161–170 of 564 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
>math and code were nearly perfect with zero peer review Bitcoin had to be forked in the early years due to critical errors in the original code. There was nothing perfect about it.
Just for a little context luke jr was infamous on cryptocurrency forums for being adamant that the sun revolved around the earth, all religions other than catholicism are evil, there is an "ethical aspect to slavery" and that bitcoin's 1 KB/s throughput was too much and should be cut down even further. https://archive.is/sS5Ml https://archive.is/DrP83 https://np.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/36w6nw/why_did... ht…
But yes, Luke Jr's comment was a non sequitur for two reasons. (Any Catholic analysis of Jesus is necessarily a bit of a non sequitur, since Jesus and his disciples weren't... Catholic. )
The geocentrism discussion is interestingly similar: in the same thread he makes two claims, one saying that geocentrism is equivalent to heliocentrism (which is mathematically true, and which is better depends on what specific system you are modelling), but then also says that the Sun orbits the Earth is true and scientific consensus, contradicting himself.
There is a very easy rewrite of what he wrote that makes it totally fine, and probably what he "meant": models are broadly equivalent, choose one based on convenience for the problem at hand, and spirtual truth is independent of science. But since he appears to have strict religious beliefs in the infallibility of Scripture, he can't go all the way to commit to saying that the Scripture is scientifically wrong, though he did hint at it.
He's either a very poor communicator (like many forum posters are in forum posts) or his thought process is quite inconsistent and self-contradictory without him noticing.
I still think the reason Satoshi vanished is that he lost his private key and couldn't handle the embarrassment.
[flagged]
The US government doesn't need to burn coal to fund the clandestine services. They just put it in a budget line item whose contents are classified.
[1]: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposu...
Would this happen if his wallet was a hardware wallet like a ledger or trezor?
999,999 times out of a million, the answer is no. the 1 time out of a million is when an attacker manages to intercept the hardware wallet being shipped to the victim and tamper with it.
Would be interesting to know how his BTC were stolen. Because he is a BTC core developer, I believe he followed the best practices, like not writing down his password. So infection or keylogger?
Storing most of his bitcoin in a single hot wallet seems to go against the best practices, no?
Dude has 8 kids and someone is claiming it was around 200 BTC. That's ~$3.3M down the tubes. Ouch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
>math and code were nearly perfect with zero peer review Bitcoin had to be forked in the early years due to critical errors in the original code. There was nothing perfect about it.
It's not a statement about such things being impossible, just unlikely to come from a single individual working in complete isolation up until the bitcion whitepaper release.
Additionally this alone would be merely peculiar on it's own, coupled with the lack of retrospective investigations uncovering -anything at all- significant about the person moves it to suspicious. Adding in the subject matter of cryptography + pseudo anonymous money and it strains credulity not to consider
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It can be very difficult to protect against targeted attacks from adversaries. Not really. The device used to sign transactions should never be connected to the Internet.
If the level is millions of dollars, that device could be physically stolen, or some aspect of the cryptography/auth scheme could be attacked through a 0-day. Of course, it's also possible he just wanted something closer to the convenience of a bank account/credit card instead of a pile of cash and failed in the opsec.
Keep a small amount in a hot wallet for convenience and a larger amount (but not too large) in a cold wallet accessed via hardware. But the bulk shouldn’t be accessible without breaking into at least two lock vaults.
https://bitcoinhackers.org/@lukedashjr his mastodon feed indicates that one of his servers was physically compromised multiple times. Seems like he should have been more paranoid about securing his coins with that knowledge?
Weird he cheaped up on servers paying 55 a month to some random vps provider.
devil's advocate: is DigitalOcean in this category?
Context now that the editorialised title has changed, this is a core Bitcoin developer. These things happen every day, but happening to a core developer (if confirmed!) who has a deep understanding of the systems and security indicates just how fragile crypto can be (in my opinion)
Exactly! if the experts can’t secure their accounts, what hope does anyone else have? Soon you will see people saying you should have done this or that complicated thing, or how somebody so smart could should have known better. No matter what they say it is never enough. This is why lack of consumer protections suck.
Agreed, and the problem is that this is a feature. Without that feature of a lack of central control, Bitcoin's main use case is invalid.