TradeFortress is a scammer.

[ervalvola]

Ripple as a system isn't meant to send actual BTC, it's meant to send IOUs for actual BTC.  Douchebag TradeFortress knows this but doesn't plan to honor his IOU's but rather plans to exchange them for IOU's issued by others that will be honored as he clearly stated in his PM to me...

One word: (actually two) - liquidity providers. I've being able to exchange my own IOUs for bit stamp ones because of a flawed feature in ripple.

The only currency in Ripple that is similar to BTC is XRP.  So pretending or implying to Newbies (where he posted) that sending BTC in Ripple is in any way similar to sending BTC through Bitcoin is not only disingenuous but it's sleazy.

TradeFortress is running a scam and it's sad that no moderator has the balls to do anything about it. EDIT: Or maybe the necessary brain power is not available amongst the moderators to understand that Ripple is not the same as Bitcoin and should not be used by a board member to steal ignorant newbie's BTC (which is why TradeFortress - aka - douchebag scammer - is posting on the Newbie board).

If this is true, he is properly a stealer.

[1713862735]

1713862735

[1713862735]

1713862735

[Deprived]

...Is this correct?

Not exactly. It's more like this:

1. TradeFortress issues a cryptographically signed, digital promise to provide actual Bitcoins in the future when the promise is redeemed

2. TradeFortrees breaks his promise.

At what point has be broken his promise?

If you borrow 1 BTC from me without agreeing any terms of repayment are you a scammer IMMEDIATELY (as you haven't repaid it?) How about in a week's time?  Or a month?  A year?

An IOU can NOT be defaulted on (other than by the issuer stating that they default) unless a means/time-scale for settlement was agreed.

If you disgaree then answer this simple question:  if you receive 1 TF BTC on ripple at what date/time has be defaulted if he hasn't yet redeemed it?

If your claim is that ALL ripple BTC debts should be IMMEDIATELY redeemable for actual BTC then that has some very nasty logistical issues - not least of which being that if you borrow on ripple (i.e. issue an IOU in return for real BTC) you can't actually spend those BTC without being immediately a scammer as you can no longer redeem them on request.  If, on the other hand, your claim is NOT that all IOUs should be immediately redeemable on request then we're back to asking how/when is the agreed redemption of these TF IOUs?

That's ONE of the flaws this little experiment has addressed - that IOUs with no terms are inherently worthless as they can only ever be redeemed if the issuer of the IOUs voluntarily chooses to do so (there's no clearly defined point at which a 'default' can be declared).  Another flaw shown here (which I pointed out and asked about ages back - but it got ignored despite Ripple team answering easy questions in same thread) is that all IOUs are treated equally - just because I issue trust to A and B does NOT mean I value IOUs from them equally or am fine with IOUs from one being swapped to IOUs from the other without any input from myself.

[darkmule]

Where's the transaction on the Bitcoin blockchain where real BTC went from one actual person to another?

That's as stupid as asking someone what the serial numbers on the dollar bills they lost were when someone loses money with a credit card or a bank card or a cheque or something. Do you think the police ask that and then say "well geez no `money` was stolen then sorry".

Bullshit.  Every BTC transaction has a permanent record, which you'd know if you knew jack-shit about BTC.

[bitaccumulation]

Let me translate this:

"Two words: STEAL BTC - through people I misrepresent Ripple to so they'll act as liquidity providers.  I've been able to exchange the BOGUS IOU's I've convinced the ignorant newbie's to take (because they believe I'm giving them real BTC) and been able to get IOU's from legitimate companies that I can turn in for real BTC."

TradeFortress is using a feature of the Ripple system to dupe newbies out of their real Bitcoin.   That's the bottom line.

[arsenische]

At what point has be broken his promise?

Good point. IMHO if a person creates a debt that he is not going to pay for, then he is a scammer. There is a difference between "I owe you, let's settle my debt" and "I never promised to redeem it, so in fact I don't owe you anything".

Another flaw shown here (which I pointed out and asked about ages back - but it got ignored despite Ripple team answering easy questions in same thread) is that all IOUs are treated equally - just because I issue trust to A and B does NOT mean I value IOUs from them equally or am fine with IOUs from one being swapped to IOUs from the other without any input from myself.

Actually Ripple allows to specify the quality of debts on the protocol level, it is just not in the UI yet. Source: https://github.com/rippleFoundation/ripple-client/issues/682#issuecomment-18076497

[runam0k]

Let me translate this:

"Two words: STEAL BTC - through people I misrepresent Ripple to so they'll act as liquidity providers.  I've been able to exchange the BOGUS IOU's I've convinced the ignorant newbie's to take (because they believe I'm giving them real BTC) and been able to get IOU's from legitimate companies that I can turn in for real BTC."

TradeFortress is using a feature of the Ripple system to dupe newbies out of their real Bitcoin.   That's the bottom line.

Oops, that's pretty damning.

I don't quite buy the "he promised me 1BTC and I'm obviously not getting it so he's a scammer" line, but if someone is having their valuable bitstamp IOUs swapped for junk TF IOUs, that's bad.

[Deprived]

At what point has be broken his promise?

Good point. IMHO if a person creates a debt that he is not going to pay for, then he is a scammer. There is a difference between "I owe you, let's settle my debt" and "I never promised to redeem it, so in fact I don't owe you anything".

You're not thinking it through far enough.  For one thing, before we can distinguish between the two sample responses you give we need a defined point in time at which the IOU issuer is obliged to give a response at all (a settlement date).

IOUs (taken as meaning any acknowledgement of debt) don't necessarily EVER have to be redeemed.  For example perpetual bonds are never intended to be redeemed - yet are debt.  And on ripple, IOUs can be created for, as an example, shares.  Are those scams because the issuer has no intention of ever redeeming them?

Now IF there were some definition of what minimum liquidity (or maximum time before redemption) had to be provided to be allowed to issue a BTC IOU then we'd be having a very different discussion.  But no such definition exists.  So issuing IOUs with no intention ever to settle is allowed (as opposed to just not prevented) - which is, of course, why noone should grant trust to anyone without making an agreement outside of ripple on the terms for settlement (do even ripple gateways actually provide a guaranteed time-scale for redemption of their IOUs on request?).

Maybe ripple should add a popup when someone tries to extend trust - refusing to do so unless the user ticks a box saying "I have agreed to this issuer's policy on redeeming their IOUs in general and, if applicable, this one in particular".

[bitaccumulation]

Definition of fraud - Wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.

Deceiving newbies into thinking you're going to give them a Bitcoin in a ledger system they don't understand so you can cash in on their real BTC being held at Bitstamp qualifies under this definition I would think.

[arsenische]

For one thing, before we can distinguish between the two sample responses you give we need a defined point in time at which the IOU issuer is obliged to give a response at all (a settlement date).

IOUs (taken as meaning any acknowledgement of debt) don't necessarily EVER have to be redeemed.  For example perpetual bonds are never intended to be redeemed - yet are debt.

Thanks for your valuable arguments. You might be right and I think I understand now why theymos said IOU is not a binding contract. But now I feel totally confused. What is debt then, if it is doesn't ever have to be repaid?

Maybe ripple should add a popup when someone tries to extend trust - refusing to do so unless the user ticks a box saying "I have agreed to this issuer's policy on redeeming their IOUs in general and, if applicable, this one in particular".

Yes, that might be useful. I don't yet know how IOUs are being issued in Ripple, but maybe they should have that policy included.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Let me translate this:

"Two words: STEAL BTC - through people I misrepresent Ripple to so they'll act as liquidity providers.  I've been able to exchange the BOGUS IOU's I've convinced the ignorant newbie's to take (because they believe I'm giving them real BTC) and been able to get IOU's from legitimate companies that I can turn in for real BTC."

TradeFortress is using a feature of the Ripple system to dupe newbies out of their real Bitcoin.   That's the bottom line.

I don't think you understand how to watch a graph, because I haven't used the liquidity provider trick, other people (like iron cross mentioned) did.

Like I said before I have not cashed in anything for this. I am able to, however I haven't (other than testing that it works obviously, just like the 1 tril BTC in my screenshot).

I also have zero plans to honor Ripple IOUs unless I explicitly state a policy.

[bitaccumulation]

Let me translate this:

"Two words: STEAL BTC - through people I misrepresent Ripple to so they'll act as liquidity providers.  I've been able to exchange the BOGUS IOU's I've convinced the ignorant newbie's to take (because they believe I'm giving them real BTC) and been able to get IOU's from legitimate companies that I can turn in for real BTC."

TradeFortress is using a feature of the Ripple system to dupe newbies out of their real Bitcoin.   That's the bottom line.

I don't think you understand how to watch a graph, because I haven't used the liquidity provider trick, other people (like iron cross mentioned) did.

Like I said before I have not cashed in anything for this. I am able to, however I haven't (other than testing that it works obviously, just like the 1 tril BTC in my screenshot).

I also have zero plans to honor Ripple IOUs unless I explicitly state a policy.

Then why in the hell would you PM and say "I've being able to exchange my own IOUs for bit stamp ones..."?

Here's the deal:  You deceived newbies by playing on their ignorance of the Ripple system.   Whether you steal their Bitcoin or people you know steal their Bitcoin, in either case, you've been a party to fraud.  That's not cool dude.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Didn't I just say except testing? I think I should go to jail now, for hacking my own webserver 

Reading comprehension, thnx.

[bitaccumulation]

Didn't I just say except testing? I think I should go to jail now, for hacking my own webserver 

Reading comprehension, thnx.

Yeah if I got a newbie to give me their secret key for their Bitcoin wallet and said it was for "testing" would that make it OK?

You're really something.  You must have some good friends on this board to get away with this kind of shit.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Didn't I just say except testing? I think I should go to jail now, for hacking my own webserver 

Reading comprehension, thnx.

Yeah if I got a newbie to give me their secret key for their Bitcoin wallet and said it was for "testing" would that make it OK?

You're really something.  You must have some good friends on this board to get away with this kind of shit.

I think you're being confused here, if I got my own private key for my address would it be OK?

Hint: yes.

[Deprived]

For one thing, before we can distinguish between the two sample responses you give we need a defined point in time at which the IOU issuer is obliged to give a response at all (a settlement date).

IOUs (taken as meaning any acknowledgement of debt) don't necessarily EVER have to be redeemed.  For example perpetual bonds are never intended to be redeemed - yet are debt.

Thanks for your valuable arguments. You might be right and I think I understand now why theymos said IOU is not a binding contract. But now I feel totally confused. What is debt then, if it is doesn't ever have to be repaid?

Debt is something that you owe - a claim someone else has against you.  Not all debts are created with the intention of being repaid (e.g. loans that are made for tax reasons without either party to the loan having an intention of there ever being a repayment).  Perpetual bonds are another example of debt that will never be repaid (talking RL ones not the pretend mining ones on here).  The bond issuer borrows money that will never be repaid - paying interest (a dividend) on it regularly.  The only way to get your cash back is to sell it to someone else.

That's why debt/IOUs with no agreed terms is worthless.

Maybe an example will help - for the examples below the assumption to be made is that I WILL honour any commitments I made (in practice all debt should be discounted in value based on your confidence that I'd repay):

If I said I'd owe you 20 BTCs to be settled in a week in return for 10 BTCs from you now then (IF you had total trust in me) you could reasonably value those 20 ripple BTCs at similar value to 20 actual BTCs.

If I said I'd owe you 20 BTCs to be settled in 5 years in return for 10 BTCs from you now then (IF you had total trust in me) you would STILL have to value them at a lot less than 20 actual BTCs (as they'd generate no revenue in the meantime and were illiquid).

In ripple BTCs of each of the above scenarios are treated as being interchangeable (whether its 2 sets from same issuer or from 2 different issuers) - despite the fact they have very different actual value.

Now consider a third scenario (equivalent to perpetual bonds):

I say that if you give me 10 BTC now I'll owe you 10 BTC on ripple.  I will never repay those BTC but on the first of each month I'll send 0.01 BTC for each BTC owed to whoever currently holds them.  Again - to ripple those are just BTC - and swappable with anyone else's BTC (provided someone trusts both me and the other issuer).  These BTC may have more or less value than the other ones - depending on how people value 1% interest/month against liquidity.  But I'll never repay them - and am NOT a scammer for issuing them.

Now the final case.  I say if you give me 10 BTC now I'll owe you 20 BTC on ripple but will only ever repay them if I win the lottery.  What are those BTC worth?  Nearly nothing (even ignoring the fact that I don't play the lottery).

Do you see how the value of a debt/IOU is defined by the TERMS that apply to it - not by its face value?  But ripple treats them all based on face value.

TF's ones were pretty much explicitly worthless.  In the absence of terms the only way to reasonably assess value of something is to look at what consideration was given in return for them - and assume a similar value.  Nothing was given - so their value is gong to be around zero.

[bitaccumulation]

Didn't I just say except testing? I think I should go to jail now, for hacking my own webserver  

Reading comprehension, thnx.

Yeah if I got a newbie to give me their secret key for their Bitcoin wallet and said it was for "testing" would that make it OK?

You're really something.  You must have some good friends on this board to get away with this kind of shit.

I think you're being confused here, if I got my own private key for my address would it be OK?

Hint: yes.

I'm not confused at all.

You posted on a newbie forum the following: " I am giving away at least 1 BTC per address on Ripple."

You flat out said you are giving away BTC on Ripple.  The only way to do that on Ripple is to issue an IOU since the only trust-free currency on Ripple is XRP.   You are playing on the fact that people don't understand how Ripple works.  That is not a flaw.   Just like if someone didn't understand how public/private key encryption works it would be sleazy to ask them for the PRIVATE key of their wallet to deposit money and then use that private key to steal the rest of the BTC from their wallet.

I'm done arguing with you.   If the Mods here think it's OK to put up a little red warning when one of their Hero members is pulling a full out scam on ignorant newbies then so be it.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Just like if someone didn't understand how public/private key encryption works it would be sleazy to ask them for the PRIVATE key of their wallet to deposit money and then use that private key to steal the rest of the BTC from their wallet.

That's true. However, I haven't used it to steal BTC IOUs from other people's wallet, people who have zero affiliation with me (other than also being sent my IOUs) did.

TESTING MEANS TEST IT ON MYSELF / OWN ACCOUNTS. I am not responsible for anything other people do. Oh, and see Deprived response for why Ripple is actually flawed in how liquidity providers work.

[bitaccumulation]

Just like if someone didn't understand how public/private key encryption works it would be sleazy to ask them for the PRIVATE key of their wallet to deposit money and then use that private key to steal the rest of the BTC from their wallet.

That's true. However, I haven't used it to steal BTC IOUs from other people's wallet, people who have zero affiliation with me (other than also being sent my IOUs) did.

TESTING MEANS TEST IT ON MYSELF / OWN ACCOUNTS. I am not responsible for anything other people do. Oh, and see Deprived response for why Ripple is actually flawed in how liquidity providers work.

You're involved in a scam.  If you did the same thing with secret keys (knowing that people didn't understand what they were) and then gave those secret keys away to other people - would that make you any less culpable in the scam?   I think not.

Having people trust you for 100 BTC in Ripple is the same thing as asking someone who doesn't know the difference between a private key and public key to give you a private key.   In both cases you are playing on someone's ignorance of the system and promoting theft - whether you do the stealing or not.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Having people trust you for 100 BTC in Ripple is the same thing as asking someone who doesn't know the difference between a private key and public key to give you a private key.   In both cases you are playing on someone's ignorance of the system and promoting theft - whether you do the stealing or not.

Uhh, no. If I send someone a bitcoin in exchange for a private key, that's not theft, I'm buying vanity addresses.

[Deprived]

Just like if someone didn't understand how public/private key encryption works it would be sleazy to ask them for the PRIVATE key of their wallet to deposit money and then use that private key to steal the rest of the BTC from their wallet.

That's true. However, I haven't used it to steal BTC IOUs from other people's wallet, people who have zero affiliation with me (other than also being sent my IOUs) did.

TESTING MEANS TEST IT ON MYSELF / OWN ACCOUNTS. I am not responsible for anything other people do. Oh, and see Deprived response for why Ripple is actually flawed in how liquidity providers work.

You're involved in a scam.  If you did the same thing with secret keys (knowing that people didn't understand what they were) and then gave those secret keys away to other people - would that make you any less culpable in the scam?   I think not.

Having people trust you for 100 BTC in Ripple is the same thing as asking someone who doesn't know the difference between a private key and public key to give you a private key.   In both cases you are playing on someone's ignorance of the system and promoting theft - whether you do the stealing or not.

It's actually NOT the same thing.

If I ask someone to give me their private key and they do, noone else can do anything to harm them unless I give away the key.
If I ask someone to trust me for 100 BTC on ripple and they do then other people can cause them financial loss WITHOUT me doing anything.

The difference is down to a flaw in how ripple is implemented - that it values all IOUs based purely on face-value.  So 1 BTC issued by a gateway that will redeem immediately is treated as having the same value as a BTC issued by a penniless bum with a track-record of scamming, failing to meet promises and zero assets (a large chunk of the forum membership falls in this group).  Or, as in this case, the same value as a BTC issued by someone trying to prove just how bad that system is - with no promise or intent of ever redeeming it.

Issuing the BTC did no harm - where harm occurred was from the requirement to extend 100 BTC of trust in return for receiving 1 BTC of worthless IOU.  But seriously - anyone dumb enough to do that DESERVES to suffer loss as an example to the rest of the community.

If I said I'd give you an IOU for $1 in return for being allowed to use your $100 overdraft facility at your bank would you accept?  If not, why would you accept the same offer made on ripple?  Because that's basically what the deal was - just most people accepting it didn't have a usable overdraft facility so were immune to harm.