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

The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 409 posts

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#341

Post by pornel »

colinmhayes wrote: post #271
pornel wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blacklisting doesn't have to be a feature of a blockchain. It's enough if most countries decide to make it illegal for anyone to spend coins received from a blacklisted address. It's not easy to enforce of course, but people would be afraid they get in trouble if they're ever deanonimized, and businesses could be required to report their trades, just like taxes. This will force creation and use of wallet reputation c…

Everyone already knows mixers are holding illicit coins. It doesn't matter because mixers don't actually "want" anything. They're just code in the ether. You send your coins to an address along with a receiver address and the smart contract sends coins to the other address. How do courts stop that without shutting down exactly what makes blockchains valuable?

If a bank robber wanted to swap blacklisted $100 bills with you, would you? Would you just swap them at their face value, or at a discount knowing that it gives you a non-zero risk of having negative legal consequences?

Mixers will have to change their policies in order to avoid becoming a market for lemons in which everyone loses.

I do not expect governments to worry a tiniest bit about destroying value of an anti-government technology.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#342

Post by luxuryballs »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #65
SamBam wrote: post #50

> But in our email exchanges, he argued that he'd executed a perfectly legal series of trades. In real finance, there is an understanding that technical loopholes can exist, since not every outcome can be foreseen when writing laws, but the legal system can frequently prosecute against a series of actions which are, individually, legal, but which together are taken in order to achieve something illegal. That is, mode…

I've seen this argument regarding smart contracts several times now, and I don't think it makes any sense. It's like robbing someone in real life, then claiming you did nothing wrong because you didn't violate the "laws" of physics. Those are two entirely separate things. In the world of smart contracts code is indeed law, but that doesn't change the fact that in the real world law is law, and the fact that you used…

I think legally speaking you’re correct, they would need to pass some sort of law or ruling saying that smart contract code can not be ruled incorrect/fraudulent/negligent etc. which nobody is going to pass, so a judge will just laugh at the idea that crypto is above the law.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#343

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #321
sushid wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I primarily care because I think there's money to be made. But I also think the shift directionally makes sense. Traditional finance (really most transactions for that matter) have moved towards fewer middlemen dependent, more democratized forms of transactions (e.g. wealthy folks can call their traders to buy/sells stock -> open to middle class -> no need to call traders -> no fee no minimum online trading). To me,…

> I primarily care because I think there's money to be made. Crypto /thread

Stock market /thread

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#344

Post by aidenn0 »

motohagiography wrote: post #292
aidenn0 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If he has the money, fleeing before charges were laid was probably even rational, as there is no reason to expect the legal system is equipped to deliver justice in something so new. TFA claims he was originally offered to keep 10% (over a million dollars) from this hack, free and clear. Not agreeing to that deal meant willingly putting himself at the mercy of said legal system. Talking about a single decision as r…

This is like a casino offering to let you leave with 10% of your winnings because their dealer didn't shuffle the deck. Not an reasonable expectation. I will go back to this idea of an endogenous logic calculation vs. exogenous parsing errors description, where so long as he did not misrepresent the identities or sabotage the functions of any of the sources or destinations of the funds he used in his system, he shoul…

> This is like a casino offering to let you leave with 10% of your winnings because their dealer didn't shuffle the deck. Not an reasonable expectation.

If the casino has Mafia backing, then maybe it is reasonable...

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#345

Post by colinmhayes »

pornel wrote: post #341
colinmhayes wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone already knows mixers are holding illicit coins. It doesn't matter because mixers don't actually "want" anything. They're just code in the ether. You send your coins to an address along with a receiver address and the smart contract sends coins to the other address. How do courts stop that without shutting down exactly what makes blockchains valuable?

If a bank robber wanted to swap blacklisted $100 bills with you, would you? Would you just swap them at their face value, or at a discount knowing that it gives you a non-zero risk of having negative legal consequences? Mixers will have to change their policies in order to avoid becoming a market for lemons in which everyone loses. I do not expect governments to worry a tiniest bit about destroying value of an anti-g…

mixers are currently a market for lemons. No one uses a mixer on clean crypto. Hasn't been a problem, but I guess the government could start banning exchanges from accepting crypto that has ever been used at a mixer, although eventually won't it all pass through one?

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#346

Post by thaway2839 »

jeffbee wrote: post #225
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of the appeal of crypto/smart contracts is that they are final with little to no recourse, humans can't intervene and exploit failure modes which individuals using the so-called contracts can't defend against. Corporations and wealthy individuals with influence in the writing of this legal system, with massive amounts of financial resources, with negligible moral agency, and with limited criminal liabil…

I don't know what jurisprudence you live under, but under English common law (also America, Canada, etc) - which, I must say, I also always denounce and rarely defend - inequitable negotiating power between parties to a contract is considered by courts when adjudicating whether parties have broken it or can be awarded damages. We don't have a system where big powerful organizations can just dictate contracts to power…

Unfortunately US courts have taken a very dim view towards adjusting balance of power.

For example, I don't think there's anywhere else where the mere act of purchasing a product or service can result in you giving up the right to sue the company in court and be forced to enter arbitration with an arbiter of the company's choice.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#347

Post by randomhodler84 »

turtledove wrote: post #313
randomhodler84 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its the same. You have an irrational fear/hatred of decentralized peer-to-peer money. Grifts unwinding is a thing, but don’t throw out the baby with the bath water here. I fully intend on using Bitcoin for the next few decades, both as a saving and international remittance system. It’s from a place of spite. Don’t be spiteful, it makes you a bad person.

It's not the same, and you are delusional to think that I'm being irrational. A 401k has regulations. My broker has a fiduciary duty to act in my best interest. The money invested into the markets helps power the economy. And yes, I am spiteful towards grifters and conmen. Don't be tolerant of them, it makes you a bad person.

I don’t think tolerance makes you a bad person at all. Quite the opposite. Just be respectful and don’t be joyful when others are down.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#348

Post by klyrs »

bombcar wrote: post #80
criddell wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are lots of stories lately about stolen NFTs. The podcast ReplyAll did an episode where they tracked down the current owner of a stolen NFT. He had sympathy for the original owner but he had no intention of turning it over. I don’t get why purchasing a stolen NFT is different than purchasing a stolen guitar from a pawn shop. Shouldn’t the previous owner be able to use the courts to demand the return of the item…

The whole point of an NFT is that the ownership is on the blockchain and guaranteed by said blockchain - if the courts can "force" return of the NFT than the NFT isn't actually synonymous with the ownership, and so then is kinda pointless.

> if the courts can "force" return of the NFT than the NFT isn't actually synonymous with the ownership, and so then is kinda pointless.

That's just the thing, isn't it? Courts have zero interest in upholding whatever boneheaded ideals that NFTs are meant to represent. Receiving stolen goods is a crime, and that's something courts are entirely geared towards resolving.

Re: The math prodigy whose hack upended DeFi won’t return funds

#350

Post by Dylan16807 »

DangitBobby wrote: post #330
Dylan16807 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An NFT exists purely in the realm of thought, and the owner is whoever knows the password. Therefore phishing the seed phrase is not "actually stealing" it within the rules of NFT. And outside the rules of NFT it's just a receipt; it's worthless. It's taking a picture of a picture of a bike, not stealing it.

That doesn't make sense. An NFT exists purely in the realm of reality. It has a real (non-fungible!) representation as 1s and 0s and it's etched into "the blockchain". That's just as "real" as the atoms that makeup a bicycle. Arguably, much less valuable, but still real. At the end of the day, the NFT is represented by atoms as well. If you steal my bike, that's theft. If you steal my DVD collection, that's theft. If…

The actual bits are public information though. You can't steal those like you can steal atoms.
Post reply on HN