has understandably become such a cynical world of fear and suspicion.
For what it's worth, I'd trust you with my keys and I don't even know you. Sometimes intuition and reading between lines is just as good as immutable blocks!
Yeah I guess it's more like, since this new technlogy now exists and isn't that expensive to include, why not just do it to remove any doubt or accusations, etc that may arise.
For instance if I get extremely lucky opening vials and others would be like "ugh of course the founder gets this "lucky"" it would totally ruin my mood.