Real world definition for stealing: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it. Exactly, that's you!  At what day and how did I steal something from h4ns? Click on the link in your scam flag. All the info is there. |
|
|
|
In the real world a successful brand does not change its brand name!  You claim that you have this and that, but so far you have not shown any proof of your claims! For example, where is the accounting of the eosbet.io operation? You claim that you are so successful, but BET fantasy token holders lost around 70% of its investment as soon as the token was listed on Binance! Since the 23 September 2019 ATH investors lost 50% of its investment! Why suffered investors so hugh losses even though you made USD 5 million profit? There's a lot of exciting things coming in 2020 q1 it will open up for mainstream adoption from normal users to being ready to learn about a blockchain casino and why it makes sense to be a part of a casino instead of giving all their money to Bet365, PokerStars and not get anything in return. No, it does not make any sense to pay 50% more rajke to get a fraction of it back! It makes sense to pay 50% less rake and get more rakeback like on earnbet.io! You are obviously absolutely clueless about accounting! If they showed you a screen shot of a bunch of open support tickets would you believe them? (This is what Games-Protect does to try and convince people to send him money for his "services", it's the only way he can think of to trick people into thinking he isn't a scam) |
|
|
|
So I went through the github for Earths. It's a fork of Waves. https://github.com/wavesplatform/Waveshttps://github.com/earthspay/EarthsPretty much all the commits since they forked it, except 1, are just replacing any mention of "Wave" with "Earths". Every variable, filename, directory, documentation etc. There was one commit called "fix" that caught my eye: https://github.com/earthspay/Earths/commit/4aaca912c9da5424b76499e8f957baec4e76c6fd So the only real technical change they made to the project was in this file: src/main/scala/com/earthspay/settings/Constants.scala The original file looked like this: package com.wavesplatform.settings
import com.wavesplatform.Version
import com.wavesplatform.utils.ScorexLogging
/**
* System constants here.
*/
object Constants extends ScorexLogging {
val ApplicationName = "waves"
val AgentName = s"Waves v${Version.VersionString}"
val UnitsInWave = 100000000L
val TotalWaves = 100000000L
} They deleted that file, and replaced it with this one (notice the change in TotalEarths goes way up):
package com.earthspay.settings
import com.earthspay.Version
import com.earthspay.utils.ScorexLogging
/**
* System constants here.
*/
object Constants extends ScorexLogging {
val ApplicationName = "earths"
val AgentName = s"Earths v${Version.VersionString}"
val UnitsInEarth = 100000000L
val TotalEarths = 9223300000000000000L
} Then they changed only the TotalEarths, deleting a few zeros:
package com.earthspay.settings
import com.earthspay.Version
import com.earthspay.utils.ScorexLogging
/**
* System constants here.
*/
object Constants extends ScorexLogging {
val ApplicationName = "earths"
val AgentName = s"Earths v${Version.VersionString}"
val UnitsInEarth = 100000000L
val TotalEarths = 92233000000L
} So it looks like the only thing they were interested in changing was TotalEarths. My guess is that first they added too many zeroes and got an error, so they reduced it a bit with a new commit. I'm not familiar with the waves platform so I'll let someone else determine if this actually could be part of a scam. OP, could you just let your users know what's up with the totalEarths please? And let me know if I missed anything. |
|
|
|
What you are doing is simply creating a false equivalency. We aren't talking about immigration, healthcare, or taxes, we are talking about negating the vote of the people completely outside of the law and due process.
I'm just sharing my thoughts. I'm not trying to change your mind or attack you. My point is just that I think at the moment, a lot of Americans feel like they have root for either the Dems or the GOP like it's a Football game. They picked their team in 2016 based on each parties policies and now all that matters is a win at the end of the day (term). Only problem is that the 'official rule book' that everyone swears to defend was written 100 years before electricity was even invented. We've got a bunch of rules that are vague and barely ever used or updated. It's really easy to interpert the rules to benefit the team that you've already decided to be loyal no matter what. I just think that's a super dangerous path. Your little anecdote about debate is nice, but it doesn't excuse ignoring the rule of law, due process, or precedent. You aren't even making an argument for why it is just fine for the Democrats in the house to ignore the rule of law, due process, and precedent.
I don't think it's ok for anyone to ignore the rule of law. Due process is also vital to any civilized society. But politics and the criminal justice system don't go hand in hand like you seem to think. A powerful elected official does not, and should not have the same rights that an American individual does when it comes to being investigated for corruption. For example: Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, in our Criminal Justice system, is based on Blackstone's Ratio (we'd rather let 10 guilty people get away with a crime than jail one innocent person). In reality it's probably much closer to 100 - 1 today in America, especially when it comes to people who can afford to hire the best lawyers. If we make it as easy to get away with corrupt acts for the leaders of our country as it is for private citizens, we risk the country becoming corrupt. If we impeach and remove a president because it seems pretty damn likely they are corrupt, without reaching the same burden of proof that a criminal prosecutor is required to prove, the result is the VP becomes President (same political party), the Cabinet and Congress stays the same, and if the country thinks Congress didn't represent them accurately by removing the president, they get voted out when their term is up. This is a concept I think the founders made clear. The office of the president and the person who holds the office of the president or two separate things with separate rights. That's why they went out of their way to give Congress the responsibility of oversight and impeachment, but not the power to charge anyone criminally. Also the term limits are great. They obviously didn't want a President to be able to use the office to become a King. As for precedent in Congress. It's fine to break it. As long as you aren't breaking any rules, it's up to the people you represent (and your party/committee leader, or 2/3's of the entire House or Senate I suppose) to decide whether or not your actions are acceptable. |
|
|
|
You are here now, and still quite silent on the non-subpoena subpoena issue. Not like facts matter, just shift the topic to the next accusation and pretend like this total disregard for the rule of law, due process, and precedent is just always how it has been done. All you have to do is believe and magically it becomes true!
I'm totally fine with not allowing the GOP to have the power to subpoena whoever they want. It would be foolish to give them the power. They'd use it to delay, muddy the waters, and whatever other political moves they come up with. And I wouldn't fault them for doing that. There's also no chance in hell they'd give the democrats the same power if the roles were reversed. Remember, this is not the trial. We're just deciding whether or not there should be a trial. We don't do special prosecutors anymore. The house will lay out the prosecution and then send it to the senate where a few of them will serve as the actual prosecutors, and the president will have every chance to defend himself. We have already established you don't care about due process, the rule of law, or precedent. You can call being able to present a defense "muddying the waters" all you want, that doesn't wave a magic wand over totalitarianism and make it right. Rather convenient you can just unilaterally declare a defense not necessary, because after all nothing should get in the way of this extrajudicial railroading right? Your proclamation that if the roles were reverse they would act the same is nothing but you justifying democrat totalitarianism with assumptions based on absolutely noting. The House has oversight authority, not just one half of The House. Nothing about this process is within the law. So again, those non-subpoena subpoenas? Still pretty quiet... No matter, just keep shifting to new accusations as you fail to justify the last, people have short memories and you can perpetually justify this insanity by simply sliding the topic. I'm simply pointing out the massive amount of hypocrisy that goes on in US politics from both sides. I think that most peoples views on this whole impeachment thing is mainly driven by a drive for whatever side they agree more with policy wise to win. That's fucked up. Your views on immigration or healthcare or taxes shouldn't have anything to do with whether or not it's ok to blatantly lie to the country. Yet whenever a politician lies, only the opposition calls them out. And I'm not just talking about Trump. This is just a general example. It's become perfectly normal to respond to someone you disagree with by insulting them and trying to make them look or feel stupid which just creates a vicious cycle of non-productive 'debate'. (if you can even call it that). Without productive debate, we aren't really a democracy. The best ideas won't be considered. We'll just use the ideas of whoever is best at making the other politicians look the most stupid. |
|
|
|
You are here now, and still quite silent on the non-subpoena subpoena issue. Not like facts matter, just shift the topic to the next accusation and pretend like this total disregard for the rule of law, due process, and precedent is just always how it has been done. All you have to do is believe and magically it becomes true!
I'm totally fine with not allowing the GOP to have the power to subpoena whoever they want. It would be foolish to give them the power. They'd use it to delay, muddy the waters, and whatever other political moves they come up with. And I wouldn't fault them for doing that. There's also no chance in hell they'd give the democrats the same power if the roles were reversed. Remember, this is not the trial. We're just deciding whether or not there should be a trial. We don't do special prosecutors anymore. The house will lay out the prosecution and then send it to the senate where a few of them will serve as the actual prosecutors, and the president will have every chance to defend himself. |
|
|
|
You know how the Democrats bitch and whine when the Rupublicans do something with a Majority without giving a shit about what the Democrats think? (Merrick Garland for example.)
That's what you guys sound like right now.
Don't worry, you'll get to hear them bitching again as soon as the impeachment ball is in the Senates court. This isn't just "something", this is an attempt to unseat a sitting duly elected president. I believe you understand the gravity of this and are simply being disingenuous .... It does look that way. The thing is, these guys have publicly advocated impeaching Trump since the very first day he was in office, and they really didn't care if there were or were not valid reasons for doing so. And they've been upfront about it, not hiding it at all. The reason it took almost 10 months for them to have these impeachment hearings is because not enough democrats supported it. I'm one of those people that think Trump has at least 'deserved' to be impeached since not too far into his presidency. Like most people who agreed with me at the time, I believed my reasons were valid. Just because you believe they are not valid, does not mean I don't care whether or not they are valid. It just means have a different opinion on what valid is. |
|
|
|
Well now that's a crock of shit. Your side can call witnesses in its defense, but they must be approved by your adversary. Stalinist methods. It matters not how much they undermine the rule of law and due process, control must be taken at all costs. You know how the Democrats bitch and whine when the Rupublicans do something with a Majority without giving a shit about what the Democrats think? (Merrick Garland for example.) That's what you guys sound like right now. Don't worry, you'll get to hear them bitching again as soon as the impeachment ball is in the Senates court. On the contrary, after Scalia passed away and left a vacancy on the SC, the ever-diplomatic, gracious Republicans cited the "Biden Rule" in deferring the discussion about the SC vacancy: The Senate's Republican leadership was quick to assert that the vacancy should not be filled until after the 2016 presidential election.[13] They cited a 1992 speech by then-senator Joe Biden, in which Biden argued that President Bush should wait until after the election to appoint a replacement if a Supreme Court seat became vacant during the summer or should appoint a moderate acceptable to the then-Democratic Senate, as a precedent. Republicans later began to refer to this originally little-noticed idea as the "Biden rule". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_nomination#Biden_rule_debateNo need to play these games man. He did it because he wanted a shot at filling the vacancy with a Conservative. And it worked. Which is fine. It's politics.
You know how the Democrats bitch and whine when the Rupublicans do something with a Majority without giving a shit about what the Democrats think? (Merrick Garland for example.)
That's what you guys sound like right now.
Don't worry, you'll get to hear them bitching again as soon as the impeachment ball is in the Senates court. This isn't just "something", this is an attempt to unseat a sitting duly elected president. I believe you understand the gravity of this and are simply being disingenuous at this point. Speaking of being disingenuous... you seem oddly silent on the issue of the non-subpoena subpoena issue you insisted was legitimate so vociferously earlier. Funny how quickly such things become a non-topic for people trying so hard to topic slide when they run out of arguments. I mean, refusing to even hold a hearing for the guy the president nominated for the Supreme Court isn't just "something" either. Some would argue it would have a greater affect on the Country than any president. One party does everything they can to make something happen, and the other does everything they can to stop them. Both sides are going to do whatever they can to make the other side look as bad as possible. If Clinton won and the GOP were trying to impeach her using the same plays that Pelosi is using, would you really be like "wait a minute, that's not fair! The Dems should be able to subpoena whoever they want, even if they don't have control of the House!" Of course not. It would be foolish to allow the Republicans to subpoena whoever they want. They'd use it to keep the Dems from controlling the pace of the hearings, which is a huge advantage for them. You aren't really surprised the Democrats are keeping them on such a short leash, are you?
Had a big project to finish past couple weeks, that's why I haven't been active. |
|
|
|
Well now that's a crock of shit. Your side can call witnesses in its defense, but they must be approved by your adversary. Stalinist methods. It matters not how much they undermine the rule of law and due process, control must be taken at all costs. You know how the Democrats bitch and whine when the Rupublicans do something with a Majority without giving a shit about what the Democrats think? (Merrick Garland for example.) That's what you guys sound like right now. Don't worry, you'll get to hear them bitching again as soon as the impeachment ball is in the Senates court. |
|
|
|
I'm sorry but you act like r/ChoosingBeggars. They clearly won't pay and even if they pay, the reason will be: - F*ck, this guy talks so much, pay his shit and make him shut up. If you just skimmed the OP and thread I can see how you would think that. You're wrong though. It doesn't matter how obvious or easy to fix a bug is. It only matters how critical it is. The fact the bug existed and the way it was handled is a pretty big deal imo. |
|
|
|
|
Why did you change TotalEarths from 100000000L to 92233000000L after forking it from Waves? (It was called TotalWaves initially)
|
|
|
|
I think the part that is funniest, is how all this happened when the domain expired. It's like after taking investors money he put so little effort into the site he couldn't even be bothered to renew the domain. And then couldn't even be bothered to bring the site back online, and still has been too lazy to spend the 2 minutes of effort required to putting up a page that tell his customers/investors what happened. Dean's a real piece of shit. I hope this all comes back to haunt him. But not the part where I said I will pay everyone back. Obviously.
Why don't you just do it now? It's not like you don't have the money... You are obsessed with this false notion of me having money. I have none. I have debt. Do you think I enjoy coming on this forum and listening to twats like you? Do you think I want my name being tarnished like this which would prevent other projects I want to do succeeding? No. I'm not as sad as you. With the money you have (including the $800,000 you stole (see that, that's an assumption I make of you where I don't have proof, the same thing you do)) why are you still on this forum? So so pathetic. I said I would pay people back and it's the business between me and them. Not you or any idiot on this forum. I'll post when I've paid everyone back (including bkt/bkb holders). Until then you can all speculate and talk shit all you want but that doesn't get people paid. Did your investors agree to have their funds used to experiment on non Betking brands or am I missing something? It seems like all the money that was lost wasn't yours to lose. |
|
|
|
Here is what what Dean said:
As you will have likely seen BetKing has been offline for around a week.
BetKing will remain offline indefinitely with this being the last in a string of problems over the past year.
A serious issue was found last month after we launched a new dice site to test if a new brand would have more success than BetKing has had post ICO.
The new site was a clone of BetKing. We had been talking to investors about doing a series of sites like this with a shared bankroll and this one was released in time to try and capture traffic from yolodice.com who were closing their investment feature.
After a few days players had drained the bankroll and withdrew funds from the hot wallet.
After a review with the developers we found that there was an actual flaw in the code that allowed anyone to view their server seed and predict the result of their dice rolls, essentially being able to win every bet.
It turned out that this code had existed on BetKing also since January on both the dice and burst dice games and people had been using it to win bets undetected. It is not yet known if a developer added this code deliberately to cause abuse or if it was an honest mistake.
It wasn't until recently, after processing larger withdrawals and then finding the bug, that the discrepency in balances and funds available was noticed with now there being no funds left to process any remaining withdrawals.
At the time the site went offline there was a backup of all balances and pending withdrawal amounts captured.
There are around 20 bankroll investors who had more than $1000 on site, for a total of around $400,000.
Pretty obvious this is not based on reality. |
|
|
|
|
You stole 210 euros from h4ns by promising to refund the money he paid to you and then keeping the money for yourself.
|
|
|
|
There's a reason it's very difficult to trade paypal for Bitcoin.
If you don't have some secret trick nobody else has figured out yet that protects you from getting scammed, you're gonna get scammed over and over.
You'll be paid with stolen funds from hacked accounts. When paypal figures it out, they'll just return the funds to the victim.
If I understand you correctly, are there scammers trying to buy bitcoins with fake PayPal accounts? Is this really news to you? Real paypal accounts that were hacked or have stolen funds in them. |
|
|
|
It is pretty clear he only cares about profits. James, via Nike wants to exploit the Chinese market to sell shoes. Nike can produce shoes for next to nothing via slave labor, and even though average per capita income is much lower in China, everyone needs shoes, and as such, they can sell shoes in China for a 'low' price, and still earn a lot of money.
Nike doesn't face any real consequences for pissing off Americans, and as such, they have no problem doing so, while pandering to the Chinese government.
He's not a business man. He's a business, man. I don't think this should make a difference. In both cases, he should act ethically I agree. In all cases people should act ethically. Was just being a smart ass with a Jay Z reference. I don't think Lebrons statement was unethical though. He clearly didn't understand what was going on in Hong Kong. |
|
|
|
|
There's a reason it's very difficult to trade paypal for Bitcoin.
If you don't have some secret trick nobody else has figured out yet that protects you from getting scammed, you're gonna get scammed over and over.
You'll be paid with stolen funds from hacked accounts. When paypal figures it out, they'll just return the funds to the victim.
|
|
|
|
This is the last reply you are getting from me on this matter. You are refusing to refund h4ns as you previously promised and have trashed what little was remaining of your reputation as a result. There's nothing more to be said. You are a thief and a scammer. Real world definition for thief: A person who steals another person's property, especially by stealth and without using force or threat of violence. What property did I steal and how? You stole 210 euros from h4ns by promising to refund the money he paid to you and then keeping the money for yourself. In the real world you can not steal something by promising something! Real world definition for stealing: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it. Real world definition for take: Remove something from a particular place. I did not remove anything from h4ns! You stole 210 euros from h4ns by promising to refund the money he paid to you and then keeping the money for yourself. You claim that I took BTC worth 210€ from h4ns's wallet without his permission? Real world definition for stealing: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it. Do you have proof of my intention? Is it ok to steal second base? |
|
|
|
One mate of me play more than 250k $ , than he won one time 83k $ and they dont pay it out! because a slotmaschine error haha! Game Protect enforces claims against bitcasino.io, so tell your friend to submit his case to us. Game protect is a well known scammer. Don't waste your time getting all your money back from him. |
|
|
|
It is pretty clear he only cares about profits. James, via Nike wants to exploit the Chinese market to sell shoes. Nike can produce shoes for next to nothing via slave labor, and even though average per capita income is much lower in China, everyone needs shoes, and as such, they can sell shoes in China for a 'low' price, and still earn a lot of money.
Nike doesn't face any real consequences for pissing off Americans, and as such, they have no problem doing so, while pandering to the Chinese government.
He's not a business man. He's a business, man. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
