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

Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 901 posts

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#341

Post by madars »

vmception wrote: post #141
knownjorbist wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another possibility is Ironfish( https://ironfish.network/ ), but I don't know how much liquidity there exists in either of these. I don't think you could launder/hide $4bn through either of these. Perhaps slowly over a long period of time.

Ironfish is just a testnet so there is zero liquidity there because it isn't even launched. Tornado cash has about $700mm right now deposited in it, with the vast majority of that being in the 100 ETH deposit pool. They absolutely could have done it over time. They could have bridged the Bitcoin using the RenVM protocol to receive renBTC, done a combination of selling the renBTC and let arbitrageurs provide the liqui…

What about network level privacy? i.e. they'd also want to minimize the linkage between broadcast patterns and characteristics of those 100k addresses

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#342

Post by smnrchrds »

mardifoufs wrote: post #265
d23 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the standard for our criminal justice system, not for us as individuals. It sounds from the release that the justice department has a boatload of compelling evidence against them.

There's a reason why the criminal justice system operates like that though. The system has been designed like that because it turned that it is a very good idea not to go on witch hunts or to assume guilt if you want a functional society. I'm not defending the person involved here, but it's important to remember that the presumption of innocence isn't just an abstract legal concept instead of a very important part of…

Do you think it is wrong for a person to believe OJ was guilty of the murder he was accused of? If a person decides to keep their distance from their new neighbour OJ and not treat them with neighbourly kindness and open arms because of that murder, would you admonish them for treating OJ differently for something he was never found guilty of in the court of law?

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#343

Post by mtoner23 »

systemsignal wrote: post #331
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the government trying to enforce their opinion of who should own those Bitcoins, thereby taking power away from the owner that the network has decided on, which would be "whoever has the cryptographic keys". I really don't understand these arguments. The law still applies whether or not you use cryptocurrency. Using cryptocurrency doesn't free someone from the consequences of their actions. Illegal acts are st…

What makes hacking illegal? What if they acquired the Bitcoin without using illegal means Probably not possible in this case, but in DeFi where everything is ruled by smart contracts, what would make executing behavior allowed by those contracts illegal.

US Law makes hacking illegal

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#344

Post by outside1234 »

localhost wrote: post #299
pdog wrote: post #215

Ilya Lichtenstein (YC S11) is the co-founder of YC-backed MixRank. Heather Morgan, his wife, is apparently a serial entrepreneur, investor, and "contributor" to Forbes.

She's also a rapper, and not a very good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DIuPPmY9mw

"0FCKs given"

This whole crypto space is just a giant show of "Punk't" isn't it. This can't be real - it is just parodies the whole way down.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#345

Post by lhorie »

buran77 wrote: post #316
throwawayboise wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's not the way real contracts work. Contracts are an agreement between parties. If there is later a disagreement about what was agreed to, a judge sorts it out.

> If there is later a disagreement about what was agreed to, a judge sorts it out. Only because human language leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Computer output doesn't, or at the very least not nearly to the same extent. If your smart contract is itself legal (you are legally allowed to formalize those terms), and produced an output as a function of it's actual internal operation (and not a random, accidental…

> Only because human language leaves a lot of room for interpretation

Technically no. Many things have intrinsic physical value that cannot be tracked via digital contracts. If I go to amazon and buy a book, but they ship the wrong book due to clerical error, then there's a clear cut violation of expectations with no room for conflicting interpretations.

In the crypto world, NFTs are frequently criticized for this very issue, and it doesn't even leave the digital boundaries: you can prove to have ownership of a token through the blockchain, but whether that token is actually tied to legal ownership of an asset is anyone's guess (case in point, there are various cases of people selling fraudulent NFTs for art they do not own).

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#347

Post by repomies69 »

SantalBlush wrote: post #313
TTPrograms wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obvious no-true-scotsman. Believing that the goal of crypto is to circumvent laws regarding possession and theft is at most a fringe belief. The fact that this is at the top of HN demonstrates how devoid of merit crypto discussion here is.

Circumventing property law has absolutely been a selling point of crypto, front and center, since its inception. The real no-true-Scotsman is saying, "Those who want an extra-governmental system of property aren't the real crypto fans." Yes, they are. In reality, crypto's true purpose is a moving target, so it can never be criticized because that's not what crypto is really about.

> In reality, crypto's true purpose is a moving target, so it can never be criticized because that's not what crypto is really about.

Bitcoin is a tool. Like hammer or a shotgun. You can use it whatever way you want. There is no centrally defined "purpose".

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#348

Post by mtoner23 »

giaour wrote: post #279
caseysoftware wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or weaponize the coins. Take 10 BTC and give them to 100 groups/people you don't like. Investigators make their lives miserable for a while. For normal people, that'd be ridiculously expensive but since they didn't pay for the coins and have 100k+ more they can't use, it's "free."

Wouldn't investigators look at the provenance address for one of those 100 transactions? That seems like a dangerous prank.

They already knew that address though, they were waiting for them to convert the BTC to USD to find the person tied to the address. Still dangerous because the person you sent them to might give the feds your name.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#349

Post by 35fbe7d3d5b9 »

bostonsre wrote: post #286
paulpauper wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just unreal. this guy was living a double life of being the greatest criminal ever. So among our community was a $4 billion hacker, just nonchalantly posting. I don't think he will be commenting anytime soon again if this really is him https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=il like your neighbor being a serial killer or something

I don't understand why he wouldn't move to somewhere that doesn't have an extradition policy with the US. If you go down that path, it seems like you should probably be willing to abandon your life. It's the same with Ross Ulbricht, seems like it would be terrifying living with that sword of damocles hanging over your head absolutely constantly.

Humans notoriously overestimate their competence and underestimate dangers they face. Combine that with a federal investigation that's going to be slow because 1) it's complex and 2) the feds will happily investigate you for years if it increases their chance of a conviction, and you've got a recipe for people who think they got away with it right up until the moment of arrest.

Re: Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds

#350

Post by tnorthcutt »

tptacek wrote: post #336
tnorthcutt wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What portion of those convictions are plea bargains? This article says 97%: https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/prisons-are-packed-bec... Why are people so eager to confess their guilt instead of challenging the government to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the satisfaction of a unanimous jury? The answer is simple and stark: They’re being coerced.

This is a pretty silly argument. I'm not opining on whether or not prosecutions are coercive; I'm certain they are. But a lower conviction rate would be a bad thing: it would mean the DOJ was bringing more cases they weren't certain they would win, and even exoneration comes with immense costs to the accused.

I wasn't replying to a claim that a high conviction rate is a good thing (or better than a lower one).

I was replying to a claim that a high conviction rate somehow suggests we should dispense with the idea that, as a society, we should not presume guilt.

grumple, who I replied to, seemed to me to be suggesting that because the federal government has a high conviction rate, we should assume the accused are guilty.

I'm suggesting that because there is compelling evidence that many guilty verdicts are obtained through coercion, we should not make that assumption.

Post reply on HN