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

How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

bitcointalk.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 251 posts

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#221

Post by rodgerd »

DanBC wrote: post #16
mootothemax wrote: post #12

Mtgox has clearly not had time to respond, and I fear they will claim this is my fault as I have seen in other posts online that they say "report it to the police". They should compensate me 100%. This shows one of the fundamental problems with Bitcoin-related services: when people get taken advantage of, they expect to be compensated. While in the real world, banks will often compensate you if you're the victim of f…

...and banks will only compensate if they really have to because there are laws compelling them to do so. If they can get away with saying it's your fault they will. While I have sympathy for the author it was a pretty silly thing to do.

No, banks will compensate you if they feel that the reputational damage of not doing so is worse than than the financial damage of doing so.

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#222

Post by dragonwriter »

Karunamon wrote: post #213
burntsushi wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll re-quote the first sentence of my post: > I agree that MtGox shouldn't be doing any kind of refunding in this case. You didn't respond to my central point: blaming the victim.

>You didn't respond to my central point: blaming the victim. Your central point is without merit. The "victim" is a victim, not of MtGox, but their own poor decisions.

> Your central point is without merit. The "victim" is a victim, not of MtGox, but their own poor decisions.

Their decisions may have made themselves vulnerable to the attack, but (based on the information provided) they are a victim of a third-party that is neither the MtGox nor themselves -- that is, the people that actually used the malware to steal the BTC.

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#223

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

socillion wrote: post #200
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I had noted in another comment, this product that this person is using is advertised on hackforums. ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5531500 ) So I've gone on hackforums, searched for poutinecoutu, and what do you know? This might be him. http://www.hackforums.net/member.php?action=profile&uid=... So let's look at their recent posts: http://www.hackforums.net/search.php?action=results&sid=... >RE: Bitcoin pr…

You can easily check if the username is taken via the register form - it is. Flaw: someone could potentially have tried the same thing before me and accidentally registered it.

Right. I have no clue what to do now, though.

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#224

Post by fyi80 »

chimeracoder wrote: post #203
kbolino wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct (albeit substituting "class" for "source file" since runtime Java has no concept of source files), although the guarantee is stronger than that. Any two identical literals will refer to the same object, since literals are interned, regardless of what classes "own" them. Chapter and verse: JLS §3.10.5, http://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-3.html#...

Caveat: This will yield different results whether you initialize the string as > String a = "foo"; vs. > String a = new String("foo");

Parent wrote:

"Any two identical literals"

The second 'a' is not a literal.

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#225

Post by im3w1l »

burntsushi wrote: post #194
dreen wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will you demand compensation from your local authorities because they did not prevent you walking into a dark alley?

I'll re-quote the first sentence of my post: > I agree that MtGox shouldn't be doing any kind of refunding in this case. You didn't respond to my central point: blaming the victim.

I want to discuss this in more detail as I see this argument come up now and then.

I think we first have to discuss the word blame. What do you actually mean by "blame"?

Merriam-Webster: >1 to find fault with : censure >2 a : to hold responsible > b : to place responsibility for

Do you agree with this?

For the sake of the argument I will assume yes. According to this definition did dreen blame the victim? Yes. dreen claims that the victim acted wrong: Victim should not have ran the applet. Using my powers of intuition [i.e. shout if I am wrong] I assert that dreen considers the victim responsible for securing his bitcoins. A responsibility the victim failed. Hence blame.

Now using further powers of intuition, I believe that you, burntsushi, think that blaming the victim is inherently wrong. Interpreted strictly that means that the behaviour of a victim is always flawless, and and a victim always lacks responsibility for bad outcomes. This is in my mind a quite ridiculous view, so I don't think this is what you mean. So what DO you mean? I will consider two possible guesses and discuss them.

>The thief acted wrong. Stealing the coins was immoral. -I think we can all agree with this statement. Hence no need to state "you are blaming the victim" so insistently. >But then you shouldn't say "your own fault entirely" -Maybe you are right. Could be argued that everyone gets this anyway. Unsure.

>We should pity, not scorn the victim I probably, maybe agree with this. Clearly the victim is in crappy situation and has my sympathies. On the other hand, scorn discourages others from following his example, which could be useful.

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#227

Post by dragontamer »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #161
RyanZAG wrote: post #76

Isn't this exactly what Bitcoin was created for - to allow unregulated access to currency? I guess people don't really realize what unregulated actually means - and nor do they realize why you really do want regulated currency. This kind of thing happens all the time with real banks, but with real banks, all transactions can be traced and reversed. Law enforcement can follow the required documentation to find the own…

BitCoin, the Internet's answer to "Capture the Flag" now with scoring in dollars.

You mean... scoring in Bitcoins :-p

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#228

Post by zenocon »

RyanZAG wrote: post #76

Isn't this exactly what Bitcoin was created for - to allow unregulated access to currency? I guess people don't really realize what unregulated actually means - and nor do they realize why you really do want regulated currency. This kind of thing happens all the time with real banks, but with real banks, all transactions can be traced and reversed. Law enforcement can follow the required documentation to find the own…

Yay! More regulation for you, and you, and you. It's like Oprah giving away Pontiac Azkeks. Yea, he f'd up, but let's not FINCEN our way to utopia.

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#229

Post by mikeash »

antr wrote: post #5

I'm not doubting Bitcoin's potential to become a true currency, but unless this type of smash-and-grab situation can be traced/avoided/insured (whatever the right mechanism is) it is going to be extremely hard to make ordinary businesses and people use it. People don't place value in the currency itself, but the system that provides certain security around it.

Cash is vulnerable to actual smash-and-grab attacks, wherein physical items are properly smashed and grabbed. People still use it extensively.

The problem with bitcoin isn't necessarily that it's too much like cash, but that people don't treat it enough like they would treat cash. Few people would put their cash in a robot that would hand it over blindly to anyone with the right password, but that's effectively what they're doing by holding bitcoins on an exchange like Mt.Gox.

Re: How I got robbed of 34 btc on Mt.Gox today

#230

Post by mikeash »

sequoia wrote: post #180
burntsushi wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would be surprised if MtGox decides to refund you I agree that MtGox shouldn't be doing any kind of refunding in this case. > what happened is your own fault entirely You're blaming the victim. If I'm walking down a dark alley and someone pulls a gun on me and takes my wallet, is it my fault because I decided to walk down a dark alley? Not at all. The only person at fault here is the cracker who perpetrated the s…

+-------------------------------------------------------+ | SECURITY WARNING! | | You are attempting to walk down a dark alley, | | which could be dangerous. Only walk down | | dark alleys you are familiar with and trust. | | By walking down this alley you assume responsibility | | for the attendant risks. | | | | Do you still wish to walk down the dark alley? | | [x] Yes [ ] Cancel | +-------------------------------…

Fault and blame is not zero-sum, a point many people seem to miss. Realizing that the victim has some (and he certainly does here, and in many other cases) does not in any way reduce what attaches to the perpetrator.
Post reply on HN