|
|
#11
03-05-2004, 12:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pokerbot is designed to Cheat!
[ QUOTE ]
ze, [ QUOTE ] I wasn't talking about whether selling your bot could open you up to liability. I was commenting on the fact that you personally have admited to cheating at online poker and that you've admited the company, during testing, has cheated at onling poker, both of which appear to be prohibited and punished by criminal statute in my home state. [/ QUOTE ] let me assure you, that you will be prosecuted for engaging in gambling online (which will never happen) before we will be prosecuted for letting two parties engage in a private communication transmission. [/ QUOTE ] I wasn't talking about whether you would be prosecuted for allowing people to use your servers to cheat. I hadn't thought about that aspect of it, although now that you mention it, aiding and abetting would also be a violation of my state's criminal law. And I was commenting on the fact that it is a criminal violation in my state, not on whether it would be an easy crime to prove. But ok, you say it can't be done. I know very little about computers so I'll just have to take your word for it that users can't be identified from your server--no ip addresses, no card rooms, no user names, nuttin. It does occur to me to wonder how bot users find each other and if that method couldn't be used to dectect bots in use sharing cards and traced back to your secure servers. Alright, assume that couldn't be done. Have ya ever heard of a sting operation? Based on unusual betting patterns the cardroom detects collusion. The busted players admit the use of winholdem. Is the information you mentioned above stored on your computers? Busted. Even if not, the players who colluded testify to using winholdem bot in cardsharing mode...your posts here and your product documentation are evidence that you allowed your servers to be used for the purpose... Gee that was actually pretty easy. Ya don't necessarily need the cardroom to detect colluders at work. Mr. law enforcement official buys a copy of your program, sets it to playing and waits till it runs into another bot user set on collude mode, the collusion starts and bingo, follow the method above... But again, I wasn't talking about busting you for ongoing violations of the law. I was talking about you personally admitting to having cheated and simply noting that its a violation of a criminal statute. You've also claimed the company has done plenty of testing in cheating mode. I'm not a prosecutor but if I wanted to prove you'd violated the law I'd get a search warrant for your company and seize all your computers and records. Based on the statements posted here that would be easy to do. I suppose its possible you've destroyed any such records but that would seem to be counterproductive to your programing efforts, so I suspect there is plenty of evidence to the cheating you've admitted to. How big is the company? Do you believe nobody would roll over when offered immunity? As part of the company records I'd be able to determine who you are. I'd get a warrant and seize your personal computer and any relevant records. Between the company and your own computer and records are you positive there's no evidence of the cheating you've admitted to doing? Ah, my favorite defense you are employing--the good old, "sure I committed a crime--but you can't prove it!" defense. Oddly enough, it tends to be less effective than you might imagine. --Zetack 
|
|
#13
03-05-2004, 03:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerbot is designed to Cheat!
ze,
[ QUOTE ] It does occur to me to wonder how bot users find each other and if that method couldn't be used to dectect bots in use sharing cards and traced back to your secure servers. [/ QUOTE ] they dont find each other, they already know each other in some way and were probably already sharing (via chat) before they ever discovered the winholdem team edition. if you read our license agreement: http://www.winholdem.net/license_agreement.html it very clearly states that we do not help teammates find each other. in other words we dont do anything to help total strangers meet and agree to team. the people that do this have to become acquainted and conspire to team by some alternate method of communication. there is no way that we could safely allow total strangers to meet online and decide to team. in this scenario there is no way to protect ourselves and/or protect the players. the original design version for winholdem team edition was going to allow colluders to automatically find each other. it was originally going to just automatically connect you to anybody else at your same table ... no questions asked. and at first we thought this would be very powerful convenient and helpful. there was just one huge problem - player security. there was no way to provide a 100% guarantee to team players at the table that everyone that could see their cards were also honestly sharing their own cards (the deadly hack for this scenario is to enter the table channel and observe the cards of everyone sharing yet not reveal your own cards), this honesty element simply couldn't be guaranteed; also, it was very obvious that it would be completely impossible to prevent the opc's from hiring a private spy to license the super-team version and then hunt through all the table channels all day long red flagging anybody in the channel and excommunicating the account. [ QUOTE ] Alright, assume that couldn't be done. Have ya ever heard of a sting operation? Based on unusual betting patterns the cardroom detects collusion. The busted players admit the use of winholdem. Is the information you mentioned above stored on your computers? Busted. Even if not, the players who colluded testify to using winholdem bot in cardsharing mode...your posts here and your product documentation are evidence that you allowed your servers to be used for the purpose... Gee that was actually pretty easy. [/ QUOTE ] we are no more vulnerable than the phone company or microsoft or aol. the phone company knowingly allows the phone to be used by very evil people each and every day. very evil people use chat daily. the problem you face is proving exactly when and where somebody did something wrong, because there are winholdem formula developers that use the channel server regularly to test new formula ai on poker professional. there are also people who play a single team hand (many people playing 1 hand). none of this is questioned by anyone. it will never be a crime to allow two parties to privately communicate - at least in the U.S. where individual privacy and bill of rights have a lot of weight. [ QUOTE ] Ya don't necessarily need the cardroom to detect colluders at work. Mr. law enforcement official buys a copy of your program, sets it to playing and waits till it runs into another bot user set on collude mode, the collusion starts and bingo, follow the method above... [/ QUOTE ] this statement right here proves 100% that you absolutely do not understand how the winholdem channel server works with team edition. the team edition is not a poker dating service. how is Mr. law man going to find another teammate? because we do not provide any mechanism that will allow him or anybody to find you. nor do we provide a mechanism for anybody to find him. so your scenario is based on a complete lack of understanding of how winholdem works. let me put this into a conversation style for you. read the following carefully. example MSN chat between two willing wiholdem team edition users: bill: hey ted lets play some $5 NL tourneys tonight on stars. ted: great ill be back here on MSN about 7pm. bill: great see you then. <later around 7pm> ted: bill u there? bill: yes where are you? ted: im logged into stars in the tourney lobby waiting for you. bill: im logging in now ... bill: ok im in ... ted: ok lets grab the next NL table here bill: ok table 512348 now do it ted: im in. bill: me too i see you. ted: what wh channel? bill: 3898238902 ted: ok im in channel ... we're secure ... i see 2/2 bill: let's rock baby! ted: hey my roomate wants to observe from his machine ... let him in please bill: ok channel size is 3 ... does he have the channel number? ted: yes, i just gave it to him. ok he's in i see 3/3 now. bill: ok good ... let's win this thing. ************* so, ze, as you can see from this example, we did not provide an introduction for bill and ted. they used some alternate form of communication to discuss and plan what they wanted to do. they each paid $200 for the winholdem team edition which gives them access to the winholdem.net secure channel server. bill used MSN to publish his private channel number to ted. they both connected to the same winholdem.net channel where bill had total control over the channel as evidenced by his ability to change the size to let jack in. so, ze, i ask you. how does mr. lawman find bill and ted and jack? how does he magically guess what channel they're in (1 chance in 4 billion), but lets say he did guess it how does he get into the channel? bill set the size to 3 and that means a 4th person cannot get in. lastly, ze, there is no crime without a vicitim. you can't say the opc's are a victim; they operate offshore out of US jurisdiction; the US government isnt going to lift a finger to protect an entity not paying US federal income tax. you cant say it is any one player. there is no way for that player to prove anything. but lets say that player was you; do this ze, call the attorney general for your state and ask him to come to your rescue because you feel you've been wronged while gambling online in his state. lastly, you can't say the government is a victim. we haven't done anyting to wrong them. so who is the victim. and where is the proof? it will never be illegal to let two people communicate privately ... unless you use encryption strength beyond what the law allows and the provider refuses to make the key available for the sake of national security. if you read our license agreement, we clearly notify the user that we will publish the encryption key to any US federal agency if they feel it is in the interest of national security. and so lets say they did this so they could observe the communication stream, all they would see is just a bunch of messages that look like this: <chair7,hand> so woopee!!! i mean what are they going to do? omg! ... chair3 just got AA ... scramble the bombers!!! defcon5 ... code blue!! no code red! no orange! whatever! red alert! somebody do something! dive! dive! it's ridiculous. we've actually gotten more grief from players for providing encryption because the guys with packet sniffers wanted to see that we were not sending anything other than <channel,chair,hand> info upstream ... and we may remove the encryption altogether just to prove this 100% to everyone because the encryption is just not necessary; its over kill really. to sum up zetack, you have not made your case because there is no case for you to make. 1) you cannot produce a victim. 2) you cannot provide evidence. 3) and lastly you cant id the parties involved. (if we cant id them and the government cant id, you sure as hell cant) you have no case. winholdem support.
|
|
#14
03-05-2004, 06:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerbot is designed to Cheat!
Ridiculous. It's a crime to commit fraud over telephone, it's a crime to talk about killing the President. You can't transmit top secret information between private parties either. No one is saying that communication is wrong, it's what's being communicated that's wrong.
[ QUOTE ] it will never be a crime to allow two parties to privately communicate - at least in the U.S. where individual privacy and bill of rights have a lot of weight. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#18
03-05-2004, 04:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerbot is designed to Cheat!
Mr. WimpHodemSupportMan,
what say ye about these oft repeated, but always dodged questions: 1. if carlton sheets could make a million using his system, then why would he have to resort to SELLING said system for 3 easy payments of $19.95? (insert any get rich quick charlatan for example) 2. how do you respond to the chrges/speculation that your product alone could destroy online poker completely by the "evil few" who misuse your product? 3. what would the impact of an MSNBC story showing 9 guys, that NO LONGER need to be in the same frat house/dorm room, using your product to fleece players that have no clue such technology exists? Do you think this would discourage newbies, and possibly even attract MORE scum to the game? (not to mention enforcement agencies, college admins etc) 4. what do you have planned for us to supplement our incomes after YOUR product dries up the pond? please keep your response to these questions, and don't skirt or divert like you do at rgp. this is a moderated board, so you must provide substance to your contributions here, else your presence is NADA but spam. the flo' is yo's. reply properly or be gone. 
|
|
#19
03-05-2004, 04:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerbot is designed to Cheat!
You know I generally linger and almost never post - this winholdem support guy has to go. He is blatantly peddling the ability to cheat. I agree with the prior poster in that if cardrooms were regulated, this is basically insider trading in a cardroom rather than on a stock exchange. What a scumbag.
Mat - how about barring this guy?
|
|
#20
03-05-2004, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pokerbot is designed to Cheat!
Sheesh, I don't know why you want to keep coming back to this aiding and abetting stuff when my point was that you personally have admitted to cheating and have admitted that your company cheated. In my state that's a crime...did you even read the elements of the crime that I listed?
Ok, but you're so hung up on the aiding and abetting. See the thing is, although you protest and protest that you can't get caught in the act you don't have to get caught in the act. If they can catch colluders (maybe this is a big if, I don't know)--those colluders may admit to using winholdem to cheat. Your own post above (and many others) would be evidence that you provided a secure server to them for the very purpose of cheating! I suspect that a search of your company's records would provide further evidence that you provide this service. This would indeed be aiding and abetting the crime of "Accessing Computer To Defraud or Obtain property." To say that its not a crime because its private comunications...did you read the elements of the crime? Ok, to depart from this aiding and abetting stuff, I was saying that you personally have admitted to actions that are a crime in my State, that is, the colluding that you personally engaged in, and that you company engaged in violates a criminal statute here. Do they have to catch you doing it? Again, no. I suspect you company has records of their activities (if only to aid in their programing efforts). Unless you have destroyed all those records there is evidence against you. Do I think you are ever going to be prosecuted? No. Do I think its impossible that a motivated prosecuter could prove you've committed a crime. No--in fact I think they probably could. But its probably a moot point. I agree its unlikely you will be prosecuted. The idea that you couldn't be, however, is just foolish. And, if it's so important to you that you show that you couldn't be prosecuted why not just jump on the point that I already made, that its unclear whether a prosecutor from my state could get jurisdiction? Hey, what you've admitted to is a crime in my state. I know you love the risk reward analysis. The risk of getting prosecuting is undoubtedly miniscule. Just an interesting factoid I was pointing out--that you'd admitted to criminal behavior. --Zetack
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
