Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
Originally Posted by AndrewG View Post
Rob Singer: how do we know you're telling the truth now?

How do we know that the sequence you described is the actual sequence used to trigger the bug?

This forum has zero credibility. Shouldn't the owner and moderator make an attempt to keep his forum honest?

Instead he allows unproven claims (yes Mr Kewl your claims are also unproven whether you follow the math of gambling or not) and the forum even permits someone who admits to a dozen or more phoney identities to keep posting here.

Sorry, but there is no reason to believe anything here.

The bottom line will be Mr. Shackleford laughing his ass off at this forum and everyone connected to it and I predict Mr. Witteles will shut it down after realizing the forum did nothing but tarnish his reputation.

By the way, does anyone even read his sports picks?

If you're familiar with VP the sequence he described is either correct or an exceptionally clever fabrication. It actually makes a lot more sense than what was described in the Wired article, and I think Axel said he believes it is the correct sequence.

In my opinion it's credible enough that it outweighs the weak points of Rob's story. I don't see how a neutral observer can confidently dismiss his claim without coming up with an explanation for how Rob might know about the bug.

God, smurger, take a moment and think. I want to believe "Singer" and all, but it doesn't take much cogitatin' (to quote Jed Clampett) to come up with other storylines. "Singer" may have, for example, played the glitch but just been an errand boy following instructions. Those instructions could have come from someone who not-so-innocently set the glitch loose on the world. Or they may have come from people who employed the individual who set the glitch upon the world. Singer had connections in Las Vegas with certain, shall we say, entrepreneurs. It may be how he got and kept the Gaming Today gig for awhile. His ethnicity may have played as big a role as his sparkling personality.

Those scenarios don't take much imagination. And let's say "Singer" was an errand boy. Now, three million isn't enormous, but it's a fair amount. Hard to explain no property in one's name, or people suing for not paying rent and all that. But if one is an errand boy and earns one's keep executing the glitch, then it would explain a fairly modest personal history while also explaining how he knows about the glitch.

These alternative explanations make at least as much sense as the idea that somebody purposefully experimented on machines, or bought one and played with it for hours every day in his private lab, seeking great truths -- LOL. Personally, I find the errand boy explanation at least as credible as the "I found it" explanation.

Smurger, maybe you were just trying to see if anyone applied a little cogitatin' to alternative explanations, or if "Singer" was safe with his "I found it" rap. If that's the case, I can tell you that I'm sure half a dozen folks on this forum came up with the same alternative explanations. It doesn't take a Mensan.