Live data from Hacker News

Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

theguardian.com

81–90 of 125 posts

Re: Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

#81
post #56
post #11

Forget the bitcoins, why would you throw away a perfectly good, supposedly working, hard drive? That's a shame. And before secure formatting it?

Most people just throw away their laptops when it breaks for whatever reason. Even if the HD was ok, they won't even bother opening it up.

True, but most people don't have bitcoins.

Re: Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

#82

Offer a £1m cash reward to landfill owner

The original owner has less of a legal claim to the harddrive than the landfill owner, so if the landfill owner were to find it why would he return it for 1/4th the value?

Re: Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

#83
Eventually over time, once all the bitcoins are mined and out and about in the world. They'll get lost for various reasons. Is there a way to recover these lost bitcoins and return them to circulation or is the artificial scarcity of bitcoins going to turn into real scarcity and drive up prices even more?

Re: Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

#85
post #61

A not-unreasonable penalty for risking pollution of his ground water, especially since he probably did the same thing to electronics many times before. I can't believe nobody is talking about this. Illegal in many US states. http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?story...

The actual story was sourced entirely from this reddit post: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rilcj/as_a_person_... Which was sourced entirely from "someone in the IRC channel". Whether it's true or not is one thing, but if it is then the reddit source also says: > He went to the "recycling centre" and they showed him around. This makes some sense, I've 'recycled' before at places like this: http://www.houns…

    The thing is... I don't actually believe that electrical equipment is really recycled
I had something similar happen when I went to my local recycling center a year after moving into a new town. I had carefully squirreled away a pile of batteries (AA, AAA, D-cells, etc), old smoke detectors (which contain trace amounts of radioactive elements), and some unused cans of latex paint. Saved it all for the big trip to the recycling center.

The guy told me that they'd accept it all, but next time I might as well toss everything but the paint into the trash, as that's what they were going to do with it. Pretty disappointing.

Re: Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

#87
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This means the value (or potential value) of each BTC has gone up. By an ever decreasing significancy as the market cap expands and BTC of value are held onto with care.

I think there may be some confusion on my part in understanding your point. To the second part, BTC loss will hopefully decrease. If loss/theft continues it's represents a significant UX issue that will inhibit the growth of bitcoin. To your first part, why would 1 BTC lost when it's worth $1000 have a greater significance than 1 BTC lost when it's worth $1,000,000? EDIT: Unless you mean any individual wallet's share…

> Unless you mean any individual wallet's share of BTC is likely to be less, in which case the odds of losing as much BTC in a single incident is significantly reduced.

Exactly. The only common narrative of these lost BTC is an earlier ignorance by the owner and a rapid increase in price. That is the only reason "millions" get lost. Once prices stabilizes via increased market cap and average BTC/owner is reduced, this narrative stops being prevalent and large scale.

Re: Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

#88
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there may be some confusion on my part in understanding your point. To the second part, BTC loss will hopefully decrease. If loss/theft continues it's represents a significant UX issue that will inhibit the growth of bitcoin. To your first part, why would 1 BTC lost when it's worth $1000 have a greater significance than 1 BTC lost when it's worth $1,000,000? EDIT: Unless you mean any individual wallet's share…

> Unless you mean any individual wallet's share of BTC is likely to be less, in which case the odds of losing as much BTC in a single incident is significantly reduced. Exactly. The only common narrative of these lost BTC is an earlier ignorance by the owner and a rapid increase in price. That is the only reason "millions" get lost. Once prices stabilizes via increased market cap and average BTC/owner is reduced, thi…

I still have a question, when will prices stabilize? Why does an increased market cap imply stable prices?

Re: Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

#89
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

£4m penalty for discarding one hard drive is "not-unreasonable"? boggle You weren't on the Apple-Samsung or Newegg juries, were you?

1. I believe penalties for polluting our externalities should be greater, yes. As evidence I cite the fact that people keep polluting with existing penalties/enforcement. The tragedy of the commons is a very real thing. 2. I wasn't recommending that be the legal penalty. But if karma decides to be a bitch to this guy, hey I ain't complainin'. 3. I was exaggerating for effect. Seemed for a good cause: We human beings…

I wonder what the negative externalities of a 4 million pound fine for minor littering would be.

Re: Missing hard drive containing Bitcoins worth £4m in Newport landfill site

#90
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. I believe penalties for polluting our externalities should be greater, yes. As evidence I cite the fact that people keep polluting with existing penalties/enforcement. The tragedy of the commons is a very real thing. 2. I wasn't recommending that be the legal penalty. But if karma decides to be a bitch to this guy, hey I ain't complainin'. 3. I was exaggerating for effect. Seemed for a good cause: We human beings…

I wonder what the negative externalities of a 4 million pound fine for minor littering would be.

Penalties work best when they are large enough to hurt, but without causing irreversible harm. There's lots of research on what humans find pleasant and unpleasant (Thinking: Fast and Slow, etc.), which is often unrelated to any actual damage. This seems like an example of one such idea that I'll call unrealized opportunity cost. Seeing what might have been won't matter in the long run, but perhaps it'll rise up in people's psyche enough to alter their behavior.
Post reply on HN