Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

decrypt.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 369 posts

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#251

Post by komali2 »

JoshuaDavid wrote: post #224
thekuanysh wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you have to add “Chinese”?

I think it's serving as shorthand for "in a country halfway around the world, with a government that isn't going to intervene on your behalf as a foreigner even if you figure out who did it and hand them the evidence on a silver platter".

Right, it wasn't necessarily hateful on purpose, but as another poster pointed out, what does it mean that we default to using one specific group of people for that example? If they'd said "PRC hacker" it'd be a different story, but the word "Chinese" conflates a nationality and heritage. It does this, by the way, in written Chinese as well, hence a lot of arguments I've had in the past with PRC-citizen exchange students about whether Taiwanese people are Chinese or not (even though they are, obviously, not PRC citizens, Taiwan being a sovereign nation).

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#252

Post by grandridge »

thekuanysh wrote: post #177
erfgh wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do have to trust yourself to have 100% flawless security because one slip and you lose that $1B to a Chinese hacker with no hope of ever getting it back.

Why do you have to add “Chinese”?

Why don't you just grow up and realize we don't live in a utopia where no one's feelings get hurt. It's an earned reputation with a simple identifier

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#253

Post by _jal »

centimeter wrote: post #162
_jal wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more unpopular opinion: humans should be as free as capital. Making capital transfers easy while restricting the movement of real people ghettoizes and traps people for corporate convenience and cost savings.

> humans should be as free as capital. Capital doesn't put a drain on the social welfare systems of the country you're sending it to.

Ya think? Try googling "walmart subsidy".

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#254

Post by remmargorp64 »

staplers wrote: post #249
erfgh wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do have to trust yourself to have 100% flawless security because one slip and you lose that $1B to a Chinese hacker with no hope of ever getting it back.

This happens all the time with wire transfers. It's no different. Banks don't care. Example: https://www.clickorlando.com/news/2018/05/24/central-florida...

I don't understand how banks can claim to have federal FDIC-insured protection of $250,000 per depositor if they don't actually reimburse you when a simple wire transfer fraud happens??

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#255

Post by dragonwriter »

remmargorp64 wrote: post #254
staplers wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens all the time with wire transfers. It's no different. Banks don't care. Example: https://www.clickorlando.com/news/2018/05/24/central-florida...

I don't understand how banks can claim to have federal FDIC-insured protection of $250,000 per depositor if they don't actually reimburse you when a simple wire transfer fraud happens??

Because the insurance is against the bank being unable to pay deposits due to bank insolvency. The FDIC does not insure depositors against wire transfer fraud.

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#256

Post by co_dh »

erfgh wrote: post #99
grubles wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the point is with Bitcoin you don't have to trust RBC to not freeze and/or abscond with your $1B.

You do have to trust yourself to have 100% flawless security because one slip and you lose that $1B to a Chinese hacker with no hope of ever getting it back.

why Chinese hacker? Discrimination.

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#257

Post by jacquesm »

bronzeage wrote: post #15

Taking an educated guess here, that the miner of the block which moved that transaction must be related to the owner of that wallet. Nobody would otherwise accept such a low fee for a big transaction. Find the miner, you find the wallet owner.

Quite a feat: to predict that you will be one to mine that particular block.

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#258

Post by bjoernw »

hocuspocus wrote: post #148
mindcandy wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remittances are one of the big, obvious use cases where crypto can save poor people a ton of money. To the tune of a collective $40-50 billion a year. https://academy.binance.com/blockchain/blockchain-use-cases-...

Call me when a blockchain-backed remittance service reaches even a small fraction of the customer-base of companies like Transferwise or CurrencyFair. If it was an efficient way to cut on fees, everyone would do it. Yet almost nobody does.

What's your number? That's exactly what Ripple is working on - replacing SWIFT. https://ripple.com/ripplenet

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#259

Post by jacquesm »

Tenoke wrote: post #9
bouk wrote: post #4

SEPA transfers are free :)

Technically yes but SEPA is not quite so ubiquitous and definitely not so quick. Even within Euope more often then not I just end up paying the fee and doing my international transfers via TransferWise anyway.

I transfer quite a bit of money to our freelancers all over Europe and SEPA has served us very well, I'd definitely not use a service like TransferWise over regular banks for such payments, and that's besides the ease of integration with our accountants who can now easily match up invoices with payments from the current account.

Re: The largest unknown Bitcoin wallet moved nearly $1B for $0.48 in fees

#260

Post by dlubarov »

johnpaulkiser wrote: post #231
dylkil wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whats worse is Bitcoin's security depends on high fees, but you have articles like this celebrating low fees. Satoshi intended for bitcoin to scale to hundreds of millions of transactions, all paying sub cent fees. All those fees would add up to millions of dollars per day. The fees are what secure the chain when the block reward runs out. Around 2014/2015 some devs who worked with blockstream started campaigning to…

That isn't even slightly true. This debate has been settled a long long time ago. Running a full node is the only way to assure the integrity of the currency. Increasing the block size decreases the number of people that run full nodes. It's obvious to anyone who works on Bitcoin that a linear increase to blocksize can never scale, while maintaining an open and decentralized environment.

> Running a full node is the only way to assure the integrity of the currency.

Another method is to use cryptographic proofs to demonstrate the validity of a blockchain state. A lot of newer projects are taking this approach, such as the project I work on, Mir Protocol.

Granted, it doesn't seem like a realistic option for Bitcoin. The community doesn't seem very open to major protocol changes, and even if it were, cryptographic proofs for Bitcoin might be prohibitively expensive since the protocol wasn't designed with that in mind.

Post reply on HN