If I was a powerful wizard with a magic scepter that could enslave mortal Central Bankers and put them under my spell, I would use this scepter to make the Fed print lots of money and call it POMO, OMO, QE, and lower interest rates to near zero. This would inevitably send my Bitcoin to 1 million usd each and beyond and make me a fabulously wealthy Wizard. Unfortunately I dont have this scepter, but bc Im a lucky SOB the Fed is fulfilling my fantasies by doing this of their own free will.
Damn plot twist, I thought you were going to make them give it all back to the people  LOL. Yeah hate to break it to you Lambie but if BTC rises because the dollar is that drastically inflated, a million bucks just won't have the same ring to it any more. If money flows into BTC because of the perceived reduction of the dollar's purchasing power, and not actual inflation to match, then yes that would be just dandy. |
|
|
|
You are incorrect on so many counts I don't have time to dissect each and every point. So lets just stick with the major ones: Nevertheless, its still a loss. Is not a loss caused by the algo and is so small that has absolutely no value or impact on the overall ROI. Nice try This is a prime example of your big-headedness getting in the way of reality and what makes you untrustworthy. ANY loss incurred has an impact on the overall ROI. This is mathematically unavoidable. If you would have said the losses have a "statistically insignificant" impact on ROI, I might have been inclined to agree with you. But no, you said "absolutely no impact," which is unequivocally false. Learn what backtests are. 33 wins in a row in 3 weeks is no handfull and is not luck. Is backtest accuracy. There's no way to prove the backtest accuracy without giving access to the source code to competent people. This will never happen because:
a. source code will never ever ever be shared
b. most of users in here, including yourself, are just... users. you know how to use SOME things works, you have no idea how and why they work that way. But is ok. Is not your job. But at least avoid starting a which hunt while you have very little knowledge in the sphere of interest. Accept to be wrong sometimes.
You are just confirming what I said earlier: you are relying on people to trust you to be truthful, which you apparently have a pretty hard time doing. Your reply is a long, weird way to go about saying I am right. Everything market related, has risks.
You are adding risk on top of risk by assuming the trust of your clients. I have no other interest than bringing profits to my clients, simply because i earn only from their profits.
Again you're being untruthful by leaving out your $10 a month VPN fee. As I pointed out earlier, if you had made the same trades for one of your clients through API they would be sitting on a loss after your fees. Other users know you very well, you think you can damage my business with your flags and red trust? Your pathetic attempts only brought attention on Arakne, and all the points i debunked with knowledge,data and reputable sources only cleared more doubts that people could have had.
Yeah you really showed us. Cleared up all the doubts. Everything is pretty crystal clear now.  |
|
|
|
I already explained what those negative PNL of 0.0001 mBTC ( 0.001$ loss) several times in the other Threads.
There's a bug in the bitmex websocket's position endpoint. After several days without trades, the position value restores and the endpoint returns error when trying to access it. This causes the bots to crash. What's the solution until bitmex fixes the problem? Make instant 1 contract trades to unlock the endpoint. That 0.001$ loss is the fee paid as taker(necessary to close the "unlock trade" in less than 1 second) and the mathematical loss that come from the 0.5$ of spread between the ask and the bid.
Nevertheless, its still a loss. I have all kind of verifiable data, if you are unable to access a bitmex account via terminal is
not my problem, but i will make an easy step by step guide when i will have some free time.
No, you don't. You have 1 data set of a handful of trades made this month. Anything else you are referring to is non-applicable to the service you are offering in this thread. You still don't understand what a Market Maker is , and why they REQUIRE HUGE AMOUNT OF CAPITALS. Please DYOR before making a fool of yourself over and over again.
As defined by BitMEX a "market maker" is ANYBODY who places a limit order. You could place a limit order of 0.001 BTC and boom, voila, you are now a market maker. So the "requiring huge amount of capitals" idea is completely bogus. Perhaps don't be such an over-assuming ass if you don't want to make an ass of yourself over and over again. The 495% roi in 20 months is backtest, the exact same code that is running right now with 100% win rate. Before attacking the validity of backtest, please learn what they are and why they are mandatory for every legit bot.
You are just expecting people to take your word that you have not altered either the bot or the data set. Why can't you see the problem here? Again, all you actually have data on is your 7.615 mBTC deposit, which is less money than the minimum you are asking to participate. I see this as incredibly risky and would never touch what you are offering. Some people are lazy at heart and too enamored by the idea of "passive income" to dig deeper into what they are getting themselves involved in, so you will inevitably find new suckers to draw into your scheme. If you make them all broke, I can't help but think they deserved it. |
|
|
|
It would appear that the majority ALL of your trades were positive, so that is commendable.
Buddy why you can't accept we are legit? Because you keep lying. You had 4 losing trades, and even if the losses were so small they aren't reflected in your balance, they are still losses. How could you generate a negative Realised PNL without a losing trade? You don't have any verifiable data that demonstrates your bot is capable of profiting with larger amounts of bitcoin. All you have data on is your 7.615 mBTC deposit, which is less money than the minimum you are asking to participate. By the way, what is your advertised 495% ROI based on? 2 years of testing data? Testing of what? The exact same bot you have now with no modifications whatsoever? You should probably clarify this when advertising your service because that's part of what makes the whole thing look like a con. |
|
|
|
Wow, you made $11.33 in 20 days, that's terrific!  Watch out everybody, a market maker star is born!  It would appear that the majority of your trades were positive, so that is commendable. However, if you charge your clients 30% of the profits + a $10 VPN fee, while conducting the same trades for them via API, that means they are sitting on a net loss of $2.40. Maybe you can squeak out a few more trades before the end of the month to put them back at a net zero. |
|
|
|
Those first few replies aren't an argument and are the debate equivalent of "NO U!"
Is the video still on YouTube or not? Nope, it is apples to apples. Definition of " bribe" "something given or promised in order to improperly influence a person's conduct or decision" Sure sounds like it meets the definition of bribery to me. Of course it does. You also used the words "with no finding of wrong doing" after implying the investigation was concluded when nothing of the sort happened.
Was wrong doing found or not? Incomplete investigations rarely create findings of wrong doing. Investigations remain active until officially closed. Yes a 3 year old murder case would still be considered active until officially closed.
False. "Cold cases" have 2 different statuses: - open, active - open, inactive Perhaps this information would have been investigated if corrupt high level officials such as Biden were not extorting them to not do so.
Wrong. Your timeline of events is off. I went over this already in my first post. Besides I thought it was a bribe. Now its an extortion? Way to up the bullshit ante. Nice victim blaming.
How SJW of you. I especially like the part where you claim the intended results of the crime itself is some how evidence of it not happening.
What does this even mean? "Intended results of the crime"? What crime? I didn't know anybody had been accused of a crime other than by the conspiratard media. Oh plenty will come of this, don't worry cupcake. Biden's legacy is over, and many other high level officials are going to face prosecution. You argue about meaningless peripheral issues all you like. The truth is coming out, and your butt is gong to be so hurt you are going to suffer a prolapse from the sheer force of your head being yanked out of your ass when the news breaks.
Not one shred of this statement will become truth. But I'm quoting it in its entirety for future reference. Not that being proven utterly wrong about something has ever compelled you to admit it in the past. |
|
|
|
This just in: Antonio Brown, done! Thousands of Fantasy Football players cry out in unison. Antonio Brown Says He Won’t Be Playing In The NFL AnymoreHe announced on Twitter that he’s finished with the league.
“Will not be playing in the (NFL) anymore these owners can cancel deals do whatever they want at anytime we will see if the (NFLPA) hold them accountable sad they can just void guarantees anytime going on 40m 2 months will see if they pay up !” the tweet read.
Brown was recently released by the Patriots. He only played one game with New England before he was cut.
The Patriots released a statement saying, “The New England Patriots are releasing Antonio Brown. We appreciate the hard work of many people over the past 11 days, but we feel that it is best to move in a different direction at this time.”
ESPN’s Jeremy Fowler said Brown will likely forfeit his $9 million signing bonus from New England because of a contract clause calling for players to disclose situations preventing availability. He also said Brown was due $5 million on Monday.
Before Brown’s arrival in New England, he was playing with the Raiders. Brown had been fined over $200,000, and the Raiders voided the $29.125 million worth of guaranteed money that his deal had guaranteed, according to ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter. Related story: Pittsburgh Doctor Claims Antonio Brown Repeatedly Farted In His Face, Owes Him $11,500 |
|
|
|
By the same silly logic, he has pretty much the same compelling proof as you do calling this project a 'scam', so it has to be correct right?
In fact, the only difference is that this guy is not peddling or advertising a known scam company like you do at the bottom of every post … Oh the irony! Lol
LOL Sportsbet is "a known scam company." That's hilarious. There are literally hundreds of complaints of Spectrocoin stealing customers' funds on the web. Of course the Bankera ICO swindle dwarfs all of them in comparison. But as long as you guys are getting your sweet weekly payments you're happy watching the price of BNK fall to 1 satoshi, right? |
|
|
|
Video of Joe Biden admitting that he bribed the Ukrainian President with $1 billion dollars to fire lead prosecutor investigating his corrupt son is being scrubbed from YouTube and other social media. 1. The video in your article is hosted on YouTube. Guess the DNC or whoever isn't scrubbing very hard. 2. The subject of contention has nothing to do with a "bribe." It has to do with the release of a condition-based loan. 3. The embezzlement case against Burisma Holdings was handed down to the Ukranian state prosecutor, Viktor Shokin in 2014, 2 months before Hunter Biden took a position in the company. The investigation effectively concluded in 2015 with no finding of wrong doing. Shokin wasn't fired until 2016. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-07/timeline-in-ukraine-probe-casts-doubt-on-giuliani-s-biden-claimHunter Biden joined the board in April 2014, two months after U.K. authorities requested information from Ukraine as part of a probe against Zlochevsky related to money laundering allegations. Zlochevsky had been minister of environmental protection under then-President Viktor Yanukovych, who fled to Russia in February 2014 after mass protests.
After the U.K. request, Ukrainian prosecutors opened their own case, accusing Zlochevsky of embezzling public funds. Burisma and Zlochevsky have denied the allegations.
The case against Zlochevsky and his Burisma Holdings was assigned to Shokin, then a deputy prosecutor. But Shokin and others weren’t pursuing it, according to the internal reports from the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office reviewed by Bloomberg.
In a December 2014 letter, U.S. officials warned Ukrainian prosecutors of negative consequences for Ukraine over its failure to assist the U.K., which had seized Zlochevsky’s assets, according to the documents.
Those funds, $23.5 million, were unblocked in 2015 when a British court determined there wasn’t enough evidence to justify the continued freeze, in part because Ukrainian prosecutors had failed to provide the necessary information. It would appear that this Shokin guy was too soft and ineffective in his investigation, which completely contradicts the narrative of Biden Did Bad Thing. This story is a big bowl of nothing except for the fact that it looks like Trump pushed too hard for a reopening of an investigation into Hunter Biden and got caught in the process. |
|
|
|
Wasn't Ethereum suppose to scale better than BTC?  Yesterday I had an ETH transaction that took 45 minutes! And the fee was "standard" according to your infographic. It didn't fall off the network, it just took for god damn ever to confirm. Longest ETH transaction ever. |
|
|
|
|
Procrastination
Just thinking up a haiku
Instead of working
Special ed shitposts
Put their posters on ignore
Forever. Amen.
Take care of your dog
If you can't fucking do that
Then don't buy a dog!
This is the haiku
That never ends. It just goes
On and on my friends.
|
|
|
|
Just reached my 100 days as well!   It took me 5 years and 5 months to get this amount. That means I've spent roughly 5% of my life looking at this bullshit since I started! Jesus Christ, I just realized something... I'm a nerd!   |
|
|
|
Every fudder here will regret of the decision of sell BNKs, good times coming for BNK holders. Thanks BANKERA for the efforts!!!!!
This comment aged well. LOL. Never mind, this is just some greasy criminal trying to cause damage because their extortion scheme failed.
Do you have evidence of this? |
|
|
|
|
Oh, this is over the Gapcoin thing?
Just know it wasn't me who reported you. I was grateful that an oldtimer like yourself wanted to share something with me about a coin they found interesting.
I could never download the whole blockchain, it was moving way too slow, but I do appreciate the offer for... what was it? 314 free Gapcoins?
In any case, I of course support your unbanning.
If the decision won't be reversed, just keep in mind that 30 days is a relatively short period compared to the timeframe of how long you'be been here.
I appreciate your insights into the Satoshi-era forum, your comments in the BSV Scam thread, and your unique brand of humor. Hope you'll remember to come back and aren't too offput by this minor ordeal.
|
|
|
|
|
Congratulations, you managed to type 4 paragraphs while saying nothing.
Just oppose the flag and be on with your day.
I don't have time to deal with another cryptohunter.
|
|
|
|
I dont know what your team looks like but you probably took woods around round 4/5, I dont think Cleveland's secondary is enough for me to bench a rams wr. I have Brooks in one league and kupp in another I am starting both of them without thinking twice. I would advise you to do the same with woods unless you are wr heavy
Here's who I have on my WR list: Chris Godwin - TB Mike Evans - TB Michael Thomas - NO Robert Woods - LAR Allen Robinson - Chi Sterling Shepard - NYG Emmanuel Sanders - Den So yeah you could say I am WR-heavy The ones in bold are my starters. Would you make any changes? |
|
|
|
Perhaps I'd consider withdrawing my support after more evidence of his legitimacy has come to light.
Isn't this the exact opposite of the intended purpose of flags? I thought the evidence was supposed to be presented before supporting it, not create a conclusion and then build a narrative around it. You know, innocent until proven guilty, not your rep is toast until you can prove yourself/appease the mob. No. The purpose of the flag system is to warn other users about potentially getting scammed. Nobody is saying anybody is "guilty" because this isn't a court of law. What we are saying is that this guy is demonstrating untrustworthy behavior and users should take caution before entrusting this person with their funds. So far he has put forward little to zero evidence that he can actually do what he is claiming to do. What he has put forward is a bunch of disjointed nonsense backed only by an outrageous ego and air of superiority. Feel free to oppose the flag if you'd like. |
|
|
|
While we're on this topic: For those interested in joining the campaign, would you rather have more frequent openings of single slots, or slightly less frequent openings but with multiple spots open?
You should just PM people you want in the campaign. Not that its a hassle to apply, but you'd probably save yourself a lot of time that way. |
|
|
|
Well shit..
...
nutildah - maybe this is what you suspect but it's not something you can prove..
Just want to point out that I updated my feedback several hours ago. You must be looking at the screenshot he made earlier. Upon closer inspection, it doesn't look like a Ponzi per se (not that anyone can spot a Ponzi other than its general characteristics and outcome after it has ended) but the fact that he is so stubborn about certain aspects is suspicious to me. In no circumstance should people trust huge sums of money with him given how little he actually has to show for what his bot has accomplished, and his behavior overlaps that of scammers to a certain degree. Perhaps I'd consider withdrawing my support after more evidence of his legitimacy has come to light. |
|
|
|
Please tell me where i said that a bitmex api key alone can act as a private key of the bitmex's wallet.
Not interested in playing word games with you. You keep shifting the goal posts, and again, we're very familiar with this kind of behavior. This guy summed up the problem with what you are offering more-or-less perfectly: I have not encountered 1 bot, in the world of crypto trading, that had a proven track record of consistent profitability and was also on sale for the retail public's benefit. If there was any significant alpha factor, the owner of such a bot would be extremely cautious about not compromising that edge by sharing it with the public. You would be the first of your kind in this case, which is highly doubtful, but I'm sure the intelligent traders & investors can decide for themselves.
I understand you are not selling the bot. No need to nitpick that point. But the problem remains: if your bot is consistently profitable enough to offer consistent returns of this-or-that a month, why share it with the public? Why not just compound your own profits and not run the risk of having somebody figure out what your bot is up to? Furthermore, one point of clarification I'd like is, how do your customers benefit from your account having "market maker" privileges if their accounts do not? A few trades you made that appeared to be a loss may have still been profitable to you thanks to such privileges, but would still be a loss to them. I'm just trying to understand how you reconcile this difference. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
