I'm the guy who bought 259684 Bitcoins for under $3000 yesterday

Post by jacques_chester » Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 1:09 AM UTC

jerf wrote: post #143

Tichy wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, what I mean is that if I was 99, I wouldn't care much about being punished for being a thief. I could therefore make a lot of people happy. If not my family, then maybe I could go Robin Hood, steal from the rich and sell cheaply to the poor. I can't imagine that it works that way. I can believe that as a buyer of stolen good without knowing they were stolen, you won't be punished. But you will still have to retu…

In addition to what jacques_chester has said, never forget the law is adjudicated by humans, not computers. If a judge thinks you've found a "loophole" there's no guarantee he's going to take that too kindly to that line of argument. Yes, we've all heard stories about loopholes that worked, but for every one that did there were a great deal more that did not.

Post by rapind » Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 1:12 AM UTC

mahyarm wrote: post #115

ra wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was test entries in a database, then how could the OP transfer real BTC to his wallet?

I don't know how Mt.Gox arranges it's accounts, but it's possible it came from the mt.gox BTC pool?

Post by random42 » Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 1:21 AM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #106

jacques_chester wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've misread me. You, the thief, are still on the hook for your crime. The buyer, if they really are a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, is not. Your family would probably not meet the test, as this would be the first time they've heard of the Porsches. (IANAL, TINLA)

Yes, what I mean is that if I was 99, I wouldn't care much about being punished for being a thief. I could therefore make a lot of people happy. If not my family, then maybe I could go Robin Hood, steal from the rich and sell cheaply to the poor. I can't imagine that it works that way. I can believe that as a buyer of stolen good without knowing they were stolen, you won't be punished. But you will still have to retu…

Post by ohashi » Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 1:24 AM UTC

haberman wrote: post #131

The community that for months has been preaching the virtues of the currency nobody can control is suddenly arguing that a middleman should roll back a bunch of free-market transactions. I decided a while ago that arguing against the "bitcoin has no problems" crowd was futile: people are too enamored with the idea to see problems like this until they happen.

Post by dkokelley » Tue, Jun 21, 2011, 1:29 AM UTC

dangero wrote: post #97

romland wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or it could, again, be stupidity by MtGox: This was a "test account" that had no real user attached to it. After all, if the trade is internal on MtGox, it's just a double in a database. If that is the case, then hell yes, I can see why MtGox would want this rollback.

That's a really good point. Who says that there really was anyone with that many bitcoins in their account? Maybe someone just hacked the database, put 500,000 btc into an account, and then sold them on the market? We know the user database was dumped, so why shouldn't we think that someone edited the account balances too?