God dag p? dig, Hector!
Jag har funderat ?ver det r?dande l?get och om det finns ett b?ttre alternativ, men jag finner mig alltid ?terv?nda till licensmyndigheten. Den nuvarande situationen, baserad p? licenser, g?r det allm?nt f?rst?eligt att n?r ett spel v?l ?r licensierat, kommer det fr?n den licensierade leverant?ren och erbjuds genom det licensierade casinot - allt ?r v?l.
Se vad chatGPT har att s?ga:
"Utvecklaren (mjukvaruf?retaget) skriver spelet."
– Detta inkluderar slumptalsgeneratorn (RNG), som "blandar" resultaten. Den ?r vanligtvis baserad p? v?letablerade kryptografiska eller andra erk?nda algoritmer.
Ett oberoende testlaboratorium – en ackrediterad tredje part.
– Det h?r ?r f?retag som eCOGRA, Gaming Laboratories International (GLI), iTech Labs, BMM Testlabs och andra.
– Deras ingenj?rer och matematiker utf?r en fullst?ndig granskning av spelet (s?rskilt slumptalsgeneratorn):
K?llkodsgranskning – De verifierar att slumptalsgeneratorn (RNG) inte har n?gra bakd?rrar, beter sig enligt specifikationerna och inte har n?gra "ledtr?dar" f?r casinot.
Statistiska tester – De simulerar ett enormt antal snurr eller resultat och kontrollerar att vinstfrekvensen matchar den deklarerade teoretiska husets f?rdel.
Ber?kningsvalidering – De k?r standardiserade testsviter (NIST STS, Dieharder, TestU01, etc.) f?r att bekr?fta att slumptalsgeneratorn uppfyller relevanta standarder.
– Om allt g?r igenom utf?rdar de ett intyg till operat?ren som intygar att spelet ?r r?ttvist och att slumptalsgeneratorn ?r vattent?t.
Licensmyndigheten (tillsynsmyndigheten) godk?nner certifikatet och utf?rdar licensen.
– Tillsynsmyndigheten beh?ver inte sj?lva f?rst? alla tekniska detaljer – de litar p? att det ackrediterade laboratoriet f?ljer ISO/IEC-standarder f?r testning av spelprogramvara.
– Ibland g?r tillsynsmyndigheterna sin egen "mystery shopping" eller stickprovskontroller, men det grova arbetet g?rs av de oberoende laboratorierna.
S? det finns faktiskt en sak som ?r v?rd att kolla upp:
"Kontrollera certifikat i offentliga listor"
De flesta myndigheter (UKGC, MGA, etc.) har en lista ?ver alla licensierade spel p? sina webbplatser tillsammans med de laboratorier som utf?rdat deras certifikat. En spelare kan enkelt verifiera att en viss "RNG-bed?mning" faktiskt existerar och att den kommer fr?n det laboratorium som ?r listat i det officiella registret.
Om ett laboratorium "f?rsvinner" eller f?r sin ackreditering ?terkallad, utf?rdar tillsynsmyndigheten vanligtvis ett offentligt uttalande som anger att en viss testinstitution inte l?ngre uppfyller kraven. Spelare ser d? att de "b?ttre kasinona" letar efter ett annat laboratorium som fortfarande finns kvar p? listan.
S? om alla dessa punkter ?r i linje med f?rfarandet antar jag att det inte finns mycket som n?gon myndighet ens skulle "utreda".
Om slumptalsgeneratorns bas ?r tillr?cklig kan spelet uppvisa glitch-liknande beteende, ibland frysa och vara av d?lig kvalitet, men slumptalsgeneratorn antas vara intakt.
Jag ?r inte s?ker p? om det h?r ?r till hj?lp, men jag t?nkte att du kanske ocks? ville l?sa det.
Good day to you, Hector!
I have been contemplating the current state of affairs and whether there is a better alternative, but I always find myself returning to the licensing authority. The current situation, based on licenses, makes it generally understandable that once a game is licensed, it comes from the licensed provider and is offered through the licensed casino - all is well.
See what chatGPT has to say:
"The developer (software house) writes the game.
– This includes the RNG (random number generator), which "shuffles" the outcomes. It’s usually based on well-established cryptographic or other recognized algorithms.
An independent testing laboratory—an accredited third party.
– These are companies like eCOGRA, Gaming Laboratories International (GLI), iTech Labs, BMM Testlabs, and others.
– Their engineers and mathematicians perform a full audit of the game (especially the RNG):
Source-code review – They verify that the RNG has no backdoors, behaves according to spec, and has no "hints" for the casino.
Statistical tests – They simulate enormous numbers of spins or outcomes and check that the frequency of wins matches the declared theoretical house edge.
Computational validation – They run standard test suites (NIST STS, Dieharder, TestU01, etc.) to confirm that the RNG meets the relevant standards.
– If everything passes, they issue the operator a certificate stating that the game is fair and the RNG is airtight.
The licensing authority (regulator) approves the certificate and issues the license.
– The regulator doesn’t have to understand all the technical details themselves—they trust the accredited lab to follow ISO/IEC standards for testing gaming software.
– Sometimes regulators do their own "mystery shopping" or spot checks, but the heavy lifting is done by the independent labs."
So there is actually one thing worth checking out:
"Checking Certificates in Public Lists
Most authorities (UKGC, MGA, etc.) have on their websites a list of all licensed games along with the laboratories that issued their certificates. A player can easily verify that a particular "RNG assessment" actually exists and that it comes from the laboratory listed on the official registry.
If a laboratory "disappears" or has its accreditation withdrawn, the regulator typically issues a public statement indicating that a certain testing institution no longer meets the requirements. Players then see that the "better casinos" are looking for another laboratory that still remains on the list."
So actually, if all those points are in line with the procedure, I guess there is not much any authority would even "investigate".
If the RNG base is adequate, the game may exhibit glitch-like behavior, occasionally freeze, and be of poor quality, but the RNG is assumed to be intact.
I am not sure whether this is helpful, but I thought you might want to read that too.
Automatiskt ?versatt:
