Can you still believe aTriz words? Reopened, too many open questions

[scam_detector]

Here we go again: OP *stands down*, the forum's Iago continues his personal vendetta.

Oh my god, you really seem to have a mental problem. I will not close this thread for two reasons.

• First, I was criticized earlier for closing the other thread in the middle of the discussion.
• And second, I do not like your manner. You are a very arrogant, opinionated person who does not accept other opinions. I just do not want to give you the satisfaction of telling me something.

I will not respond to your posts anymore! I will now go offline.

[Lauda]

Oh my god, you really seem to have a mental problem.

Take a look in the mirror, sockpuppet.

I will not close this thread for two reasons.

Did not ask you to.

And second, I do not like your manner.

Do you really think I care whether some random likes me or not? Cute.

I will not respond to your posts anymore!

You've said that already, and we've established that you're a liar. No wonder you like Iago.

[nullius]

Three letters. WOW. I had to let it sink first. I did not think a post could change my mind about another person (aTriz), but your post did it. Your post is a perfect example of how to argue conclusively and calmly. After reading your post I feel bad about having brought a very likely innocent person (aTriz) in connection with a scammer (alia) or accusing aTriz to be involved in the scam.  I still believe that his actions should have consequences, but no longer think he should be painted red. That would be too harsh a punishment for which he most likely just naive acted. You have just climbed a level in my personal trust level (nullius).

I am very sorry aTriz. I acted too fast and thoughtless.

Thank you, scam_detector.  I think that when aTriz arrives, all this can be settled amicably some way which reasonably assures that the thing you complain of will not happen again.  I think that’s what you’re seeking; am I right?

Aside, it was from your behaviour in the other thread that I concluded that your intentions are what you claim:  Fighting scams—while not risking flamewar blowback to your main account, but also not taking credit as “the one who outed Alia”.  I see that I was correct in this assessment.


For all the people discussing that signature contract:

In the Alia scam thread, I raised the issue of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.  Rather than digging up what few words I already said on the topic, or trying to write new ones—here, have a wiki link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implied_covenant_of_good_faith_and_fair_dealing

TL;DR:  Terms such as “you must not be a scammer totally misrepresenting your identity to obain this contract” do not need to be written into a contract.  They are implicit in all contracts; and breach thereof is material breach of the contract.

Ignorance at best
It is foolish to trust scripts
Luck is unchanging

Thank you.  That was—not only witty, but quite instructive, I think.

Out of the last 24 posts, 16 were personal alia/nullius recriminations, and her/his/its other recent responses were just abuse or drivel.

At least mine were witty—and true.

It was an unpleasant surprise to see someone who appeared to be level headed like aTriz, making the errors of judgement he has made in vouching for a gambling script and pre paying a large signature deal with a newbie, based on a 'contract' apparently scribbled on the back of an envelope.

My best guess:  Star power.  Movie studio exec rushes to lock in a hot rising starlet, who is supposed to be the Next Big Thing—and it turns out, there is some nasty surprise about her...

Again, my guess.

I note that aTriz also hinted at making an offer for my signature.  From Alia’s signature-selling thread:

Do we get the sig space of your alt nullius as well?

(Disclosure:  Some discussions were had.  The only reason why I’m not wearing a paid signature now is that I really don’t want one—although I do not wholly exclude the possibility; remember, I’m the guy who couldn’t get scammed out of 1.2 BTC because I don’t have it.  Nevertheless, my PGP key fingerprints need the space.  PGP fingerprints are important to me.)

@OP i am not sure, but maybe aTriz was thinking with his dick  

Though I was not privy to any discussions between them whatsoever, I doubt that.  I suspect that aTriz was simply interested in snapping up her signature and, he hoped, mine also.

Attention. I am a scammer. Please do not trade with me.

 

Good idea.  (Suddenly, the prepayment money becomes a public service.)

$300 a month isn't a lot for someone who was already on Theymos's watch list and who had convinced theymos to change her forum name.

My bad.  Oops.

[actmyname]

I am very sorry aTriz. I acted too fast and thoughtless.

First, I was criticized earlier for closing the other thread in the middle of the discussion.

There needn't be more
Here, future speech relates not
Look at the title

(Has it not been resolved?
Need we continue any more?
Pointless dialogues?)

[OgNasty]

I'd be concerned why aTriz rushed to team up with a fraudster like alia that tried to pull the wool over theymos' eyes as well as a documented extortionist like Lauda who has been fired for his behavior, and seemingly has been taking out small loans to establish trust ratings.  Not actions you'd expect to see from an aspiring signature manager.

[LoyceV]

On the gambling issue, it is difficult for me to reach a firm opinion.  As I said in the Alia thread, I don’t know enough about gambling to assess this issue.  I have trouble following the discussion, since I do not know all the jargon.  It would take me hours of reading to even begin to get a handle on the issue, when I am already exhausted (now awake much >24 hours due to this Alia blowup...).  I’d be interested in hearing what unbiased, technically competent persons who know gambling have to say about the matter.

Do you mind if I jump in here? I've been a Mod in an online casino for over two years, and the one thing that's always been very clear, is there is no winning method, script or bot. You can get lucky, you can get lucky quite a lot, but luck is all there is to it. You can win at 1% chance, or lose at 98% chance. The former is just much less likely than the latter, but both are possible.

aTriz posted this:

Was given a vouch copy of the method by op and played around with in with funds from the faucet.

With the 10 minutes I used this script with, I profited and worked perfectly. Would recommend.

I made an extremely good ROI, and I’m sure that others who buy the method will experience similar results. Thanks, Alia!

Let's assume he turned a 30% profit in 10 minutes. I just went to BetKing, played 1 bet at 76% chance, and instantly earned 30% profit (Bet # 32333134)!
What does this say about my system? It means nothing! But it is the same result as aTriz reached in 10 minutes. Am I a master gambler or what?

Using past results to predict future bets is like a lottery winner telling you to buy a ticket, because it worked for him. Gambling, and especially your chance to win/lose, isn't intuitive. People easily see patterns, while it's just random numbers. Winning once doesn't mean you'll win again. Winning many times doesn't mean anything either (as long as the game is fair, cheating can change this of course).
Now, back to BetKing: I did it again (Bet # 32333137)! And again (32333138) and again (32333139)!
I could vouch for "bet all at 1.3x four times", but doing so would only make me look like I don't understand math. My fifth (32333140) and eighth (32333143) bets lost.

Selling a winning script is like selling the goose with the golden eggs: if it would exist, you wouldn't need to sell it.

The only way I see aTriz getting out of the contract is if alia doesn’t make at least 30 posts per month.

The contract states 30 to 100 posts per month. Alia has already posted more than 100.

[MadZ]

Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.

Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome.

The contract also states that all payments will be refunded to aTriz should she fail to reach Legendary member status by the third year. Assuming people wake up and stop handing her free merit (21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius), I doubt she will be able to meet this requirement.

[OgNasty]

Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.

Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome.

The contract also states that all payments will be refunded to aTriz should she fail to reach Legendary member status by the third year. Assuming people wake up and stop handing her free merit (21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius), I doubt she will be able to meet this requirement.

So nearly 40% of his/her merit comes from TMAN and nullius?  Seems legit.  

[nullius]

Do you mind if I jump in here?

Thank you.  I think an edited, generalized version of what you wrote should be stickied in the Gambling forum.  (If something isn’t already...)

Stripping it down to simple mathematical terms and concrete examples puts the issue quite clearly in focus.

Using past results to predict future bets is like a lottery winner telling you to buy a ticket, because it worked for him. Gambling, and especially your chance to win/lose, isn't intuitive. People easily see patterns, while it's just random numbers. Winning once doesn't mean you'll win again. Winning many times doesn't mean anything either (as long as the game is fair, cheating can change this of course).

I sometimes have fun looking for patterns in hashes of arbitrary data, or in the output of /dev/random.  At least I know it’s not real.  If I want an extended intelligible pattern, such as the vanity addresses in my signature, then I need to bruteforce it—600 CPU-hours on slow laptop for those addresses.  By analogy, flipping a coin many times until you get n heads in a row.

Thinking aloud here:

Suppose I think that a gambling script which wins, say, 1000 times in a row should be possible.  Of course!  Not only is it possible:  It is trivial.  The problem is that depending on the odds of the game, it will need to lose an astronomical number of times to hit an unbroken streak of 1000 wins in a row.  (Rather like after trying many billions of losing keys, I got one with a corresponding address which spells “segwit”.)

So, I write this script (which essentially just plays the game repeatedly).  Then I create a forum account called “Alia 2.0” (new and improved!), pay some girl to get /r/GirlsGoneBitcoin verified for me, and sell my script as the script which will win 1000 times in a row.

Does that sound like an “upgrade” on what happened here?  I hope so.  I always like to improve things.

What I think OP is seeking here is to know that my “Alia 2.0” alt would not obtain such a glowing mini-review from a widely respected person for the “guaranteed 1000 wins in a row [eventually]” script.


Aside:  I feel a bit stupid now for not having paid more attention.  Alia had many posts about gambling, wrapped in a sort of gambler’s talk I tended to tune out.

It would ordinarily be absurd to follow or scrutinize all the posts of users I like, if many of them are uninteresting to me.  Maybe I should have here.

Anyway, after the scandal broke, I PMed a trustworthy gambling expert to ask for learning information.  He sent back a bunch of Github links.  Works for me.  I’ll dig into them later.  Perhaps you’ll see me in Gambling someday—though probably not any day soon.

Selling a winning script is like selling the goose with the golden eggs: if it would exist, you wouldn't need to sell it.

Sure, I do.  Because although it wins, it will need to lose more than it wins on average—and I can’t afford that!  However, it is probabilistically guaranteed that eventually, you will hit a really awesome winning streak.  Also, the goose which lays golden eggs must be fed more gold than it lays in eggs.  I will start a thread in Goods for that.

Edit:  @MadZ:  Re, “21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius”:  If you want to ask me about that in the Alia scam thread, I would reply there.  (Short answer:  Nobody gave her “free” merit; I could have given +48 in one shot to put the account up to 100, but would never do such a thing.)  Otherwise, suffice it to say, I think it’s clear that that account will not be receiving much more merit from anyone—if any at all.

[TMAN]

Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.

Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome.

The contract also states that all payments will be refunded to aTriz should she fail to reach Legendary member status by the third year. Assuming people wake up and stop handing her free merit (21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius), I doubt she will be able to meet this requirement.

So nearly 40% of his/her merit comes from TMAN and nullius?  Seems legit.  

Yes in the same way as theymos thought she was legit so did I. She was entertaining and not a shitposter.

It's a bit like the early investors in your IPO they changed there minds when you went down the scamclub route. Hence the price of the seats dropping. So in the same vein, the amount of merits she will receive will drop as well.

Keep trying little man

[OgNasty]

Just a hint: (also for TMAN) if you guys are trying to make a point here, I'd refrain from taking it to a personal level.

Totally agree - I have stopped the mud slinging now!

That lasted about as long as you'd expect TMAN's word to last...

So nearly 40% of his/her merit comes from TMAN and nullius?  Seems legit.  

It's a bit like the early investors in your IPO they changed there minds when you went down the scamclub route.

The NastyFans member list shows an all time high in active member accounts was reached this week.  As usual, your allegations are not only fabricated, but the exact opposite of the truth.  (Shhh... Your intelligence is showing: It's their, not there.)

https://nastyfans.org/members.csv

Men lie. Women lie. Numbers don't.

Back to how aTriz & aLia's words are not to be trusted (TMAN's word is quite obviously already worthless)...

[TMAN]

Just a hint: (also for TMAN) if you guys are trying to make a point here, I'd refrain from taking it to a personal level.

Totally agree - I have stopped the mud slinging now!

That lasted about as long as you'd expect TMAN's word to last...

So nearly 40% of his/her merit comes from TMAN and nullius?  Seems legit.  

It's a bit like the early investors in your IPO they changed there minds when you went down the scamclub route. Hence the price of the seats dropping. So in the same vein, the amount of merits she will receive will drop as well.

The NastyFans member list shows an all time high in active member accounts was reached this week.  As usual, your allegations are not only fabricated, but the exact opposite of the truth.  

https://nastyfans.org/members.csv

Men lie. Women lie. Numbers don't.

Back to how aTriz & aLia's words are not to be trusted (TMAN's word is quite obviously already worthless)...

Don't poke and I won't bite..

Numbers of people = price of share??

Trust?? I think you need to get some water in you, we know it's hot in the desert especially with those miners running on the solar that zeroxal paid for

[Lauda]

Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.

Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome.

The contract also states that all payments will be refunded to aTriz should she fail to reach Legendary member status by the third year. Assuming people wake up and stop handing her free merit (21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius), I doubt she will be able to meet this requirement.

Unless she makes a miraculous recovery out of this, she will very unlikely make it. However, that would still take too long for aTriz to get his money back. Additionally, I think that it implies that he continues sending her money until that time.

One handed thief (the getaway car)

The one handed thief ran out of the bank and jumped into the getaway car only to realize it was a four on the floor with stick shift .

T'is one be full of th't morality.

[OgNasty]

Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.

Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome.

The contract also states that all payments will be refunded to aTriz should she fail to reach Legendary member status by the third year. Assuming people wake up and stop handing her free merit (21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius), I doubt she will be able to meet this requirement.

Unless she makes a miraculous recovery out of this, she will very unlikely make it. However, that would still take too long for aTriz to get his money back. Additionally, I think that it implies that he continues sending her money until that time.

Interesting take.  So aTriz will have to continue paying a scammer, knowing he won't get his funds back because he agreed to an awful contract?  I guess feeling that way, you'd probably leave him negative trust if he refused to honor these payments?

[Lauda]

Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.

Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome.

The contract also states that all payments will be refunded to aTriz should she fail to reach Legendary member status by the third year. Assuming people wake up and stop handing her free merit (21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius), I doubt she will be able to meet this requirement.

Unless she makes a miraculous recovery out of this, she will very unlikely make it. However, that would still take too long for aTriz to get his money back. Additionally, I think that it implies that he continues sending her money until that time.

Interesting take.  So aTriz will have to continue paying a scammer, knowing he won't get his funds back because he agreed to an awful contract?  I guess feeling that way, you'd probably leave him negative trust if he refused to honor these payments?

En garde.

I don't think he's obligated to pay. He entered into the contract thinking someone was who they said they were and that person is clearly a liar who is misrepresenting themselves, so IMO the contract could be void just based on the fact it was created under false pretenses. I'd also add that standard public policies amongst the community has generally been that red trust == removal from signature campaigns which I believe adds further reasoning.

[suchmoon]

Suppose I think that a gambling script which wins, say, 1000 times in a row should be possible.  Of course!  Not only is it possible:  It is trivial.  The problem is that depending on the odds of the game, it will need to lose an astronomical number of times to hit an unbroken streak of 1000 wins in a row.  (Rather like after trying many billions of losing keys, I got one with a corresponding address which spells “segwit”.)

No. That's not how it works, gambling or hashing. The next bet or hash has the exact same probability of being a winning bet or a valid block hash or a super cool vanity address as any other regardless of any bets or hashes preceding it.

You mentioned someone pointing you to github and that might help, but for a proper context you also might want to read some posts here in the gambling section. There are some brilliant folks here who know how this shit works and learned some of it the hard way and don't hesitate to share stuff that you won't find in source code.

[johhnyUA]

I guess feeling that way, you'd probably leave him negative trust if he refused to honor these payments?

Maybe someone of you will better leave negative feedback for merit abusers like these - 1 or these 2 than debating here? 


Sorry for my intervention in such interesting debates.

[Astargath]

Suppose I think that a gambling script which wins, say, 1000 times in a row should be possible.  Of course!  Not only is it possible:  It is trivial.  The problem is that depending on the odds of the game, it will need to lose an astronomical number of times to hit an unbroken streak of 1000 wins in a row.  (Rather like after trying many billions of losing keys, I got one with a corresponding address which spells “segwit”.)

No. That's not how it works, gambling or hashing. The next bet or hash has the exact same probability of being a winning bet or a valid block hash or a super cool vanity address as any other regardless of any bets or hashes preceding it.

You mentioned someone pointing you to github and that might help, but for a proper context you also might want to read some posts here in the gambling section. There are some brilliant folks here who know how this shit works and learned some of it the hard way and don't hesitate to share stuff that you won't find in source code.

However I remember that she said her ''strategy'' was based on a vulnerability on a particular casino because the casino itself had some sort of script that would let new accounts win at first or something like that. It wasn't really a normal idiotic ''strategy'' at least that's what she said. I personally wouldn't vouch for something like that even if it was legit since it involves some sort of cheating.

[Lauda]

Suppose I think that a gambling script which wins, say, 1000 times in a row should be possible.  Of course!  Not only is it possible:  It is trivial.  The problem is that depending on the odds of the game, it will need to lose an astronomical number of times to hit an unbroken streak of 1000 wins in a row.  (Rather like after trying many billions of losing keys, I got one with a corresponding address which spells “segwit”.)

No. That's not how it works, gambling or hashing. The next bet or hash has the exact same probability of being a winning bet or a valid block hash or a super cool vanity address as any other regardless of any bets or hashes preceding it.

You mentioned someone pointing you to github and that might help, but for a proper context you also might want to read some posts here in the gambling section. There are some brilliant folks here who know how this shit works and learned some of it the hard way and don't hesitate to share stuff that you won't find in source code.

However I remember that she said her ''strategy'' was based on a vulnerability on a particular casino because the casino itself had some sort of script that would let new accounts win at first or something like that. It wasn't really a normal idiotic ''strategy'' at least that's what she said. I personally wouldn't vouch for something like that even if it was legit since it involves some sort of cheating.

aTriz said he was aware of this exactly where?

[marlboroza]

As for the gambling vouch, didn't he just say that it worked?

Did he check script for backdoors?

That would imply that he knows more than what a variable initialization looks like. To my knowledge, he does not.

That wasn't really a question.
Look, I am strongly against people who are selling "winning scripts" or any kind of gambling scripts/bots for several reasons:
1) gambling scripts/bots are available for free, no one needs to buy one
2) winning script/method doesn't exist, people who are selling such methods are selling fog to naive people
3) such scripts/bots usually have something hidden to steal balance

As I already said, he was probably thinking with his lower head and I hope all this will remind him not to vouch for such shady thing again.

~
However I remember that she said her ''strategy'' was based on a vulnerability on a particular casino because the casino itself had some sort of script that would let new accounts win at first or something like that. It wasn't really a normal idiotic ''strategy'' at least that's what she said. I personally wouldn't vouch for something like that even if it was legit since it involves some sort of cheating.

You are wrong, For this case and method, she specifically said that script was created for provably fair sites:

This script is designed for crash sites, and has been backtested against around 2 years worth of data. This script is intended for use on provably fair sites

"Method" you mentioned was posted in other topic.