51–60 of 381 posts
I wouldn't be surprised if Bybit cuts a deal with the hacker to return the funds. There's no way that $1.46 billion of marked ETH can be liquidated and off-ramped to fiat.
That’s well within the daily trading volume.
Bybit CEO Ben Zhou wrote on X that a hacker "took control of the specific ETH cold wallet and transferred all the ETH in the cold wallet to this unidentified address." "Control" has a specific meaning under UCC Article 12, which was ratified in 2022 and is slowly being adopted by U.S. states. It links some rights to control/possession of keys, even if a blockchain asset may have been stolen before being sold, https:/…
What is the purpose of this comment?
> The wallet has sold around $200 million worth of stETH so far
If some of those sales took place within jurisdiction of a U.S. state that has ratified UCC Article 12, then the buyer of the stolen cryptocurrency is now the new legal owner.
Bybit CEO Ben Zhou wrote on X that a hacker "took control of the specific ETH cold wallet and transferred all the ETH in the cold wallet to this unidentified address." "Control" has a specific meaning under UCC Article 12, which was ratified in 2022 and is slowly being adopted by U.S. states. It links some rights to control/possession of keys, even if a blockchain asset may have been stolen before being sold, https:/…
As in: "The hacker gained access to" "The hacker took charge of" "The hacker assumed authority over"
The entirety of the cryptocurrency world is so obviously a "Chesterton's Fence" situation. Every pseudo-intellectual thinks that the fiscal world is "too complicated" and they're going to "simplify" it by making some token, only for people to realize that the monetary world is just complicated , and they have to reinvent everything that already existed in the traditional banking system. I had to do some work on an AC…
What you are describing are the systems of power which create a stable financial system. That is, one where you can put a nickel into a bank account and expect it to be there in a year or a hundred years.
That indeed requires a complex web of power structures, because its top line goal is to be stable and dependable. And stability within a complex landscape requires an equally complex network of power.
Crypto provides the exact opposite value: it cannot be controlled, no matter how robust your power structure is. It can be insured, at a significant cost, but not controlled.
That means in the face of even totalitarian powers someone could still move crypto across any boundary that is permeable to information, which it turns out is a set that roughly approximates the set of all boundaries.
This is a terrible way to pay for candy bars, because candy bars are not worth insuring.
But what I think the crypto opponents miss is that there is a set of transactions—some criminal, some legal, some immoral, some righteous—which cannot be made in a state controlled financial systems.
And that these transactions are what gives crypto value as a currency.
To me, where I would like the debate to go is not “is crypto a scam?” but “how does society protect people from the violence facilitated by crypto?”
Yes, financial “violence”, which can be insured against, but also real violence: human trafficking, extortion, etc.
We anarchists sometimes like to pretend that without rulers we will be freed to care for each other. But in the shadow of a history of violence, there will be more violence too.
And the “crypto is a scam” argument I fear is a red herring that distracts from this, the real issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
let’s not forget that Satoshi rolled back Bitcoin in 2010, whereas Ethereum was a surgical state change within a smart contract
What are you talking about in 2010?
Other transactions besides the one that created 184 billion BTC in that block was effectively “rolled back” on the working chain.
Bybit CEO Ben Zhou wrote on X that a hacker "took control of the specific ETH cold wallet and transferred all the ETH in the cold wallet to this unidentified address." "Control" has a specific meaning under UCC Article 12, which was ratified in 2022 and is slowly being adopted by U.S. states. It links some rights to control/possession of keys, even if a blockchain asset may have been stolen before being sold, https:/…
I think (I assume but could be wrong) in the average CEO X-tweet "control" likely only means 'control' nobody was reading through UCC Article 12 while drafting this message As in: "The hacker gained access to" "The hacker took charge of" "The hacker assumed authority over"
Society has devolved a bit when not long ago a heist like this would involve sieging Nakatomi Plaza, now it takes just finding a bug in someone's defective Python codes.
I wonder how many programmers resort to crime after they were laid off and couldn't find a job. Like soldiers after a war.
[flagged]
The genius behind crypto is that it's not just the extremely gullible. I know a fair number of really smart people, academics even, that have bought into the cryptocurrency hype. It has this kind of veil of "high techness" to it that is appealing to smart-but-uninformed people (like me in 2021). I'm embarrassed that I fell for it, but on the bright side it does make me a bit more sympathetic for other people who also…
I don't know about you, but I barely follow cryptocurrency news, and I've still been hearing about major players getting "hacked" several times a year for over a decade.
Either it's Mt Gox or FTX or The DAO or Bitfinex or QuadrigaCX or Terra/Luna or rug-pull meme coins or dollar-backed coins that actually aren't or any of a dozen other things.
Anyone who isn't being extremely careful to avoid scams, given the constant drumbeat of reports about how you have to be extremely careful to avoid scams when dealing with cryptocurrency, is pretty gullible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s well within the daily trading volume.
Exchanges will blacklist the addresses that hold the hacked ETH. They won't be able to deposit, or if they can deposit, the ETH will be frozen by the exchange.
The entirety of the cryptocurrency world is so obviously a "Chesterton's Fence" situation. Every pseudo-intellectual thinks that the fiscal world is "too complicated" and they're going to "simplify" it by making some token, only for people to realize that the monetary world is just complicated , and they have to reinvent everything that already existed in the traditional banking system. I had to do some work on an AC…
For what it’s worth, I’m a “crypto believer” and I have never considered ease of use to be one of its selling points. What you are describing are the systems of power which create a stable financial system. That is, one where you can put a nickel into a bank account and expect it to be there in a year or a hundred years. That indeed requires a complex web of power structures, because its top line goal is to be stable…
Or if government is smarter, they can slowly gain control over it. Allow trading traceable currencies via official channels, but with good KYC measures. Do not allow fully anonymous systems. Go after mixers. Prosecute exchanges which do not verify their customers. Once there are plenty of government-sanctioned exchanges in the country, there will be little incentive to create unsanctioned ones, and someone with coins that were marked "North Korean-originated" won't be able to spend them in the country.