BTC Stolen from Poloniex • Hacker News Board

Re: BTC Stolen from Poloniex

#131

Post by pjc50 » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 3:01 PM UTC

aestra wrote: post #103

danielweber wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most credit card purchases, like almost everything in the financial system, are reversible. Things that aren't reversible are the exception, and those are the places where, pun intended, the buck stops. If someone gets my credit card, they can't get $50,000 out of it and disappear. It's very very hard to buy cash equivalents via credit card, and this is not an accident. Nothing in Bitcoin is reversible. Everyone work…

>Things that aren't reversible are the exception For thousands of years the only way to pay for something was with non-revertible mediums, either cash or bartering for other goods. Reversible transactions are new in the grand scheme of things. If I ran a bank and didn't bother to lock the doors or keep the money in a safe and someone comes in and steals the money, I don't get to do a chargeback and get the cash back.

Irreversible + bulk automatable = disaster: fraudster can bleed the system dry before anyone notices, and damage cannot be repaired.

Irreversible + manual = opportunities for people to spot the fraud; volume limited by amount of work required to commit each fraud.

Reversible + automatable = opportunity to spot and undo the fraud.

Re: BTC Stolen from Poloniex

#132

Post by xivzgrev » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 9:59 PM UTC

ivraatiems wrote: post #105

anigbrowl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cat sharing companies Off-topic, but as someone with too many cats I would like this idea to take off pronto. I could use a full night's sleep. I'll show myself out.

Snapcat: A whole new way to share your cats. YC '14, here I come.

Catsmolo: A social network to share your cat with your local neighbors. Mobile app enables you to browse current inventory or list your cat. Members can up and downvote cats, based on cuteness or difficulty.

SOMOLO FTW

Re: BTC Stolen from Poloniex

#133

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 8:06 AM UTC

mpyne wrote: post #126

jnbiche wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But here's where I disagree with you: it costs literally millions of dollars to get the needed state money licenses to legally operate a Bitcoin exchange[1]. FinCEN has been very explicit that they consider Bitcoin exchanges to be money transmitters. So those millions are money that could go toward building the infrastructure you describe. Bitcoin companies like Coinbase who have finished their Series A have to spend…

Well as long as the cost is fairly applied to new entrants then I don't see that as being problematic per se (as after all, any new entrant will have to deal with the same selectivity). In fact that's practically the point, to ensure that the "fly by night" Bitcoin exchange shops that couldn't survive a theft of 50 Bitcoins without going under don't actually make it into legit business. Yes, this is unfortunate for t…

[deleted]

Re: BTC Stolen from Poloniex

#134

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 8:11 AM UTC

mpyne wrote: post #113

jnbiche wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps, in the case of the most cautious developers. But right now, I'd be happy with just competent developers. And to me, at least, it's pretty clear why competent, responsible developers are not participating in this space -- we're too frightened by possible government sanctions.

> And to me, at least, it's pretty clear why competent, responsible developers are not participating in this space -- we're too frightened by possible government sanctions. I don't think that's clear at all. In fact I think bunderbunder has it right. Those who make the best products will require a large enough expense for formal design, implementation, secure hardware acquisition, physical security (i.e. no simply ru…

[deleted]

Re: BTC Stolen from Poloniex

#135

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 8:30 AM UTC

mpyne wrote: post #126

jnbiche wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But here's where I disagree with you: it costs literally millions of dollars to get the needed state money licenses to legally operate a Bitcoin exchange[1]. FinCEN has been very explicit that they consider Bitcoin exchanges to be money transmitters. So those millions are money that could go toward building the infrastructure you describe. Bitcoin companies like Coinbase who have finished their Series A have to spend…

Well as long as the cost is fairly applied to new entrants then I don't see that as being problematic per se (as after all, any new entrant will have to deal with the same selectivity). In fact that's practically the point, to ensure that the "fly by night" Bitcoin exchange shops that couldn't survive a theft of 50 Bitcoins without going under don't actually make it into legit business. Yes, this is unfortunate for t…

[deleted]

Re: BTC Stolen from Poloniex

#136

Post by yuhong » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 8:30 AM UTC

mpyne wrote: post #113

jnbiche wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps, in the case of the most cautious developers. But right now, I'd be happy with just competent developers. And to me, at least, it's pretty clear why competent, responsible developers are not participating in this space -- we're too frightened by possible government sanctions.

> And to me, at least, it's pretty clear why competent, responsible developers are not participating in this space -- we're too frightened by possible government sanctions. I don't think that's clear at all. In fact I think bunderbunder has it right. Those who make the best products will require a large enough expense for formal design, implementation, secure hardware acquisition, physical security (i.e. no simply ru…

I think deposit insurance is a better solution to the problem. Part of underwriting Bitcoin deposit insurance would be a code and design review and proof of reserves etc, and it would also allow reimbursement if it does get hacked.