Live data from Hacker News

94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

twitter.com

591–600 of 747 posts

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#591
post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's just that with 51% of hashpower it becomes relatively cheap to perform such attack The qualitative difference is that with 51% of hashpower you can sustain the attack indefinitely. Other miners might get the occasional block and temporarily take the lead but in the long run you'll always have the longest chain using only blocks you've mined yourself. With less than 50% there's a chance that you can revert a tr…

That assumes that every other miner all mines the old chain. If you and ‘dumb’ miners that just use the longest chain add up to 51% then luck is enough.

No, I was assuming that the other miners continue the longest chain, not the old chain. But they'll include the transaction(s) you were trying to suppress in their blocks; they're not on your side. Each time they mine a block you have to start the attack over again, and the odds are not in your favor. You control under half the hashpower and you need to stay at least one block ahead of the main network. It's not a race you can win in the long term, even assuming a certain amount of luck.

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#592
post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I disagree, because historically major cryptos have allowed known attacks to succeed if they targeted a member of the public at large, and have defended only if they targeted named insiders. Surely you aren't going to make such a statement without examples! I can think of examples where things were attacked, including some of the largest value destructions, and insider status didn't help. For example, the multisig…

> the multisig thing that happened to Gav Wood I wasn't sure what you were referring to, but it looks like maybe https://cointelegraph.com/news/parity-multisig-wallet-hacked...

Yep, that's the one.

The astounding, insane decision to use "libraries" aka delegate call in any immutable smart contract always boggled my mind. The amount of space saved is so ludicrously small as to beggar belief. Hope the 10k or whatever worth of space savings (about 20 transactions worth) was worth it.

Anyway, he didn't get a roll back, and the $200m in value that disappeared didn't either.

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#593
post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the multisig thing that happened to Gav Wood I wasn't sure what you were referring to, but it looks like maybe https://cointelegraph.com/news/parity-multisig-wallet-hacked...

Yep, that's the one. The astounding, insane decision to use "libraries" aka delegate call in any immutable smart contract always boggled my mind. The amount of space saved is so ludicrously small as to beggar belief. Hope the 10k or whatever worth of space savings (about 20 transactions worth) was worth it. Anyway, he didn't get a roll back, and the $200m in value that disappeared didn't either.

[deleted]

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#594
Interesting theory via Twitter:

> If you look at BCH and BSV you will see the coins also moved - this looks like someone moved to do a split of forks. The good news (if that is the case) is that this likely will mean sale of BCH and BSV, not BTC!

https://twitter.com/shanepicker/status/1170517377441849351

If that's the case, it implies that someone is looking to liquidate the value of their BCH/BSV they got for free in the forks, and need to move the BTC too since otherwise the transaction would be valid in all 3 chains.

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ostensible justification: some trivial amount of money laundering could be traced to the US (iirc a few thousand dollars worth). Real justification: Extraterritoriality is a thing you get to do when you're an empire.

Trivial amount of money laundering BTC-e haha?

Read the indictment for yourself. Namely page 16 and 17 which account for charges 3-21 of the indictment (the vast majority of it).

The only company within US jurisdiction that BTC-E did business with is a company called "tradehill". The amounts of money moved were small, ranging between $12.60 and $17,000. Less than $100,000 was moved overall and all of it was moved in early 2012.

The US doesn't care about tracking down the $12.60 that you laundered on 24 January 2012 like it says in the indictment. The US is just using that as an excuse to impose it's money laundering laws outside of it's jurisdiction. The indictment is a pretext for extraterritoriality. Extraterritoriality is a thing you get to do when you're an empire.

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#596
post #111

I'd take issue on two points. First, "wallets' don't exist in the Bitcoin protocol. Second, the tool being used is not sophisticated enough to list the inputs and outputs, giving the false impression that something unusual is "unknown." Try this link to get details: https://blockstream.info/tx/4410c8d14ff9f87ceeed1d65cb58e7c7... There are numerous inputs and a single pay-to-script-hash (P2SH) output. The relatively h…

The point about a wallet not being a thing in Bitcoin makes zero sense as anyone understand what the tweet means.

Your second point makes even less sense. A bug bounty on what exactly? Why would anyone attempt to erase this transaction when it can be resubmitted?

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#597
post #111

I'd take issue on two points. First, "wallets' don't exist in the Bitcoin protocol. Second, the tool being used is not sophisticated enough to list the inputs and outputs, giving the false impression that something unusual is "unknown." Try this link to get details: https://blockstream.info/tx/4410c8d14ff9f87ceeed1d65cb58e7c7... There are numerous inputs and a single pay-to-script-hash (P2SH) output. The relatively h…

> It effectively establishes a billion dollar bounty for any party who can rewrite enough blocks to erase it. I don't really agree with that statement. Yes, someone could mount a 51% attack to rewrite that block. However, it would be pretty straightforward to see what was happening (and which nodes were the malicious actors). If that did happen, the possible outcomes would be: 1. The value of bitcoin would fall to ba…

> 1. The value of bitcoin would fall to basically 0. The reason bitcoin has any value at all really has to do with trust - belief that the protocol is secure and can't be broken. In this case, an easily detectable spending "override" would cause faith in the protocol to evaporate.

That seems a little out there.

(1) There is something like 1 person who uses bitcoin to move billions of dollars around. The small-time users ((2) If they re-write the block, that doesn't mean that they've gotten away with it. Most countries have a legal system that would sit up and take notice if someone signs up for a billion dollar transaction, takes the goods and welches on paying.

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#598

Interesting theory via Twitter: > If you look at BCH and BSV you will see the coins also moved - this looks like someone moved to do a split of forks. The good news (if that is the case) is that this likely will mean sale of BCH and BSV, not BTC! https://twitter.com/shanepicker/status/1170517377441849351 If that's the case, it implies that someone is looking to liquidate the value of their BCH/BSV they got for free i…

There are other ways to split the coins. The simplest one would probably be to send a small amount of BCH to the address (which only exists on that chain), wait for it to confirm, and then move all the coins including the BCH making the transaction only valid on that chain. You can then do the same on the BSV chain, leaving the BTC chain untouched.

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could prevent you from spending the coins, though, by threatening anyone who accepts a transfer of the 'seized' coins.

Enforcing illegal torrents failed. I think a cryptocurrency ban would be similar. Also, the US made it illegal to hold gold between 1933 and 1974 but almost nobody turned in gold to the feds. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

They enforce it when you buy something real with the coins. A torrent is the thing you want, it isn't a currency to buy the thing you want.

Re: 94k Bitcoin (1B USD) transferred from unknown wallet to unknown wallet

#600
post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fidelity found that only 12 percent of millionaires inherited at least 10 percent of their net worth-- 88% are self-made. https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/on-retirement/articles/...

But the parent doesn't say that. It says that most people are rich because their parents are rich. Not because they inherited their wealth. Stable home life, good schools, good network, good attitude and a financial backstop in the event of disaster (which allows a higher risk appetite) are all things that correlate positively with becoming rich. Your parents can give these without a penny of inherited wealth.

I guess it depends on the definition of "rich". "Stable home life, good schools, good network, good attitude" usually attributed to somebody being in the "middle class" and is not necessarily considered "rich".
Post reply on HN