Topic: TradeFortress is a scammer. - page 4. (Read 14455 times)

Okay, I see where I was wrong. You would not be getting my IOUs if you have not trusted me, you would have got the IOUs of someone who you trusted who trusted me's IOUs which are really being backed by my IOUs. This distinction does not change the fact that:

i) you're still affected
ii) your bitstamp IOUs could have being substituted for someone's IOUs, still based on my IOUs
iii) a large enough default will leave people who you trusted being unable to repay

There's no way for your friend who you trust very much to repay IF he lost every single asset because it was replaced with worthless IOUs.

There is a difference between IOUs on an exchange, and actually trading around IOUs in an infinite web with Ripple substituting your IOUs even through they have a different value. Take this example:

You trust Bitstamp for 20 BTC.
You trust your friend Bob for 20 BTC.

You have 15 Bitstamp BTC. Your friend Bob just went on a holiday for a couple of weeks. Out of the blue, the Ripple system has decided to substitute your 15 BTC-Bitstamp for 15 BTC-Bob - because the Ripple system will not work efficiently without this substitute. You want to redeem your BTC, Bob's on a holiday, you'll have to try and trade your BTC back to Bitstamp but there may not be paths.

15 BTC in 3 weeks is different from 15 BTC now, and that's not even considering the fact that you can never trust someone 100%. Ripple thinks they are the same, and they'll substitute it each other - because OpenCoin Inc's system is more important than you.

I send 100 BTC to Bob. Bob had 100 BTC in Bitstamp IOUs.

Bob makes another account, and makes it look like someone else exchanged his bitstamp IOUs when he did it himselves. He comes to me and asks me for 100 BTC "he lost" (to himself).

1. NO
2. NO
3. NO

I like Ripple but i'm not affiliated nor a "supporter" (maybe... still) nor i'm in love with it.

Infact diskiling Ripple shouldn't be a handicap in understanding how dishonest TF was.

I see here a lot of people wich basically are saying that letting people to lose theyr money to demonstrate (without any logic in this demonstration) that Ripple is flawed it's right. That's simply absurd.

People trusted TF, in a system they don't understand well, but they never thought to be in danger of losing 100 BTC each. That's because he intentionally misrepresented Ripple and his IOUs.

All the haters probably

1. Supporters of Ripple
2. Enraged that it isnt real BTC
3. Doesnt understand that Ripple IS a lie, with its many flaws im surprised there are still people using it.

All the haters probably

1. Supporters of Ripple
2. Enraged that it isnt real BTC
3. Doesnt understand that Ripple IS a lie, with its many flaws im surprised there are still people using it.

Every electronic device on Earth uses DC, he didn't lose too badly.

geeeeez, if a forum troll can wreak such havoc then ripple doesn't seem to be that much of a system, does it?

Except that the actual vandalism/damage to the Ripple system was non-existant.

Yes.

You CAN'T have it on your account - all you can have in your account are XRPs and IOUs.

TradeFortress reminds me of when Thomas Edison electrocuted cats, dogs and elephants with alternating current (AC) to show how dangerous it was compared to direct current (DC).  

It's pretty clear TradeFortress isn't going to feel guilty for defrauding newbies and the moderators are going to protect "their own." (Ha!)  But maybe a brief look at history will open some member's eyes to the way this type of BS propaganda sorts itself out.

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/01/dayintech_0104

Relevant quote: "In the end, though, all Edison had to show for his efforts was a string of dead animals, including the unfortunate Topsy, and a current that quickly fell out of favor as AC demonstrated its superiority in less lethal ways to become the standard."

geeeeez, if a forum troll can wreak such havoc then ripple doesn't seem to be that much of a system, does it?

I guess that Mark Karpeles and Peter Vessenes trusted each other for a few months while their contract was drawn up and signed.

Trust, just like love, is eternal only while it lasts

Trust really means trust. As long as you don't grant trust to someone you don't really trust with that amount of money, you'll be fine. The trust system is what allows you to be independent of the banking system if necessary, though it doesn't insulate you against inflation caused by central banks.

geeeeez, if a forum troll can wreak such havoc then ripple doesn't seem to be that much of a system, does it?

This is why you're a douchebag.  

YOU don't have to accept BOA and Citibank equally.   But if you trust BOA - THEY trust Citibank - and thus you can end up with money from someone trusting Citibank.

Get it dumbass?  (probably not)

What Ripple does is let you TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for these trust relationships in a finer and more detailed way.   However, that's harder to do when a jerk-off like you is misleading people into thinking you're "going to send them BTC on Ripple" when they don't even understand what Ripple is.

You're a fucking scammer - you misled people to perpetrate a fraud. That's a fact.  Whether the moderators want to do the right thing or not is irrelevant.

it's true you can't make a non-XRP payment to someone unless they have indicated someone they trust to hold the funds. Just like I can't wire transfer someone money without knowing what bank they trust to receive the funds.

I'm responding to someone saying sending XRPs does not require trust, which is factually incorrect.