This is exactly why not everyone should learn how to code and be a developer.
Just like Mein Kampf is evidence not everyone should learn to read and write.
Godwin's law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
91–100 of 193 posts
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#92"No regulations" sounds great up until the moment when the bank gets robbed, the police don't care, and the only proof that it wasn't an inside job is a screenshot of the banker's email[1]. (Not that I think that it was an inside job. I just think this whole situation is kinda funny.) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=283756.msg3505394#ms...
If the owner is either incapable or unwilling to refund everybody's money then it doesn't even matter whether it was an inside job or not. It's pretty telling that he's posting a screenshot that essentially says nothing instead of being open about whether or not he'll be able to fully reimburse the people who lost money. I don't think it was explicitly stated, but it seems like people are just getting whatever percentage of the remaining funds that they owned.
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#93I don't know what you expected, Bitcoin enthusiasts. You bought into a system where coins could be permanently lost because you forgot a password. You bought into a system where the government cheerfully gained control of a large share of the market by simple confiscation. You have recreated money . But you aren't even good at it! You still think that simple cryptography will excuse you from the fact that you're gree…
You fail to point out that cash has all the same drawbacks: You can permanently lose cash if destroyed in a fire. Your cash or bank account can be confiscated easily by the government. Etc. Of course, unlike cash, Bitcoin has advantages because it offers the option to prevent these losses: you can back up a Bitcoin wallet. You can avoid government confiscation (password-protected wallet). Etc.
I'm always astounded by comparisons of bitcoin to paper cash - in 10 years we probably won't even be using paper cash and it is hardly ever used for large transactions now in advanced countries - paper cash is history. I think I've done about 5% at most of my spending in paper in the last month.
How about digital cash?
Also, Bitcoin can be confiscated by the government, along with the computer/server it sits on (see silk road). A $5 wrench or a jail cell will deal with your encryption. You can also permanently lose it if someone copies your wallet/backup and then spends it particularly while it is on one of these exchanges - that's because transactions are not reversible or traceable to a verified identity.
Technically, I think Bitcoin sounds really substantial and love the idea of creating/spending keys which avoid government inflation, but the axioms on which the usage is based are all wrong -
I've never lost money in a fire, and never will. I don't want to avoid government confiscation by technical means (which fail), I want to avoid it by law. I don't want to be able to launder money (or for others to). I don't want my transactions to be anonymous and to have no central authority and no accountability when theft/fraud happens.
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here is his proof that it is not an inside job: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=283756.msg3505394#ms...
I'm curious, how would someone go about proving this wasn't an inside job. Is that possible?
Short of the actual thief publicly outing himself, I can't really think of any way.
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can still use a "mixing" service, which takes many coins from many sources and mixes it in a way that you can't tell anymore what is the source of Bitcoins you received. Blockchain.info operates one of these.
Isn't that effectively bitcoin laundering?
Yep, that's exactly what it is.
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Different, James, I think. I'm not completely on board with your view, but your criticism here is valid and should be acknowledged by BTC proponents if they have any hope of observing their currency as realists. This kind of thing is a major drawback to using Bitcoin.
Have you never trolled the r/debatereligion circuit?
Oh, you have got the right guy then. :) but I don't know why you said james_d.
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#97What happens when bitcoins are stolen? Can they be use again without being traced?
It depends on what you mean by 'traced.' All bitcoin transactions are 'traced,' but you can just set up a few thousand wallets, transfer some money to all of them, send them between each other, trade some away to other people for things... it's not clear simply from the transaction log who actually took them, and who is just receiving BTC from an anonymous buyer for some sort of service.
From my understanding of bitcoin, doing this would be trivially easy to track also. However, I haven't studied this in great detail, so what is said here may be incorrect.
*simplified view Wallet 1 stores 50 bitcoin for(i = 1; i At this point, wallet 100000 contains exactly 1 bitcoin, that every transaction can be traced back to wallet 0. I understand that you would include more wallets, varying values, etc. But the point is every one of those bitcoins can be traced back to the original wallet which has the stolen funds.
The only way to make this behavior viable that I can see, is to have intermediate services that mix up funds.
So you have 50BTC Stolen funds in Wallet A. I run Wallet B, that takes transactions from many people. You give me the 50BTC that is stolen. I send you 50 bitcoins in small increments randomly over a set period of time, but from the other transactions I have. I do the same for other people, using the 50BTC that you sent me.
As such, my service mixed the coins through a common point, which now makes tracking the chain very difficult. If I didn't mix this with other people's transactions, and gave you back you're own coin numbers, the coins would just track through me back to the original stolen wallet.
This would need a party to offer this type of service, with enough volume to obscure the source, and for that service to not keep records (or not be inspected through other means).
Again, I want to re-iterate, my knowledge of bitcoin is somewhat superficial, so don't take this as an authoritative post on the subject.
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#981.1 Million US$ is a strong incentive to fake a theft. How can they prove it was someone else?
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#99From their website: "Security + privacy The most secure wallet ever created."
That's usually true... Until it isn't
Re: Inputs.io hacked – 4100 BTC stolen
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you think that a pile of anonymous people on the internet are going to respect a 'stolen' flag with no real downsides, I've got a bridge to sell you... Also, this is ignoring the entire problem of 'who decides what stolen means in a totally decentralized protocol?' That's non-trivial in and of itself.
I think you might be able to just start and end with the laundry cleaners. Blockchain.info could just decide that they won't wash coins that they know were from a high profile hack like this.
Then use Satoshi Dice first, or start your own game of chance with ridiculous odds floated with the stolen coins and exploit peoples natural greed.