ohhungry

For botting

So my vpn subscription ends in 3 days. I'm currently using HMA, and I'll probably renew with them since they have a summer special for 9.99 a month, and I'm pretty happy with their service. But before I do, does anybody know any other VPN's I should look at? Just for comparison, HMA has unlimited bandwidth and like 300 or so different server locations. Also, is it worth it to invest in a VPS? I currently only have 5 bots running, and my computer is good enough to handle that, and I think I could probably max it around 7 or 8. I'm not really sure if a VPS is worth it though, since it looks like a VPS capable of running more than 3 or 4 bots could cost upwards of 100 bucks a month, which I really don't feel like paying.

Hmm, maybe i should start using my .2 again then too bad a ruined my staker

I'm missing your point here

Whats the point of a .3? Everybody who's actually trying to get pid has a .1 or .0 anyways

Does anybody know if doing this is likely to get you banned? I kind of want to try this out on some of my bots, but since the game thinks my character is in a random wouldn't the bot watch notice me logged in and in a random for a very long time? Seems like the type of thing bot watch would be looking for

It chooses whichever default world the runescape site currently has selected. This is usually chosen based on location and server load, it has nothing to do with the OSbot client at all

I'll talk about the science part you talked about first, cause that's the fun stuff All the things you said are true as far as I know, and your mass-energy equivalence is what was so important in my post, that mass makes up the majority of the positive energy, while the gravitational attraction makes up the negative energy. And as for dark energy and dark matter, I'm not confident enough on the topics to really talk much about them, but there have been large experiments which have hinted at experimental proof of dark matter. Also, since the a lot of the science around dark matter in dark energy is fairly well founded, I think its better to think of them not as some problem in our theory, but as something our theory has discovered. Now on to the God stuff, science does not deny the existence of God, because science proves things. But the point is, the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. Now you can argue that the claim is "God does not exist", but since it is impossible to prove the non-existence of anything, the point is mute. There is no way to prove something does not exist, all you can prove is that we can not currently observe it's existence. So to say "prove us wrong" is simply a cheap way of trying to win an argument. Believers of leprechauns simply has to say "Prove us wrong", believers that the universe is actually held in a tiny marble in the hand of child simply has to say "Prove Us Wrong", believers that there is a unicorn flying through the vacuum of space all alone, while constantly being tortured by a radio which plays Rick Astley on loop..."Prove Us Wrong". The only things which hold ground in world of saying they exist are things which you have proof of existing. Now you can also have proof that things might exist, this would be indirect evidence. This can be applied to things such as aliens, but the same conclusion cannot be drawn about a God. With aliens, we have observable proof that life can begin on a planet, and we have observable proof that there are other Earth-like planets with conditions fit for life, so we can draw a conclusion that there is measurable chance of life beginning on another planet other than our own. Now with declaring the existence of God, there is no direct, or indirect proof. Scripture is not any more proof of a God than sailor tales are proof of the Loch Ness Monster. There is nothing to even suggest that God must exist, so the existence of a God holds as much ground as belief in that unicorn I mentioned previously. It may seem ridiculous, but that's really how it is, and hopefully it shows you how proof of non-existence is a terrible argument. So all we really say about God is, there is no reason for me to believe such a claim.

I don't really see much benefit in appealing it, maybe if I decide to turn the bot into a pure or something. But it's good to know that it could just be a bug in their system, my worst fear was that my accounts were compromised or something

This is obviously an exception, everything has one, your argument is old and invalid. When does it begin to be okay to kill the baby? Is it when it is 6 months old? No 3 Months? No way. 1 Month? No 1 day? No 1 hour? No 1 second? No Why is it okay if you can't see it? Once the cells have formed the baby, I believe it's too late. It's a human at that point and is living off it's mother. It's the beginning stages of life and we all had to go through it. Basically supporting abortion is supporting that you have no soul. Because if you did have a soul, then killing the baby would be killing the soul as well. 1 second? Yes 1 hour? Yes 1 day? Yes 1 Month? Yes 3 Months? Probably I kill more cells when I jack off, so not really a huge deal. We were all sperm at one point, but I don't really count that as me, and I sure didn't cry for the millions of brothers/sisters I lost getting to that egg. I can only assume you are referring to a soul in a religious context, and the only way I could argue against that would be to argue against your faith. Which obviously can't be done because it's faith, and you can't argue for or against faith...so I guess I have no soul You're fucking sick bro. The thing is formed. Its not cells anymore it's now a being. 3 months? How fucking insane are you? I have 2 week old cousin and he already responds and interacts with people. You saying it's okay to kill him is disgusting. I can't believe I'm around people as selfish as you. That just pisses me off. When I was referring to soul, if a human has a soul, it should never be okay to take that human out of this world because they're more than a being. I'm not religious at all. What?... 3 months after conception, not 9+3. Who on Earth would ever imply that killing a baby fresh from the womb is okay? You're the sick one for even assuming it. Wat. I was talking about after being born. No you were not, because you said "Why is it ok if you can't see it", so unless you mean we are all blind or something, or babies are too small to see? I don't know what you were going for there, but obviously you are referring to babies inside the womb, not after birth. And if you were referring to after it had been born, you wouldn't even have an argument because it's not considered abortion after it's born...

It's too bad nobody actually talked about the science aspect of this thread...there's some interesting stuff here. The Big Bang actually does obey the Law of Conservation Energy. The total energy in the universe is zero, meaning it can in fact arise from nothing . The positive energy, due to the matter/heat and what not in the universe, is directly counteracted by negative energy, in the form of gravitational attraction. The sum of all this energy is 0, so the Law of Conservation is not broken. Disclaimer: I'm not a scientist, I've heard of this theory before, but never really looked into it much, and although it looks like the majority of cosmologists agree with this theory, it's fairly hypothetical and requires a few assumptions. Also, here's a link to the source, which basically just says all the stuff I'm writing below http://www.astrosociety.org/pubs/mercury/31_02/nothing.html Now explaining how we get our universe from zero energy, doesn't appear to be that well known (or maybe I just haven't researched it enough), but from what I've read it appears that all that "nothing" would need in order to begin inflationary expansion is a small push, a tiny bit of energy (which kind of makes my whole, coming from zero energy sound like a load of crap). But anyways, this tiny bit of energy is thought to have come from quantum fluctuations, which in normal words, are particle pairs which suddenly come into existence, and then annihilate each other almost right away. Now assuming quantum fluctuations could occur before the birth of our universe, this could provide the energy required to begin the inflationary expansion, and the particles would most likely annihilate each other afterwards. I read in the article that apparently even if they didn't the Law of Conservation wouldn't really be broken because the energy violation would be too small to measure, but I am unsure if they mean "too small to measure with current instruments" or "too small to measure due to Heisenberg's uncertainty", I'm going to assume it's the second one, in which case I don't think it breaks the law of conservation. Now, for anybody who kept reading up this till now, more juicy physics, because I've basically been researching stuff as I've been typing this, and I'm too lazy to go edit the things I've already written. So quantum fluctuations create short bursts of energy, which vanishes almost instantly, so quickly that it cannot even be measured directly. Now, when I saw it cannot be measured, I don't mean we aren't advanced enough to measure it, I mean it literally is impossible to measure it, due to the uncertainty principle. If you are unfamiliar with the uncertainty principle, I advise you to read a little bit about it on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle, just like the first paragraph cause it's late and I'm too tired to summarize. So, if you read that page, you may have seen that momentum and position have certain uncertainty's associated with them, and the product of the uncertainty has constant value. This same principle can be applied to time and energy, creating a time-energy uncertainty, similar to a position-momentum uncertainty (these are actually linked, I'm pretty sure, but I haven't looked into it). Now the quantum fluctuations actually arise from the time-energy uncertainty, that means that these bursts of energy, although supposedly coming from nothing, are actually "borrowing" energy from this uncertainty, in a short flash before again. So there you go, that's how a universe arises from nothing without breaking any laws, so we don't need a God to do that for us. In case anybody was wondering, I think religion is just a place for people to ask the questions science hasn't answered yet, so unless Jesus gets resurrected again any time soon, I probably won't become a person of faith. TL;DR; Please read it, physics is something everybody should learn Also, if anybody here is actually a physicist, please respond to my post In response to this, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" -Carl Sagan

The vpn has so many different IP's though, I'm using HMA, which apparently has over 54000 IP addresses, and it's not even a free vpn so I really don't think the IP was tainted, the chances of somebody else using that same IP for botting is just so small. And since it happened on 2 different accounts (I'm not sure if I was using the same IP on both, as they were different days) I'm not even sure if it was linked to my IP at all. For some reason (although this is pretty unlikely) I feel like it's from me being in mod mark's cc so much, and with all the people spamming markdonalds they just permamuted me by accident

I'm not really sure how this happened. But somehow 2 of my bots received permanent mutes, and one got a perma-ban from 0 offences the next day. I don't think the perma-ban is related at all, but I'm really confused where the perma-mutes came from. I rarely talk with the bots (sometimes have little convos to seem a little more human) but whenever I bot with them I get them to join a cc, normally "mod mark" cause it's a really full one and nobody will notice. I probably won't appeal the mutes because it doesn't affect my bots at all, but does anybody know where they came from? I just hope my accounts weren't hacked or something and used as advertisers. Here's a link to the bans http://imgur.com/5fiv6Ja,LPO7ZTT#0 It's weird cause it says "macroing evidence" and that I was banned for website advertisement. I know that saying things like "rs walmart" can get you muted, but I'm pretty sure I never said any of those things. This happened on 2 accounts, one on the 29th, and one on the 30th. Also, on the topic of perma-bans, does anybody know if it's really just caused by ip flags? Because I had 3 other accounts botting on that same ip(which I had only been using for a day or so, on a vpn with hundreds of thousands of ip's). It was one of my smithing bots doing iron knives that got permabanned, but I had another iron knives bot going for the same amount of time, just on a different world, and no perma-ban. I don't really want to appeal don't want them to track the items back to my main or something, but does anybody know exactly what separates instant "goldfarming" permabans from just regular macroing offences? I've had 2 accounts get goldfarming permabans, both with different ip addresses, but the rest just get 14 day macroing offences.

CONTEST ENTERY: Why OSBOT is Awesome: It lets me bot non-stop My Favourite Mod/Forum Mod Is: Laz I Prefer (Rap/Metal/Other): Dubstep

Application for orders You agree to my TOS below: sure How much bow string: However much you have right now Will you pay 105 gp per bow string no excuse: Yes Your Skype name:ohhungry

DISPUTE Disputed member: madnessko152 + http://osbot.org/forum/user/5074-madnessko152/ Link to dispute: http://osbot.org/forum/topic/9282-lvl-3-65-wc/ Evidence: http://imgur.com/a/FoTHj Additional notes: He already has one dispute opened against him for another unrelated case of scamming. If required, I can send a moderator proof that the email has been changed. I did not want to post that here because I do not want my registered email to be posted.

Could you do 1-60 range and make a dbow pure? So trained via cannon/range guild. Also do you train via bot or legit, because botting range guild is basically insta ban...

If you want 99 mage you can just alch in pest control world 1. Turn off all randoms and just stand on the giant swarm of people. Join a random cc like "mod mark" or something and you can probably go for hours and hours a day without getting banned, since it would be pretty hard to tell the difference between a bot that just clicks in one spot and a person who just clicks in one spot...to make it more realistic just type something into the cc every once in a while or have a short conversation. I honestly can't see any way you could be banned doing this. Now if you're superheating, that might be a little more detectable, but just alching, as long as the bot has some random timers built in shouldn't have any risk of ban. *Important: If you are alching in pest control MAKE SURE YOU TURN OFF ALL RANDOMS. This will prevent the bot from accidentally running outside due to somebody elses random. I think OSbot has this covered so it shouldnt happen, but just to be extra safe, turn off all the randoms.

I'll buy one

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! I've got a few fletch bots going, but I find that the scripts are really only super reliable if you are stringing bows. I've gone for hours at a time stringing with no problems. If you can't get it to work at all with cutting the logs, you could try buying some unstrung bows and stringing them, you'll also get faster exp this way.

edit: retracted, sorry for spam

I bid 3 mill Edit: Bid retracted, sorry, I didn't realize how few membership days there was

Computer science

It's their Facebook, they can post what they want. You tear them apart in arguments? As far as I'm concerned an Athiesm vs Religion argument is never-ending, either of you can't prove each other wrong. More like one side is right, and the other is in denial...

This is obviously an exception, everything has one, your argument is old and invalid. When does it begin to be okay to kill the baby? Is it when it is 6 months old? No 3 Months? No way. 1 Month? No 1 day? No 1 hour? No 1 second? No Why is it okay if you can't see it? Once the cells have formed the baby, I believe it's too late. It's a human at that point and is living off it's mother. It's the beginning stages of life and we all had to go through it. Basically supporting abortion is supporting that you have no soul. Because if you did have a soul, then killing the baby would be killing the soul as well. 1 second? Yes 1 hour? Yes 1 day? Yes 1 Month? Yes 3 Months? Probably I kill more cells when I jack off, so not really a huge deal. We were all sperm at one point, but I don't really count that as me, and I sure didn't cry for the millions of brothers/sisters I lost getting to that egg. I can only assume you are referring to a soul in a religious context, and the only way I could argue against that would be to argue against your faith. Which obviously can't be done because it's faith, and you can't argue for or against faith...so I guess I have no soul