Maybe so, maybe not. Hopefully the reply to your e-mail will tell. BTW an RNG is an algorithm.

Question: Back to your donkament bad beats, what's PokerStars' incentive for rigging a tournament hand so that you get sucked out on?

no - the algorithm that you quoted is flawed (for the reasons quoted in the cigital article). they could not have given that algorithm to cigital for verificatoin.

this is another lie from a lying liar who lies.

[quote]
It was? It says "we" as in Cigital on their site that wrote the article.

Not sure where you think this was published, this was Cigitals findings.

Josem, ur being obtuse.

I didn't say that WAS the algorithm they gave..

I said that is all they had to do.


Quit with the liar crap moron.

Yes it is. That's their business, amongst other areas: "Assure your software is secure and reliable"

You continue to lie like a lying liar who lies.

Is there any reason to doubt their ability? This is another example of you believing things with no reason to do so.

Um... L2Read?

How We Learned to Cheat at Online Poker: A Study in Software Security

by Brad Arkin, Frank Hill, Scott Marks, Matt Schmid and Thomas John Walls
Originally appeared on Developer.com; September 1999

You claimed that that algorithm was all Pokerstars "could've gave (sic) cigital to "test" their rng". That is a lie. PokerStars could not have just given Cigital that algorithm, 'cause that algorithm is flawed.

Which is untrue.

Either you are ignorant or you are lying. I am happy to be corrected if you think you are ignorant of the issues involved here.


Then stop lying - or admit that you are ignorant. I don't mind which.

Rake...DUCY?

I don't. Please explain.

Quit being ******ed....how much you making an hour to defend these turds. Learn to read. It was an example ******.

Proof is all I need, give it up douche tard.

[x] profit

DUCY NOW?

I'm not being paid by PS (or any other online gaming provider).

However, if they or any other site wanted to employ me, they can PM or email me all job offers.

But the example you used is false. 'Cause they couldn't have given that algorithm.

Nope.

You are seriously being an idiot. IT WAS AN EXAMPLE DOUCHE TARD.

...which was false.

No [censored] sherlock...it was an example. You do know what an example is right?

Yes. An example is a hypothetical situation which could be applicable to the situation at hand.

But your hypothetical isn't possible - it is a lie to say that PokerStars could've provided that algorithm to Cinetel for verification, 'cause they could not have.

You need to stop lying. You need to stop being a lying liar who lies.... or you need to admit that you were wrong and ignorant to provide that example.

This whole thread is littered with your lies and half-truths, so it is about time that you lifted your game and started to develop some integrity.


You continue to make serious criminal allegations against people, incredible slurs against people's livelihoods, and you provide no evidence to support them. That is a dirty, dirty, way of living a life.

Josem, you are officially ******ed.

I simply asked for proof that its legit, you couldn't give me any.

Keep douching on douche bag.

lol at criminal allegations...

oh, why couldn't they have sent Cigital an algorithm? LOL

How do you suppose Cigital tested their algorithm?

There's nothing criminal about rigging a poker site, sorry buddy.

There's nothing more dirty then a con artist, your gig is up.

The proof is in the page by PokerStars and the independent analysis by the two security firms.

That is clearly proof. You can argue about the strength of it, but it is certainly some proof.

They couldn't have sent that algorithm to Cigital because that algorithm is flawed. Cigital would not have endorsed it.

I don't know. If I knew how to do that testing, I'd start a business in doing it, because I think it would be a lucrative industry now and into the future.

Yes, there is. It would seem to be a pretty clear case of fraud under Australian law - I assume that most other western countries would think likewise.

You continue to be a moron. You're still clinging on to my EXAMPLE? BWHAHAHAH.

Oh btw. You assume wrong. There is no US gaming commission that oversees and regulates online poker...they can rigg it up all they want.

In Australia, we have people employed as "Police". Typically, they are responsible for enforcing the criminal law, including laws relating to fraud.

bwahahahahahahaha

I better call 911 and have them flyout to pokerstars server location.

bwahahahahah

You're an idiot.

How many times do I have to say it? There is no gaming commission in the US that regulates online poker....

DUCY?

Could you please explain how they profit from this, realjaydub?

Guys,this is hopeless.Its like trying to debate a religious fool that says,prove to me my specific god doesnt exist.Rather than being logical and wanted proof that something imaginary does in fact exist,they demand proof that the imaginary doesnt exist.Only a complete fool would take this line,which is good for the games i suppose,as its probably slightly less foolish poker lines that have them losing to begin with.