Challenge to KJ over Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

The Winnebago Minnie Winnie requires no special license. Just hook that bad boy to your hitch and hit the open road. Be sure to show what a baller you are by pointing out some $200 fog lights on your pick em' up truck.

---

I do think MaxPen brings up a good point that lends some credibility to the amount of money Rob won exploiting the DUB.

Even after spending $1.5 million for a Newell, Rob still had some money left over to buy some fog lights for his truck. I actually think these fog lights should be part of any bet going forward. It could be included with the verification bet that Rob or someone in his family owns a Newell.

This way if Rob isn’t able to prove he owns a 2011 Newell, he might be able to prove he owns the $200 fog lights, and he’ll have met 50% of the terms of the bet, and at least been able to save some face.

---

The only bugs Rob doubled up were the roaches in his apartment before skipping out on rent.

---

I was being sarcastic. The story didn’t make sense from the beginning. No one spends “hours” each day looking for bugs that might not exist. That’s what Ron said in his interview.

The way you find bugs is the way Kane found it, by accident. And they are best found when you’re really drunk randlomly pushing buttons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

It's time to play Guess that Rig....
A featured spin-off of As Grandpa Newell's Dreams Turn

Here is what Man Servant Crimm posted up



This is what I think it is

---

Lol. That made me laugh. You’d think if Rob made all that money, he’d have spent a little less on a top-of-the-line Newell, and a little more on a Winnebago. I mean for only $10,000 more you can’t start to get a pretty decent Winnebago.

And I know something about Winnebagos since I made a trip in one way back. It was a good experience, but I’d rather do the car and camping thing or car and hotel thing. I don’t like driving those big things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

It's time to play Guess that Rig....
A featured spin-off of As Grandpa Newell's Dreams Turn

Here is what Man Servant Crimm posted up



This is what I think it is

---

Lol. That made me laugh. You’d think if Rob made all that money, he’d have spent a little less on a top-of-the-line Newell, and a little more on a Winnebago. I mean for only $10,000 more you can’t start to get a pretty decent Winnebago.

And I know something about Winnebagos since I made a trip in one way back. It was a good experience, but I’d rather do the car and camping thing or car and hotel thing. I don’t like driving those big things.

---

I'm pretty sure there's not a single former +$1million Newell owner on the road in a Minnie Winnie or whatever that thing is.

Next we'll be expected to believe that backing up the trailer was just getting to be too much so Grandpa Newell switched to one of these GOATs



But check out that custom $200 double handlebar.....How does one manage to afford such things?:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

The way you find bugs is the way Kane found it, by accident. And they are best found when you’re really drunk randlomly pushing buttons.

---

Well that's not right. There are hundreds of thousands of people whose only job is to test software and look for bugs. Every major software product goes through untold hours of human testing....looking for bugs. Criminals are constantly looking for bugs in Windows and networking devices to exploit design flaws.

I have owned a small software company for 3 decades and know from experience that even though the world's largest software companies invest huge amounts in testing, they still release products with crazy bugs. Every time I sit down at any machine I look for flaws. Not to cheat it, but that's just part of my thought process. I can guarantee there's buggy software out there...some minor problems others major.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

It's time to play Guess that Rig....
A featured spin-off of As Grandpa Newell's Dreams Turn

Here is what Man Servant Crimm posted up



This is what I think it is

---

Lol. That made me laugh. You’d think if Rob made all that money, he’d have spent a little less on a top-of-the-line Newell, and a little more on a Winnebago. I mean for only $10,000 more you can’t start to get a pretty decent Winnebago.

And I know something about Winnebagos since I made a trip in one way back. It was a good experience, but I’d rather do the car and camping thing or car and hotel thing. I don’t like driving those big things.

---

I'm pretty sure there's not a single former +$1million Newell owner on the road in a Minnie Winnie or whatever that thing is.

Next we'll be expected to believe that backing up the trailer was just getting to be too much so Grandpa Newell switched to one of these GOATs



But check out that custom $200 double handlebar.....How does one manage to afford such things?:rolleyes:

---

Didn't that thing land on the Wicked Witch of the East, killing her?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

It's time to play Guess that Rig....
A featured spin-off of As Grandpa Newell's Dreams Turn

Here is what Man Servant Crimm posted up



This is what I think it is

---

Lol. That made me laugh. You’d think if Rob made all that money, he’d have spent a little less on a top-of-the-line Newell, and a little more on a Winnebago. I mean for only $10,000 more you can’t start to get a pretty decent Winnebago.

And I know something about Winnebagos since I made a trip in one way back. It was a good experience, but I’d rather do the car and camping thing or car and hotel thing. I don’t like driving those big things.

---

I'm pretty sure there's not a single former +$1million Newell owner on the road in a Minnie Winnie or whatever that thing is.

Next we'll be expected to believe that backing up the trailer was just getting to be too much so Grandpa Newell switched to one of these GOATs



But check out that custom $200 double handlebar.....How does one manage to afford such things?:rolleyes:

---

That is a perfect vehicle for KJ to use on the strip now that he does not currently have partner valet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

I do think MaxPen brings up a good point that lends some credibility to the amount of money Rob won exploiting the DUB.

Even after spending $1.5 million for a Newell, Rob still had some money left over to buy some fog lights for his truck. I actually think these fog lights should be part of any bet going forward. It could be included with the verification bet that Rob or someone in his family owns a Newell.

This way if Rob isn’t able to prove he owns a 2011 Newell, he might be able to prove he owns the $200 fog lights, and he’ll have met 50% of the terms of the bet, and at least been able to save some face.

---

The only bugs Rob doubled up were the roaches in his apartment before skipping out on rent.

---

I was being sarcastic. The story didn’t make sense from the beginning. No one spends “hours” each day looking for bugs that might not exist. That’s what Ron said in his interview.

The way you find bugs is the way Kane found it, by accident. And they are best found when you’re really drunk randomly pushing buttons.

---

Look at Bob getting all reasonable and knowledgable. He's right, looking for bugs in machines would be the most pointless thing to do in life. If Rob used the DU bug, it is become someone else told him. There is 0.000000001% chance of him having found it randomly. Lol. You're more likely to die of Covid and have a lightning strike resurrect you.

I’ll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

The way you find bugs is the way Kane found it, by accident. And they are best found when you’re really drunk randlomly pushing buttons.

---

Well that's not right. There are hundreds of thousands of people whose only job is to test software and look for bugs. Every major software product goes through untold hours of human testing....looking for bugs. Criminals are constantly looking for bugs in Windows and networking devices to exploit design flaws.

I have owned a small software company for 3 decades and know from experience that even though the world's largest software companies invest huge amounts in testing, they still release products with crazy bugs. Every time I sit down at any machine I look for flaws. Not to cheat it, but that's just part of my thought process. I can guarantee there's buggy software out there...some minor problems others major.

---

I get that and was figuring someone would make your comment. But this is different. Listen to Rob’s story. He spent hours each day for years looking for bugs. And it just so happens he found a bug IDENTICAL to the one in an article.

Rob’s story would be more believable if he found a bug and made a lot of money with it, if it wasn’t the exact same bug described word for word in an article.

I’m sure you know there are more than one bugs out there. All computer programs have bugs. What’s the odds of Rob finding the exact same bug described word for word in an article? I’d say not very likely. I could say I found that bug too, and nobody could prove me wrong. Anybody could say they found that bug, and nobody could prove them wrong.

But common sense would tell you the odds of finding the exact same bug as someone else isn’t very likely. And this one was difficult to find. An IGT technically guy spent days in the lab trying to recreate this bug, and this is after he saw video of Kane and Nester exploiting it.

It’s your call if you want to believe the story, but it doesn’t ring true on many many levels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Ahem, gentlemen, I hate to do the "paying attention to what someone actually said" thing, but you may have missed a fairly important mention by "Singer." It turns out that he has "almost always" been paying someone to drive the Newell when his son has been unavailable.

That should yield some interesting discussions. Sounds as if someone may not want to be behind the wheel when interested parties arrive. It's possible the Newell "owner" may not actually be able to drive the Newell.

As someone who has driven quite a few moving trucks, I can sympathize. Once you get beyond 30-feet (most rental companies top off at 26), it can be a nightmare.

Hmmm, that reminds me. My brothers have CDLs. A 45-foot Newell (as "Singer" quoted in the post above), I guess that might actually require a special license in certain states. Of course, I don't know the law, but boy, a 45-footer would be tough. Might need one of them there special licensing deals.

And I guess if somebody knew that, and didn't have one, they'd have to come up with a good reason to not have one, and, well, I'm sure you boys can take it from here.

---

More weirdness from the weirdo.

---

You're right, mickey. Absolutely correct. I need to be more clear in my writing. I'll give it a go.

If "Singer" resides in Arizona and does not have a current CDL, he hasn't been driving a Class A motor home. So it's one simple hurdle. It doesn't prove he has one, of course. but if he doesn't, then he's certainly not driving one.

I'm learning all kinds of things. There are about 20 states that require larger motor homes to stop at truck weigh stations, where your license is checked.

I'm sure mickey has known this all along and will shortly be posting a pic of "Singer's" CDL just to check one more question mark off the list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

I’ll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

The way you find bugs is the way Kane found it, by accident. And they are best found when you’re really drunk randlomly pushing buttons.

---

Well that's not right. There are hundreds of thousands of people whose only job is to test software and look for bugs. Every major software product goes through untold hours of human testing....looking for bugs. Criminals are constantly looking for bugs in Windows and networking devices to exploit design flaws.

I have owned a small software company for 3 decades and know from experience that even though the world's largest software companies invest huge amounts in testing, they still release products with crazy bugs. Every time I sit down at any machine I look for flaws. Not to cheat it, but that's just part of my thought process. I can guarantee there's buggy software out there...some minor problems others major.

---

I get that and was figuring someone would make your comment. But this is different. Listen to Rob’s story. He spent hours each day for years looking for bugs. And it just so happens he found a bug IDENTICAL to the one in an article.

Rob’s story would be more believable if he found a bug and made a lot of money with it, if it wasn’t the exact same bug described word for word in an article.

I’m sure you know there are more than one bugs out there. All computer programs have bugs. What’s the odds of Rob finding the exact same bug described word for word in an article? I’d say not very likely. I could say I found that bug too, and nobody could prove me wrong. Anybody could say they found that bug, and nobody could prove them wrong.

But common sense would tell you the odds of finding the exact same bug as someone else isn’t very likely. And this one was difficult to find. An IGT technically guy spent days in the lab trying to recreate this bug, and this is after he saw video of Kane and Nester exploiting it.

It’s your call if you want to believe the story, but it doesn’t ring true on many many levels.

---

I never said I believe Rob Singer about anything. I'm sure I've known he's a jerk a lot longer than you. I just take exception to your comment that the best way to find a bug is by accident. There's an entire software QA industry that finds bugs by brute force and human testing. I've discovered and documented plenty of them myself. It was no accident I found them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deech

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

Lol. That made me laugh. You’d think if Rob made all that money, he’d have spent a little less on a top-of-the-line Newell, and a little more on a Winnebago. I mean for only $10,000 more you can’t start to get a pretty decent Winnebago.

And I know something about Winnebagos since I made a trip in one way back. It was a good experience, but I’d rather do the car and camping thing or car and hotel thing. I don’t like driving those big things.

---

I'm pretty sure there's not a single former +$1million Newell owner on the road in a Minnie Winnie or whatever that thing is.

Next we'll be expected to believe that backing up the trailer was just getting to be too much so Grandpa Newell switched to one of these GOATs



But check out that custom $200 double handlebar.....How does one manage to afford such things?:rolleyes:

---

Didn't that thing land on the Wicked Witch of the East, killing her?

---

Very good joke Deech!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Leb83bRkXDg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4kiXh8YOzk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

I’ll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Well that's not right. There are hundreds of thousands of people whose only job is to test software and look for bugs. Every major software product goes through untold hours of human testing....looking for bugs. Criminals are constantly looking for bugs in Windows and networking devices to exploit design flaws.

I have owned a small software company for 3 decades and know from experience that even though the world's largest software companies invest huge amounts in testing, they still release products with crazy bugs. Every time I sit down at any machine I look for flaws. Not to cheat it, but that's just part of my thought process. I can guarantee there's buggy software out there...some minor problems others major.

---

I get that and was figuring someone would make your comment. But this is different. Listen to Rob’s story. He spent hours each day for years looking for bugs. And it just so happens he found a bug IDENTICAL to the one in an article.

Rob’s story would be more believable if he found a bug and made a lot of money with it, if it wasn’t the exact same bug described word for word in an article.

I’m sure you know there are more than one bugs out there. All computer programs have bugs. What’s the odds of Rob finding the exact same bug described word for word in an article? I’d say not very likely. I could say I found that bug too, and nobody could prove me wrong. Anybody could say they found that bug, and nobody could prove them wrong.

But common sense would tell you the odds of finding the exact same bug as someone else isn’t very likely. And this one was difficult to find. An IGT technically guy spent days in the lab trying to recreate this bug, and this is after he saw video of Kane and Nester exploiting it.

It’s your call if you want to believe the story, but it doesn’t ring true on many many levels.

---

I never said I believe Rob Singer about anything. I'm sure I've known he's a jerk a lot longer than you. I just take exception to your comment that the best way to find a bug is by accident. There's an entire software QA industry that finds bugs by brute force and human testing. I've discovered and documented plenty of them myself. It was no accident I found them.

---

As I said before, I get that. I know software complies look for bugs after they develop new programs. In fact, some programmers will put bugs in programs so they can find them and get a bonus by the company. I read about that happening at some company. This was looked into at IGT. And it looks like this bug got in by accident.

My comments were meant about Rob and his story. He said he spent “hours” for years looking for bugs. Count me skeptical, but I don’t believe someone stays on a game for hours after they are through playing it, just pressing random buttons hoping to find a bug.

And when these software companies look for bugs this isn’t how it’s done. You should know that if you own a software company.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

And when these software companies look for bugs this isn’t how it’s done. You should know that if you own a software company.

---

lol....It's structured testing. It's not random. But they're trying to break it in any way possible. That involves trying all kinds of sequences you wouldn't expect to happen normally. Some of the big guys like Microsoft have automated this with self learning programs and still have huge QA departments and yet they still release bugs every time they do an update. Just sayin'. None of this means Singer found the bug or didn't find the bug. I also wouldn't trust anything Rob Singer says. But I can guarantee that he's not the only one looking for other flaws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

And when these software companies look for bugs this isn’t how it’s done. You should know that if you own a software company.

---

lol....It's structured testing. It's not random. But they're trying to break it in any way possible. That involves trying all kinds of sequences you wouldn't expect to happen normally. Some of the big guys like Microsoft have automated this with self learning programs and still have huge QA departments and yet they still release bugs every time they do an update. Just sayin'. None of this means Singer found the bug or didn't find the bug. I also wouldn't trust anything Rob Singer says. But I can guarantee that he's not the only one looking for other flaws.

---

I get it. I’m not an expert in this area, but the way Rob said he found this bug didn’t pass the sniff test. I think his story would have been more believable if he had claimed to find another bug.

Mr. Andrew/Alan said it best when he said Rob read the article on Kane and Neater, and decided he’d claim the bug for his own. Rob’s story lines up pretty well with the wired article, which makes sense since he probably read the article.

There were many many other things that didn’t make sense, this was only one small detail.

Like I’ve said before, the good part about this whole story is now I’m the resident expert on Newells at my company.

Note: Correction. I was, as the Fonzie sometimes says, wrong. My sincerest apologies. I called a professional driver friend, and he informed me that unless the Class A is towing something, you do not need a CDL in Arizona for a Class A.

So "Singer" would not need a CDL unless his Class A was towing something substantial.

Again, I was wrong, so my apologies.

Let's just just something straight here. We are supposed to believe that this fiction writer person, owns 2 RV's or vehicles uses for travel. One is a 1.5 million dollar, top of the line Newell and the other a $16,000 camper type that you pull behind your vehicle. AND that he prefers the smaller option, so that is what he uses, while the other sits depreciating a million dollars in the 7 years he has owned it. What's that 150k a year it depreciates.

Come on, people?? Enough already. :cool: But I'll check in tonight for some more fiction reading.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

I’ll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Well that's not right. There are hundreds of thousands of people whose only job is to test software and look for bugs. Every major software product goes through untold hours of human testing....looking for bugs. Criminals are constantly looking for bugs in Windows and networking devices to exploit design flaws.

I have owned a small software company for 3 decades and know from experience that even though the world's largest software companies invest huge amounts in testing, they still release products with crazy bugs. Every time I sit down at any machine I look for flaws. Not to cheat it, but that's just part of my thought process. I can guarantee there's buggy software out there...some minor problems others major.

---

I get that and was figuring someone would make your comment. But this is different. Listen to Rob’s story. He spent hours each day for years looking for bugs. And it just so happens he found a bug IDENTICAL to the one in an article.

Rob’s story would be more believable if he found a bug and made a lot of money with it, if it wasn’t the exact same bug described word for word in an article.

I’m sure you know there are more than one bugs out there. All computer programs have bugs. What’s the odds of Rob finding the exact same bug described word for word in an article? I’d say not very likely. I could say I found that bug too, and nobody could prove me wrong. Anybody could say they found that bug, and nobody could prove them wrong.

But common sense would tell you the odds of finding the exact same bug as someone else isn’t very likely. And this one was difficult to find. An IGT technically guy spent days in the lab trying to recreate this bug, and this is after he saw video of Kane and Nester exploiting it.

It’s your call if you want to believe the story, but it doesn’t ring true on many many levels.

---

I never said I believe Rob Singer about anything. I'm sure I've known he's a jerk a lot longer than you. I just take exception to your comment that the best way to find a bug is by accident. There's an entire software QA industry that finds bugs by brute force and human testing. I've discovered and documented plenty of them myself. It was no accident I found them.

---

When you have something that has been extensively tested and hardened like video poker, it is far far different from a QA guy working on software release. This idea that Rob was methodically going around hoping to find a bug - and a bug that is actually exploitable. I mean, sure you might find something pays wrong, or something else strange, but it would be more likely the bug was not exploitable unlike this DU bug. Literally either this was inside job, or someone got lucky (and a drunk degenerate gambler is just as likely or more). I suppose though that if Rob was smart, he would just attack an area of the software that'd be exploitable but come'on - theres 0 fucking chance of that being true. No one has ever accused Rob of being smart. Most people agree he isn't near as intelligent as our lovely and cunning Tasha.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob21

I’ll

I get that and was figuring someone would make your comment. But this is different. Listen to Rob’s story. He spent hours each day for years looking for bugs. And it just so happens he found a bug IDENTICAL to the one in an article.

Rob’s story would be more believable if he found a bug and made a lot of money with it, if it wasn’t the exact same bug described word for word in an article.

I’m sure you know there are more than one bugs out there. All computer programs have bugs. What’s the odds of Rob finding the exact same bug described word for word in an article? I’d say not very likely. I could say I found that bug too, and nobody could prove me wrong. Anybody could say they found that bug, and nobody could prove them wrong.

But common sense would tell you the odds of finding the exact same bug as someone else isn’t very likely. And this one was difficult to find. An IGT technically guy spent days in the lab trying to recreate this bug, and this is after he saw video of Kane and Nester exploiting it.

It’s your call if you want to believe the story, but it doesn’t ring true on many many levels.

---

I never said I believe Rob Singer about anything. I'm sure I've known he's a jerk a lot longer than you. I just take exception to your comment that the best way to find a bug is by accident. There's an entire software QA industry that finds bugs by brute force and human testing. I've discovered and documented plenty of them myself. It was no accident I found them.

---

When you have something that has been extensively tested and hardened like video poker, it is far far different from a QA guy working on software release. This idea that Rob was methodically going around hoping to find a bug - and a bug that is actually exploitable. I mean, sure you might find something pays wrong, or something else strange, but it would be more likely the bug was not exploitable unlike this DU bug. Literally either this was inside job, or someone got lucky (and a drunk degenerate gambler is just as likely or more). I suppose though that if Rob was smart, he would just attack an area of the software that'd be exploitable but come'on - theres 0 fucking chance of that being true. No one has ever accused Rob of being smart. Most people agree he isn't near as intelligent as our lovely and cunning Tasha.

---

Well you're right about that....about Rob not being smart. There's probably 10000 little glitches that don't impact the payout for one that might....and those glitches are few and far between. People are still looking though.

Here's a good one. There was this Canadian fellow Daniel Corriveau, who in 1994 won 600K playing electronic keno when he realized that the machine was seeded with the same random number every time it was powered off. It so happened Casino Montreal powered off that machine every night when they vacuumed. He picked 19 of 20 numbers three times in a row AND he was cleared of any wrongdoing AND collected his money. That major flaw made it out of QA on a hardened machine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino_de_Montr%C3%A9al

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Let's just just something straight here. We are supposed to believe that this fiction writer person, owns 2 RV's or vehicles uses for travel. One is a 1.5 million dollar, top of the line Newell and the other a $16,000 camper type that you pull behind your vehicle. AND that he prefers the smaller option, so that is what he uses, while the other sits depreciating a million dollars in the 7 years he has owned it. What's that 150k a year it depreciates.

Come on, people?? Enough already. :cool: But I'll check in tonight for some more fiction reading.

---

Mr Kewlj cuts to the chase in brilliant style.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unowme

I never said I believe Rob Singer about anything. I'm sure I've known he's a jerk a lot longer than you. I just take exception to your comment that the best way to find a bug is by accident. There's an entire software QA industry that finds bugs by brute force and human testing. I've discovered and documented plenty of them myself. It was no accident I found them.

---

When you have something that has been extensively tested and hardened like video poker, it is far far different from a QA guy working on software release. This idea that Rob was methodically going around hoping to find a bug - and a bug that is actually exploitable. I mean, sure you might find something pays wrong, or something else strange, but it would be more likely the bug was not exploitable unlike this DU bug. Literally either this was inside job, or someone got lucky (and a drunk degenerate gambler is just as likely or more). I suppose though that if Rob was smart, he would just attack an area of the software that'd be exploitable but come'on - theres 0 fucking chance of that being true. No one has ever accused Rob of being smart. Most people agree he isn't near as intelligent as our lovely and cunning Tasha.

---

Well you're right about that....about Rob not being smart. There's probably 10000 little glitches that don't impact the payout for one that might....and those glitches are few and far between. People are still looking though.

Here's a good one. There was this Canadian fellow Daniel Corriveau, who in 1994 won 600K playing electronic keno when he realized that the machine was seeded with the same random number every time it was powered off. It so happened Casino Montreal powered off that machine every night when they vacuumed. He picked 19 of 20 numbers three times in a row AND he was cleared of any wrongdoing AND collected his money. That major flaw made it out of QA on a hardened machine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino_de_Montr%C3%A9al

---

That’s interesting! Thanks for posting the link unowme.

I think we might have spotted the next bug Rob has exploited. It’s called the Montreal Casino keno bug.