Flag - "CryptoSparks"

[bob123]

CryptoSparks offered a "service" where he promised guaranteed returns with his "AI trading bot". [1]
After this didn't work out for him, he started a "lending request or partnership up to 5BTC" without any collateral. [2]

His faulty logic is clearly misleading. Especially for newbies:

1. More bots running the trade equals more support for the trade which equals to even higher probability of success.

Lenders keep control of their funds via API KEY. Basically is RISK FREE

Anyone engaging in this is very likely going to lose his money. Therefore a Type1 flag is appropriate.


Support/Oppose the flag here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=752



[1] 10 FREE SPOTS for BITMEX TRADING BOT ARMY - 🔥 JULY 2019 🔥   (archived)
and 10 FREE SPOTS for BITMEX TRADING BOT ARMY - 🔥 JUNE 2019 🔥 *CLOSED*   (archived)

[2] Lending request or Partnership for FULLY Documentated Market Maker BOT   (archived)

[1713537439]

1713537439

[AdolfinWolf]

User has already made fraudulent claims about his returns. Claiming that they are verifiable, while in reality, they're non-existing, made up.

Not to mention that his bot is of course a complete farce, but, we've seen it before, people think these things are actually real and working, and will just mindlessly throw their BTC at it.
(Referring to ReggieBOT which was the exact same thing. - all users got liquidated a month or so later.)

Flag supported.

[efialtis]

I was in discussions with that user because we were looking for an Italian translator and he asked for upfront payment - thats not unusual actually and most of the times, I do so, too. Something just didnt feel right though and we decided to skip this...

This is just for your info and I dont mean to harm his rep, he didnt do anything wrong...

[YOSHIE]

It looks like @CryptoSparks, never tired of making trouble in this forum, problems, problems, problems that he can make.

@CryptoSparks, stop making mischief in this Forum, try to do good at least for yourself.

I will provide flag support this time to @CryptoSparks for his actions, I hope he can change in the future.

[suchmoon]

Lenders keep control of their funds via API KEY. Basically is RISK FREE

I had many pages of discussion with him on his claim that an API key can act as a Bitcoin private key. I don't think he knows how Bitcoin works.

He sounds like a very young person who reads a paragraph on Wikipedia and thinks he's an expert on the subject. Normally I wouldn't support flags on idiots for being idiots but this one is asking for money.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Not to mention that his bot is of course a complete farce

I don't know anything about trading bots, but this looks pretty fishy to me and it does indeed look as though he's a scammer.  I'll support the flag in lieu of giving this guy a neg, which he already has a bunch of.

CryptoSparks offered a "service" where he promised guaranteed returns with his "AI trading bot".

A promise of guaranteed returns is the hallmark of a Ponzi or some other scam, and since this isn't a Ponzi I'm just going to assume it's a lie made up to sell his bot.  Markets don't work this way, by the way.  If you had something (a bot) that could guarantee you profits, the more you distributed said bot, the less effective it would be--at least in theory.  He'd be stupid to sell a successful method of making money in the crypto markets.

[JeromeTash]

Damn i remember the CryptoSparks prick. He was all whinny in the Meta Board after getting exposed and then went on lament how useless this forum is and how he doesn't care about the feedback anymore.

Well basing on how he was interacting on the Meta thread, you could tell that he was one salty scammer.

I am going to support the flag because;
1. Since his service is asking for money from "customers". People should be aware that dealing with him will lead to loss of money.
2. Making stupid retaliatory feedback

[eddie13]

Well shit..

I've read these threads in the OP and based on just this I don't think I would support this flag.. I'll need to read the whole thread in meta too (I have ignored it)..

Also, I know FruitsBasket from outside this forum, and where I know FruitsBasket from their were extremely talented coders, software engineers, computer scientists, exchange devs, and yes, people who have been working on trading bots for years now.. Elite coders in the crypto space..
Therefore, I wouldn't say it is out of the question that this is a legit trading bot and wouldn't doubt that I know some of the people that have worked on it.. Lends it a bit of credibility from my perspective..

1. More bots running the trade equals more support for the trade which equals to even higher probability of success.

While I don't see this happening on such a large high volume market like Bitmex, it certainly could be true on a small market if you had enough liquidity to move the market yourself.. Whale the market around..

Lenders keep control of their funds via API KEY. Basically is RISK FREE

"risk free" isn't the way Id put it but I what he was talking about is their ability to outright make off your your coin..
If you set up the exchange account yourself, and give them your API with no withdraw permission, they will not be able to WD your funds but only place trades..

Their would still be risks including..
Bitmex scamming..
Poor trade bot performance or even malicious trade bot performance (on a smaller market you could trade a "hacked" account into your own hands on another account and make off with their coin value but I don't think so on such a huge market)
But they couldn't just WD your funds..

As far as the other option, them using your money on their account with their bot but they give you a copy of the API keys with WD permission, the API keys would kinda "work like private keys" in a way allowing you to WD from it at any time.. It would work more like username and password access to the account than like a "private key" but I don't think he was trying to imply it would be like being in control of your own private keys which you obviously are not with any exchange but a DEX..


I absolutely agree that this guy is proposing a risky investment, and could do more to openly state the risks involved, but shouldn't investors (or lenders) be able to weigh the risk themselves?

CryptoSparks offered a "service" where he promised guaranteed returns

Did he really?

1. Lender as service provider:
Lend us UP to 5BTC with 10% monthly payback + 5% monthly interest.
We can give API access + EMAIL +PASSWORD of the trading account managing the funds as collateral so you can always keep an eye on the funds.
This results in almost 30% risk free profit for the lender. 2 year of data shows the bot can easily handle the interest rate, please download and check for yourself.[/s]

This looks like a promise to repay a loan principle 10% per month + 5% monthly interest no matter if the bot works or not, no?
Over the term of the loan their would be "almost 30%" profit for the lender, right?
BTW 5% per month interest is not that high of interest for the lending section here.. Many loans are like 10% on a week or 2 loan which would be 20%-40% per month..


Maybe this guy is an asshole in his replies to criticism but I don't know if he is trying to outright scam..
Offering a risky proposition where it would be possible for him to scam, sure..

This proposition..

2. Arakne as service provider:
Create and control your own account and let our bot manage it via API KEY enabled only for order creation. Pay us 30% of monthly net profit for the service and keep the 70% as pure profits.

Looks pretty legit, very low risk of scam, and possible profits/losses depending on how well the bot works..


Lets take a look at this...


Suchmoon - While this is probably a bad way of explaining how API keys work "like private keys" probably isn't the best analogy, API keys do look a lot like private keys, and API keys can allow you to control the funds in the account, but the exchange does still have your real private keys just like manually operating an exchange account..

Vod - Speculation..

AdolfinWolf -    "Auto-Trading bots" utilizing margin trading always ends with people in tears." - While this may usually be the case "always" is not true..
"There is no such thing as a bot that can generate constant profits as promised by this user, or make "Intelligent trades"." - this is also not true, almost all of the serious wall street trading is done by AI bots and you bet they make huge money.. HFT (high frequency trading) AI bots and order que skipping bots (scalper bots?) that make massive amounts of money on the stock exchanged are most definitely a thing..
If you go watch the books even at https://pro.coinbase.com/trade/BTC-USD it is pretty obvious that probably something like 95% of the orders being placed and retracted there are done by bots, market maker bots (due to the fee structure), and I highly doubt they would be doing it if they weren't making money..

DireWokfM14- Where did he say that an API key gives you absolutely as much control over coin as does a true private key? If he said this exactly I'll support his flag and tag him myself but I'm pretty sure he said that API keys are like private keys to control your exchange account, which they are, and you can move your coin with them, which you can..

That's definately a better way to put it - API keys are private keys that let you control your exchange account, but the exchange still has the real private keys of the real coin..
As a matter of face API keys ARE infact private keys, they just aren't crypto private keys, but they are software private keys.. Aren't they?

nutildah - maybe this is what you suspect but it's not something you can prove..


This is a lot of reasonable doubt here IMO..

[suchmoon]

I don't think he was trying to imply it would be like being in control of your own private keys

He most definitely was, multiple times.

An api key can be anything, if you generate a "private api key" of an online wallet service that can act as private key as long it's enabled. A bitcoin private key is nothing else than a way to authenticate you as the owner of that wallet. An api key with full privileges (aka private api key) authenticates you as the owner of the account controlling the funds. Now why should be wrong to say that an api key can act a private key? it seems that you don't get the fact tha api keys are modular tools and can be shaped at will.

And yet again i repeat, an API key is an authentication tool that based on the service can do basically anything.... even ACT AS A PRIVATE KEY.

I realize that he just painted himself into a corner and is not going to back down no matter what, but when you're taking someone's money I think lying about the risks is not cool.

At some point he started asking me to send him $100, can't find it now. I think it was when I gave him my API keys and told him to help himself to my bitcoins since the API key "can act" as a Bitcoin private key...

[eddie13]

An api key can be anything, if you generate a "private api key" of an online wallet service that can act as private key as long it's enabled. A bitcoin private key is nothing else than a way to authenticate you as the owner of that wallet. An api key with full privileges (aka private api key) authenticates you as the owner of the account controlling the funds. Now why should be wrong to say that an api key can act a private key? it seems that you don't get the fact tha api keys are modular tools and can be shaped at will.

And yet again i repeat, an API key is an authentication tool that based on the service can do basically anything.... even ACT AS A PRIVATE KEY.

Those looks like technically correct statements to me with analogies in red.. Analogies that you may not agree with but not vastly incorrect..
API keys do pretty much work like private keys but for your account at a service and not on the actual blockchain, only on their internal centralized ledger..

I think it was when I gave him my API keys and told him to help himself to my bitcoins since the API key "can act" as a Bitcoin private key...

An api key with full privileges (aka private api key) authenticates you as the owner of the account controlling the funds.

Did you give him an API key with full privilege of a funded account? If so he should have been able to WD your coins no?


Don't hate me for being the devils advocate here, maybe I am wrong and will learn something..

[suchmoon]

Did you give him an API key with full privilege of a funded account? If so he should have been able to WD your coins no?

Yes. Although he didn't even ask which exchange it's from, which is kinda the point. API key is useless without the service. Bitcoin private key can be used regardless of any third party service.

CryptoSparks is trying to have it both ways here. He was claiming that if he gives an API key to the client (presumably from some account he created) - the client is "risk free" because the API key can act as a private key (see option 1 here - where he clearly says that he also has full e-mail etc access to the account). But if the client gives him an API key then it's also "risk free" if they key is enabled only for trading (option 2 in the above link).

Neither of these scenarios is risk free. I don't really care much about the rest of his word games.

[nutildah]

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.

[eddie13]

Did you give him an API key with full privilege of a funded account? If so he should have been able to WD your coins no?

Yes. Although he didn't even ask which exchange it's from, which is kinda the point. API key is useless without the service. Bitcoin private key can be used regardless of any third party service.

CryptoSparks is trying to have it both ways here. He was claiming that if he gives an API key to the client (presumably from some account he created) - the client is "risk free" because the API key can act as a private key (see option 1 here - where he clearly says that he also has full e-mail etc access to the account). But if the client gives him an API key then it's also "risk free" if they key is enabled only for trading (option 2 in the above link).

Neither of these scenarios is risk free. I don't really care much about the rest of his word games.

1. Lender as service provider:
Lend us UP to 5BTC with 10% monthly payback + 5% monthly interest.
We can give API access + EMAIL +PASSWORD of the trading account managing the funds as collateral so you can always keep an eye on the funds.
This results in almost 30% risk free profit for the lender. 2 year of data shows the bot can easily handle the interest rate, please download and check for yourself.[/s]

He could have meant that the market risk is not placed on the lender in this situation.. This looks like a set repayment offer regardless of what the market does or how the bot performs it is guaranteed interest/profit..
In this scenario he could totally steal your coin by WDing it though so the risk here is of him scamming..

Wasn't very wise to ask for "UP to 5BTC".. You made yourself a target with that Mr. CryptoSparks

2. Arakne as service provider:
Create and control your own account and let our bot manage it via API KEY enabled only for order creation. Pay us 30% of monthly net profit for the service and keep the 70% as pure profits.

with this option their is no risk of him scamming, WDing your coins, but you are at risk of market p/l and bot performance p/l..

"Risk Free" were stupid words to use..

I think that all of these options offer a nice balance between risk/profit for both parties.

I don't think the risk/profit balance is that great really given that he wants to socialize 30% of the profits but none of any possible losses..
2 is a way for him to not lose any money if the bot looses but make 30% of the profits when it wins.. Not real fair but IMO it's up to the lender/invester to negotiate or accept any deal or not..


CryptoSparks - you did a piss poor job of representing your product here, made yourself a target by asking for "UP to" too large of sums to start off with, and made poorly worded statements about "risk free" and how "api keys act as private keys" thereby opening yourself up to much criticism and suspicion even if you do have a real product that you do honestly believe in..


I am not absolutely convinced that his is surely a scammer but if his intentions were good he surely did fail due to his poor language performance and offensiveness.

Maybe he is a scammer though.. It is a possibility..

the fact that he is so stubborn about certain aspects is suspicious to me.
his behavior overlaps that of scammers to a certain degree.

Agree..

Perhaps I'd consider withdrawing my support after more evidence of his legitimacy has come to light.

You probably know more about APIs and exchange bots than me so I trust your judgement..

The only "evidence of his legitimacy" I may have brought to the table here is that I know FruitsBasket knows an elite coder friend of mine, who I do trust, that has been working on trading bots for a long time, and I have a hunch this bot could be legit due to that association..
It's not "cryptosparks" though and I don't want to drag their name into this mess..

Me and Fruits worked together a bit with some of the most elite coders I have ever met and afaik he did a good job so a vouch from Fruits on this lends it some credibility to me..


Good debate guys..
You guys do a good job of protecting the community here even though you might rush to judgement a bit too fast sometimes, though it is far from completely unfounded so I understand where you are coming from..
Maybe you guys saved someone from a scam here or maybe it is unfortunate that CryptoSparks handled this so poorly..

[AdolfinWolf]

I'm going to rehash some of the things i've said before about him.

Of course, he could have found the magic formula to profit. a sophisticated AI Engine. Time will learn and prove me wrong, but for now i think he's a fraud.

Observe the following points:
###1

First quote of him stating the 495% ROI:

Is not like they are all dumb, just superficial. This guy could easily hand over my thread and download the full 2 year data and trade history of the 495%roi and verify for itself.
Damn he could even access the demo account via api key and see the trades. YET he's sorry but indeed i'm simply looking to scam people.

#2

In my thread you have access to data and trading account. GO and prove that im running a shady business. Otherwise, silence is a better option. And as always, let me decide what is and isn't for me.

#3

Here's what i not only claim but prove with history data fully documented. Here a screenshoot since i'm sure you didn't even bother to check:

Because, obviously, JSON files aren't fakeable..
#4

Yup 600+ trades over a period of 20 months are just "a few"  Grin

#5

If the explanation i gave you seems random, you should think about why it feels random to you. because you can't understand it.
WHY DON'T YOU CHECK MY THREAD AND FIND THE GODDAMN API KEY YOU ARE ASKING FOR ? BECAUSE IS RIGHT THERE!!!!

#6


This is just false. He never offered access to ANY of the data listed in the JSON file.

Instead; the API key renders a couple small trades which aren't indicative of anything. The risk taken for these trades and the doubling down martingale strategy might very well not be worth it, but with such a low n size it's simply not known yet.

Compare it with martingale betting. with 1 million satoshis you can bet 1, 2, 4, 8, before losing your money.

###2
The api key debacle:


###3
Backgrounds don't match.

User was doing italian translations for pennies less than 6 months ago -- suddenly he is a highly specialized quantum bot developer?
My ass.
Not to mention that it just doesn't make sense. If his stats were actually real, any bank/developer who specializes in these things would've hired him. Don't be stupid. 495% returns?
Of course, i'd love to be proven wrong. I adjudge him all the profits in the world-- but when these profits actually come from defrauding his "investors" such as other HFT "bots" did in the past, of course i'm going to call him out on it.

Things always go right until they don't.
In an uptrend market (such as right now), you can make a hundred shit trades and get away with it by just waiting for Bitcoin to go up and call it a "prediction".

[eddie13]

###3
Backgrounds don't match.

User was doing italian translations for pennies less than 6 months ago -- suddenly he is a highly specialized quantum bot developer?
My ass.

You might have a great point here.. I didn't dig this accounts background but it could be quite concerning..

"Backtests".

I think backtests are when you run your program against past history to see how it would have done, like a demo.. This can be manipulated though, like all the climate models that say we should all be on fire by now, you can get them to say whatever you want with some tweaking..

Not to mention that it just doesn't make sense. If his stats were actually real, any bank/developer who specializes in these things would've hired him. Don't be stupid. 495% returns?

To be honest 495% gain in 2 years of crypto trading is poor performance IMO.. Ok, maybe that's decent for it being passive, but that is not an insane number.. That's only a bit over doubling your coin every year and wouldn't even be worth my time manually trading for..
My manual trading stats make that look like chump change, even in bear markets..

[TECSHARE]

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.

Guys, I know its way satisfying to hunt down dirt bags, but in the process you are degrading this community to a standard of mob justice and might makes right. This atmosphere not only drives out honest users, it creates constant chaos and conflict which is a great way for scam artists to hide in by not only easily diverting attention, but making it a simple task to target honest users who are resisting corruption.

I know casting suspicion and hoping to be right is way easier than doing the research to prove it first, but this precedent of guilty until proven innocent needs to stop. This community highly values privacy, anonymity, autonomy, and decentralization, all things that are regularly stripped from users under this precedent. There are so few platforms left where there is even a chance of preserving these things. Don't let this forum be consumed by this malignant obsession with finding and punishing scammers at all costs, because they will ALWAYS be there, no matter how many you stop.

[nutildah]

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.

[TECSHARE]

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.

You could warn others about being scammed before the flag system. The flag system was added to create some due process and a standard of evidence before accusations are lodged to stifle this exact kind of abuse.

Oh this isn't a court of law? No shit. The point is you are casting aspersions then trying to build evidence around your conclusion afterwords. You accuse, then demand he prove his innocence. That is exactly the standard of guilty until proven innocent. I should also point out the additional onerous standard of popularity contest that these accused people must cater to in addition to being forced to cater to these accusations. This is made evident by your comments about ego and an air of superiority. Who gives a fuck, is he a con artist or not?

You are all just running around forcing people to not only submit to your inquisition, but when they don't give you the proper amount of reverence you feel entitled to, then it doesn't matter what facts are presented because he refused to bend the knee and humble himself before the grand clown council.

You accuse him of having a huge ego, but this whole system is about projecting power and authority over the user base, and burning down anyone who refuses to kneel before you. This is nothing more than a protection racket that no one will speak up about because they are afraid of being targeted next.

[nutildah]

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.

[TECSHARE]

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 see. So it is ok for you to run around making unsupported allegations, but supported allegations against your own behaviors are not acceptable. I think you need to prove to me you aren't involved in a protection racket because you seem to have a large ego and air of superiority.