Slashdot Mirror


Bitcoin Thefts Surge, DDoS Hackers Take Millions

CowboyRobot writes "In November, Denmark-based Bitcoin Internet Payment System suffered a DDoS attack. Unfortunately for users of the company's free online wallets for storing bitcoins, the DDoS attack was merely a smokescreen for a digital heist that quickly drained numerous wallets, netting the attackers a reported 1,295 bitcoins — worth nearly $1 million — and leaving wallet users with little chance that they'd ever see their money again. Given the potential spoils from a successful online heist, related attacks are becoming more common. But not all bitcoin heists have been executed via hack attacks or malware. For example, a China-based bitcoin exchange called GBL launched in May. Almost 1,000 people used the service to deposit bitcoins worth about $4.1 million. But the exchange was revealed to be an elaborate scam after whoever launched the site shut it down on October 26 and absconded with the funds. The warnings are all the same: 'Don't trust any online wallet', 'Find alternative storage solutions as soon as possible', and 'You don't have to keep your Bitcoins online with someone else. You can store your Bitcoins yourself, encrypted and offline.'"

58 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. A limited number of Bitcoins by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pretty soon they'll all be stolen, kinda like land

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by kthreadd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then someone will invent a new currency and the cycle repeat itself.

    2. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      a reported 1,295 bitcoins — worth nearly $1 million

      No they aren't really worth that much. Sure, you can extract $1 million from the market now, but if everyone does that the prices will fall to zero, the liquidity is pathetic compared to the $15 billion capitalization. And the only reason people don't run to crash the market is because they hope they will be able to earn even more in the future - a.k.a "The Greater Fool Game".

    3. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      They could easily sell all 1295 bitcoins and pocket $1 million due to buyers betting on the greater fool game.

      It depends. Will someone have the $1mil to buy them all? If they start selling in smaller lots, the value will go down with each transaction.

      The only difference between bitcoins and tulips is that at least you could smell the tulips.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by daninaustin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you can sell them for $1 million, then by definition they are worth $1 million.

    5. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by daninaustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      $1 million isn't all that much now. There are multiple exchanges processing 80k+ bitcoins per day.

    6. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by Bram+Stolk · · Score: 4, Informative

      The effect of selling is less than you think.
      mtgox is not the biggest exchange, but it can easily do a $1M exchange without affecting price in a too dramatic way.

      The nice thing is that their bid book is open for every one to see, so you can predict what happens to price at large orders.
      See: http://mtgoxlive.com/orders
      At the time of writing, a $1M sell or buy would move the mtgox exchange price 5% in either direction.

      If you sell in the largest exchange in the world, which I understand is in China, it would move the market less than this.

      --
      Bram Stolk http://stolk.org/tlctc/
    7. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by mysidia · · Score: 2

      It depends. Will someone have the $1mil to buy them all? If they start selling in smaller lots, the value will go down with each transaction.

      No they won't; the exchanges that take a percentage commission, have an interest in keeping the price high.

      Buys while the prices is going up proceed at full speed. As the prices start going down latency will gear up, via the artificial braking that prevents a sudden price drop --- the volume of successfully completed trades is forced down, by artificially added processing delays

      If the price goes down too much, the exchanges will halt trading and blame it on DDoS

    8. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So what is a bitcoin? Is bitcoin supposed to be a fluid currency or an investment? It seems that answer depends on who you ask and when. That is not a good thing for either side. If it's an investment, there is no way around it being a pyramid scheme because you are not investing in anything real, only some fake thing. No ones pays their electric bill or buys anything from a store with a stock certificate. If it is a currency, it's not going to go well if the main incentive of everyone that has it is holding on to it and waiting for the value to go up. Why spend it now if the value will be more tomorrow? The funny thing is everyone that has bitcoins always talks about how great it is in theory and the utopian version of what they vision it will become but they themselves are not actually using it and spending it. They are holding on to it waiting for everyone else to start using it and just talking about what they could do with it. When is this group of people going to come in that do not think like the existing users wanting to cash in?

    9. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by schnell · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you can sell them for $1 million, then by definition they are worth $1 million.

      It seems pretty simple on the surface but it's actually not. The point that the GP post was trying to make is that in a small or illiquid market, large sales volumes can actually depress prices by introducing too much inventory to sell vs. people willing to buy. This is a somewhat different example, but back in the day when Bill Gates still had a meaningful percentage of all Microsoft's shares, he would be said in the media to be worth "[his share total] x [current MSFT quote]." But people who knew the market actually understood that if he ever decided to liquidate his shares all at once they would be worth far less because he would actually flood the market (leaving aside the fact that if people figured out that Bill Gates was selling all his MSFT shares, they would flee the stock in droves assuming he knew something they didn't.)

      So long story short - if I have a trivial number of [shares, rare items, whatever] compared to the market size, then, yes, they are worth [quantity] x [going price]. But if I have a quantity that is significant to the size of the ability to make markets and I try to sell it all at once, it will invariably be worth far less.

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    10. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the price goes down too much, the exchanges will halt trading and blame it on DDoS

      You don't have any problem with that?

      You talk about the Bitcoin marketplace as if it was some mature, regulated system. It's not. It's value is purely based on how loudly the proponents of Bitcoin are willing to clap. As soon as it can be traded for other currencies, other commodities, at a large scale, Bitcoin enthusiasts are in for a rude awakening.

      Besides, I'll bet that there will be subsequent private currencies that will replace Bitcoin as the flavor of the week and then you'll see fluctuations that make the current 50% swings look like child's play.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    11. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by sg_oneill · · Score: 2

      If you can sell them for $1 million, then by definition they are worth $1 million.

      Except its *really* hard to turn bitcoin to actual coin, compared to the other way around. Most of the sites have huge waits, or pathetic maximum transferal amounts,

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    12. Re:A limited number of Bitcoins by XcepticZP · · Score: 2

      Agreed... Just the other day I decided I wanted to buy some bitcoin, just to give it a go. I was perfectly willing to buy. Yet every single place I looked at didn't want to accept a credit card, or paypal, or Skrill(Moneybookers). There were a few dodgy ones I could have plausibly gone for like "convert to Linden dollars(SecondLife currency) via creditcard/paypal, then use the Linden dollars to buy bitcoins here". I mean, come on. The rest all wanted bank wire transfers with up to three days to process, plus 5% transaction fees. I sense that the normal financial institutions are putting up barriers that make it unfeasible for us to buy bitcoin easily. Either that, or they're just plain incompatible like it is with Paypal and it's reversal poliucy.

      At this rate, if I wanted to buy bitcoins, I'd be better off buying a dedicated mining rig/asic. Which is also bullshit, because all the feasible ones are either on backorder, or you have to pay anything from $2000 to $15000. Which is pretty much insane. Makes me wish I got in on the bitcoin craze back in the start just so I wouldn't have to buy bitcoins now using one of the dodgy payment options on the various exchanges.

  2. Something I've been ruminating about all day by astralagos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Somebody more familiar with bitcoin can answer this for me, undoubtedly, but based on my limited understanding, if the wallet file is lost or destroyed, the coins within it are effectively gone, correct? If so, then at some point there's an expected loss over time (fraction of the population who don't back up their wallet, expected size of wallet, drive failure rate), and at some point that's going to intersect with the size at which the pool expands, so that the total supply of bitcoins over time actually decreases. Theoretically, we'd hit some point where bitcoins are just being destroyed through loss. The situation will be exacerbated with thefts and personal storage.

    1. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by rasmusbr · · Score: 5, Informative

      Somebody more familiar with bitcoin can answer this for me, undoubtedly, but based on my limited understanding, if the wallet file is lost or destroyed, the coins within it are effectively gone, correct? If so, then at some point there's an expected loss over time (fraction of the population who don't back up their wallet, expected size of wallet, drive failure rate), and at some point that's going to intersect with the size at which the pool expands, so that the total supply of bitcoins over time actually decreases. Theoretically, we'd hit some point where bitcoins are just being destroyed through loss. The situation will be exacerbated with thefts and personal storage.

      Yep, that's correct. Bitcoin is designed to be ridiculously scarce in the long run.

    2. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      obligatory xkcd

      Extrapolating
      http://xkcd.com/605/

      Without knowing rate of loss vs rate of pool expansion there is no way to theoretically mark a point where bitcoin loss>bitcoin gain. Theft still leaves bitcoins in the system, so no real loss there (to the system). I can see a clever developer/maker creating a usb/sd bitcoin wallet. Keep the assets stored off the computer, in a safe place and no risk of government seisure.

    3. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by shaitand · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Of course. That's why bitcoin divides to trillions of units. The idea that trade will involve smaller and smaller units. For instance when the price hit $1000 for a BTC it made more sense to think of Bitmils .001 than Bitcoins for transactions because a bitmil was essentially a dollar.

    4. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      So if I hoard my bitcoins, I'll make lots of money.
      Why would I ever want to sell them? They'll be worth more tomorrow.

    5. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      We don't need to know the rate of pool expansion. We already know that there is an upper limit to the number of available coins. When that limit is reached we will only lose bitcoins due to the exact reasons the GP raised.

      So your "obligatory xkcd" is not appropriate at all. Back to your drawing board.

    6. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by Jack9 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      > But each of those bitcoins can be subdivided into ten million pieces

      100 million. Not that it makes a big difference right now.
      https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Myths

      --

      Often wrong but never in doubt.
      I am Jack9.
      Everyone knows me.
    7. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by fastest+fascist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They *might* be worth more tomorrow. There's no guarantee of that. You will, however, definitely need to eat regularly. Usually spending money is involved in that.

      Look at it this way, computers get better all the time. If you wait a while, you can get better value for your money. Somehow, people still buy computers all the time.

    8. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by Athrac · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That is true. However, it is not really a problem in the long run unless every last bitcoin is lost. You can divide bitcoin in infinity and trade with micro-bitcoins or pico-botcoins instead. So at first though this seems like an issue but I argue it isn't.

      You can't divide it infinitely. The smallest unit ("satoshi") is 10^-8 bitcoins, so in total, there will only be 2.1*10^15 units of money. For reference, the total M1 money supply in the world is equivalent to about $25 trillion, or 2.5*10^15 dollar cents. If bitcoin becomes a major world currency and we assume a currency loss rate of couple of percent per year, it's gonna become a problem within couple of decades.

      There could of course be a change in the protocol so that let's say any bitcoins not used in 50 years could be remined. But it's something that requires acceptance from majority of miners.

    9. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by petermgreen · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The rate of production is laregely known and is not significantly affected* by changes in mining power.

      The rate of loss is a trickier one, it is not possible for an analysist to tell the difference between a permanently bitcoins (one where all copies of the private key have been destroyed), temporally lost bitcoins (where the private key still exists and may be found but the owner has forgotten where it's stored or is having difficulty remembering the passphrase or whatever), and hoarded bitcoins (where the owner knows how to access the bitcoins but has decided not to do anything with them).

      * Short term fluctuations can happen since the difficultry takes time to adjust.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    10. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by ArbitraryName · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can't divide it infinitely.

      Yes, you can. Eight decimal places is just a fairly arbitrary number. If it becomes necessary, smaller transaction can be supported.

    11. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by lxs · · Score: 3, Informative

      If there's a way to reclaim lost bitcoins (crack the encryption), then you can get a stability point.

      The public keys and contents of all addresses that have been involved in transactions are public knowledge through the blockchain.
      If someone cracks the encryption, no bitcoin is safe from theft any more not even those stored on paper locked in a safe.
      But I guess a value of zero is a stability point too.

    12. Re:Something I've been ruminating about all day by Alioth · · Score: 2

      The problem with Bitcoin at this moment is that it is in a period of hyperdeflation, so much so it's useless for anything other than either speculation or the black market. If Bitcoin was stable relative to other currencies, it would be useful. And I wish it were, and soon, because it means the possibility of ditching PayPal forever.

  3. Savings Accounts by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ever wonder why banks can pay less than inflation for savings accounts and still get customers? Government insurance against the bank getting robbed / going broke / just absconding with the cash lets them provide a service that's worth a small cost.

    In a way, Bitcoin is a bet that the risk of the government itself being the ones to take your money exceeds the risk that individuals will do so. History shows plenty of risk both ways, but I could certainly see the value in banks offering Eurobitcoin accounts.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    1. Re:Savings Accounts by lgw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are many other choices than "savings account" or "mattress". There are a wide variety of bond investments, bond ETFs and mutual funds, money market accounts, and so on. But you pay a lot for safety, and you also pay for the convenience of liquidity, trading in very small amounts, and retail convenience.

      The Internet has nearly removed those last two concerns, however. If you educate yourself on the risks of bonds (both inflation and default risks), which is no harder than educating yourself about how bitcoin works, it's easy to match inflation with funds with daily liquidity, ability to move small amounts, and really quite small risk. But if you want that government backing against default risk, you're going to lose vs inflation - you have to pay for that insurance.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Savings Accounts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In the UK you can save with the government and cut out the middle man. The UK government owns a bank named the National Savings Bank (actually they own several banks, but this is the only one that offers savings accounts to regular people) which offers a middling interest rate and various long-term bonds. When you "invest" in the government's bank instead of it lending the money to somebody else like a regular bank it just spends it on government projects. The money to pay you back later comes from taxation. So in effect it allows the government to borrow from the ordinary consumer at a better rate than they'd get from a foreign bank, and it lets the consumer save with a 100% trustworthy bank.

      Anyway, for long term savings the National Savings Bank will give you points over inflation. They will promise to track better than the rate of inflation in interest. They can do this because they are, after all, the government, if they can't make it worthwhile to borrow money at points over inflation they definitely shouldn't be borrowing from foreign banks! Of course "worthwhile" gets to be over a long view when you're a government. Money spent today ensuring a five year old is healthy and well educated pays off twenty, forty, sixty years down the line.

      (You might say, what if the government can't pay it back? Maybe the tax base collapses, or the country is invaded or something. But in this case the country will default, EVERYBODY in the UK gets screwed if that happens, regardless of whether they use the government owned bank).

  4. Bitcoin hype over? by globaljustin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are we seeing the Zenith of Bitcoin? Is it all downhill from here?

    I'm not anti-Bitcoin philosophically, but I have worked in academic level IT & networking so I know what's going on...

    The problem is exchanging Bitcoin for real currency...there is no accountability for the value exchange. Mt. Gox? Seriously? How do you even pronounce it? "mount Gox"? "M. T. Gox"? Who do you call if you have a problem? Bank Of America even has a brick and mortar location at least...

    These aren't trivial issues.

    In order for Bitcoin to work, people have to believe it is a trustworthy place to abstract and store economic value.

    People have to **USE** Bitcoin or Bitcoin dies...until you can directly exchange Bitcoin to currency this will just be an elaborate hoax.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:Bitcoin hype over? by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but I have worked in academic level IT & networking so I know what's going on...

      Only at the level of how you store it, not in any aspects of how it works as a currency.

      The problem is exchanging Bitcoin for real currency

      But in theory you don't need to do that often, the idea is that it is a currency you can accept and use for payments.

      It's a bit tricky for me to convert USD into some other currency also, but since I don't do so very often it doesn't matter.

      As more places accept BitC for payment that concern becomes much less an issue.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    2. Re:Bitcoin hype over? by Kiuas · · Score: 2

      People have to **USE** Bitcoin or Bitcoin dies...until you can directly exchange Bitcoin to currency this will just be an elaborate hoax.

      The ease of exchange is not nearly the only problem with BC. Let me list a few others:

      1. Deflation. Because there's a set cap on the total amount of Bitcoins that can ever exist (made worse by the fact that it is possible for coins to disappear permanently, limiting the supply even more), the currency is by nature deflationary (this does not however mean that it cannot go down in value but I'll get to that later). Deflation is of course good for those who use BC for investment/speculative purposes, but very bad for anyone wanting to actually use it for trade. For the consumer, having currency that looks like it will be worth more next week than now does not really encourage spending in any way. Pricing is difficult as hell because of the deflation since you have to keep adjusting prices down because of the deflation (and people have to convert the amounts to standard currencies anway, because saying something is worth "0,02 bitcoins", doesn't really tell you anything unless you go and check how much the current rate is)

      2. Useability: let's be honest: what's the one thing people use BC for at the moment in addition to speculating? Paying for suspicious goods or services online. And I know there are other things you can get with bitcoins as well, but the main reasons people exchange their regular currencies for bitcoins is because even though BC is not anonymous (unlike some people think), it's the closest/most used equivalent we currently have for cash in the online world, making it the currency of choice for those who want to order something which they do not want to get caught buying (not just drugs btw, gambling is also a big thing with BC).

      Now, these two factors are entwined: currencies only have value because people expect that they will be accepted (ie. retain their value) later on. In the case of bitcoin, the reason the value has shot up as fast as it has, and what makes it so lucrative at the moment for speculators, is the 'quasi-anonymous' nature of it - and services such as silkroad. That is to say, in a completely hypothetical scenario wherein drugs would become legal to buy and sell online using 'old fashioned' currencies the price of the BC would likely plummet fast. Now, while such a scenario seems rather unlikely, it's just meant to show how dependent BC currently is on such sites/services. For reference, this is what happened to the exchange rates of bitcoin when silkroad was closed. Which gets us to the third point:

      3. Volatility. Right now BC has been fairly steadily increasing in value, as people have become more interested in it, but there is no guarantee that this situation will continue. In fact, looking at the rather massive increase in value and comparing it to a classic model of a bubble (got the links from a recent BC story and its comments here on /. but unfortunately I no longer remember the original poster) one cannot help but to wonder how long it will keep rising before it eventually comes down. How hard and how fast it will come down is another question, and I'm not saying it will necessarily crash and burn over night but there is no reason to assume the rise will continue indefinitely. If the early adopters start dumping their coins, if more popular BC based sites are shut down by the officials, or if someone develops a new, more anonymous/easier to use 'online cash' type of currency or a number of other things happens BC will lose its value quickly.

      You're right, people need to use bitcoin or it dies, but the essential question is: would you be confide

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    3. Re:Bitcoin hype over? by faedle · · Score: 3, Funny

      > Mt. Gox? Seriously? How do you even pronounce it?

      "Magic the Gathering Online Exchange."

      That should scare you.

  5. Mine are safe by raftpeople · · Score: 4, Funny

    in the couch

  6. Idiots by wbr1 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Keep...your...own...fucking...wallet...

    I do. Encrypt and backup your wallet.dat file. When you restore it, even if it is old, you can rescan the block chain and have all your funds. Except for transfers, why hand your entire wallet to someone? Would you do that on the subway, or in walmart?

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:Idiots by timeOday · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually it is idiots that keep all their savings in their own wallets, or in paper bag in the freezer, or buried in the yard. Whereas normal people do entrust their saving to complete strangers, all the time, in a thing called a "bank." This turns out to be much safer than holding it yourself, thanks to "regulations" enforced by "governments." Kind of impressive if you step back and think about it.

  7. Re: Just starting by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

    Now since CNN and real Wall Street brokers are getting into the act I expect the value to go skyhigh! It went up 1000% in just 12 months.

    Even if you think that is non sense Tulip bubble mania all over again you can't ignore the fact that this got some Wall Street investors attention. With supercomputers and high trading algorithms you can bet they will automate the process and prevent it from crashing. Remember if you have a super computer you can make money too by shorting the bitcoin.

    You make free money the more volatile it is. This is much more profitable than the dow jones. At this point I doubt it will go away anytime soon.

  8. Re:Idiots .. use a VM by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... and use a VM just for that purpose. Since I do IT I have a copy of VMware workstation and will utilize this for just that purpose to play it safe.

    I have one for porn and one I am going to make for litecoin trading as bitcoin is too expensive already :-(

    Firefox and Chrome with flash can get you just as infected as IE under Windows in this day and age so any browser is bad. A VM is the only way to stay safe sadly.

  9. Re:Idiots .. use a VM by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you are really paranoid, you can use whonix, which puts a vm in a vm, piping everything through tor and preventing just about any leak of IP information or exposure of OS exploits.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
  10. Already done by DrYak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Then someone will invent a new currency and the cycle repeat itself.

    It has already been done. And far more than once.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  11. I'll stick to real money thanks by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

    If someone hacks my bank and steals my money, the bank replaces it.
    If someone steals my wallet and takes off with my credit cards, I'm not liable for the transactions.

    1. Re:I'll stick to real money thanks by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      Ok

      Where can I sign up for such a security policy? I am willing to to even have them take 5% or more of my earnings for security as I have to share bank account or credit card info to buy and sell and that scares the shit out of me more than losing some bitcoins!!

    2. Re:I'll stick to real money thanks by tftp · · Score: 2

      This is not something I can change. These 2% are a business agreement between the merchant and the payment network. The merchant is allowed by the contract (or was allowed, at least) to offer cash discounts. But rare a vendor does that. Some gas stations are the only example I can think of.

      So, here we are. The 2% are built into the fabric of the entire economy. It does not matter if I pay with plastic or cash. What do you propose, outside of marching with torches and pitchforks toward the VISA HQ?

  12. Re:dreamworld by Ambvai · · Score: 2, Informative

    Interestingly enough, a lot of the small/medium businesses I work with that do business internationally have the exact same concerns with international currencies. (Dollar, Yen, Euro, Pound are accepted as safe... but even a currency as significant as Renminbi makes some people skittish.)

  13. The Real World by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ***UNLESS I CAN SEE IT PLACED IN MY $$$ BANK ACCOUNT IN REAL TIME***

    Which goes to show you are missing the point of using it as a currency. A real currency is something you hold onto, not exchange at first opportunity.

    You only think you need to do that because you think the exchange rate of BitC against some other currency is too high. Why? Are you SURE about that? Because lots of people were saying the same thing all along, at much lower values. What if BitC doubles in value again? Then you would have been an idiot to exchange it away.

    I'm not even a huge BitC proponent, I have only a tiny amount myself. But I can see that worry about the value of BitC against other currencies seems overblown, and there is a constant track-record of underestimating BitC, with every action that is supposed to bring the hammer down on exchange rates (like the closure of Silk Road) having the opposite effect instead. And I see real merchants slowly adopting payment using this currency. If there are enough real objects I can use BitC to buy then I am insulated from swings in value, and it makes more sense to hold than to get rid of right away.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:The Real World by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I know because I don't know. What I mean is, the ammount of uncertainty in BTC is much, much higher than in dollars.

      Really? I actually don't know that at all. In fact the value of USD could go haywire in a lot of ways, in case you hadn't noticed the price of metals like gold and platinum has skyrocketed, meaning a lot of other people think so too.

      Just because the USD HAS been more stable, does not mean it has to continue to do so.

      The **CORE** of that uncertainty is the number of BTC awarded per transaction mined.

      Not sure I follow that statement, in a transaction you get a specific amount of BitC from someone else. When mining you get a specific amount of BitC per block. Where is the uncertainty in ether aspect? The only uncertainty is how much other currency someone is willing to give you for BitC. But as more people want and use it, the more the value will rise.

      the number of BTC awarded to who finds the proper number/transaction is arbitrary.

      Again, how is this arbitrary? I do mine (slowly) and it seems no arbitrary at all.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    2. Re:The Real World by fastest+fascist · · Score: 2

      One of the least uncertain aspects of Bitcoin is the number of BTC awarded per block mined. That is dictated by the protocol. The code is open source so you can check if you're willing and able.

      Basically, though, the block reward gets halved every 210,000 blocks. That's happened once so far, and no-one pulled any switch to do it. Everyone running a Bitcoin node or miner simply runs code that has the same requirements to accept a block as valid. Some miner could have modified their software to produce 50-coin blocks even after block 210,000, but that would be pointless if other peers in the network weren't running software with the same modification.

      You also stated block creation must be faster than one per 10 minutes on average now. It's possible that's temporarily true, but the network retargets the difficulty of finding a block to maintain the balance at 10 minutes per block. This is done by comparing the time it took to calculate the previous 2016 blocks, starting from the previous difficulty retarget, to the expected time of two weeks. If it's less, or more, the difficulty required for a block to be valid is adjusted to compensate, making it harder or easier to find a block. All the information needed to do this retargeting is publicly available.
      You may want to have a look at: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty

      In brief, there are no mystery hands behind the curtains pulling strings to make things happen. You're right that many of the basic choices were arbitrary - the maximum of just short of 21,000,000 BTC and the block creation time being obvious examples. The rules are, however, transparent, and in order to change any of them you'd have to modify the core software and convince people to start using your modified version. That wouldn't be very easy, since it would create a competing currency forking off the Bitcoin blockchain. Anyone holding Bitcoins would likely be pretty wary of such modifications, because the effects on the value of BTC could be deleterious.

    3. Re:The Real World by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which goes to show you are missing the point of using it as a currency. A real currency is something you hold onto, not exchange at first opportunity.

      Um, no. A currency is, by definition, a medium of exchange. "Something you hold onto" is an investment vehicle, not a currency. Bitcoin is supposed to be a currency, not an investment vehicle.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  14. Re:control by Ambvai · · Score: 2

    "The reward for solving a block is automatically adjusted so that roughly every four years of operation of the Bitcoin network, half the amount of bitcoins created in the prior 4 years are created. 10,500,000 bitcoins were created in the first 4 (approx.) years from January 2009 to November 2012. Every four years thereafter this amount halves, so it will be 5,250,000 over years 4-8, 2,625,000 over years 8-12, and so on. Thus the total number of bitcoins in existence will never exceed 21,000,000. Blocks are mined every 10 minutes, on average, and for the first four years (210,000 blocks) each block included 50 new bitcoins. As the amount of processing power directed at mining changes, the difficulty of creating new bitcoins changes. This difficulty factor is calculated every 2016 blocks and is based upon the time taken to generate the previous 2016 blocks"

  15. Re:dreamworld by dex22 · · Score: 2

    And a credit/debit card processor or bank won't do that? :)

  16. uh... by Tom · · Score: 2

    'You don't have to keep your Bitcoins online with someone else.

    In fact, why in all hells would you even think of storing your wallet with someone else??? I'm fairly new to bitcoin, but the thought was so far from my mind that it took me a while to understand what the problem with these kinds of attacks was.

    Don't people get it that Bitcoin is money? Storing your wallet on someone elses server is like giving them your money. You do that with a bank, but not with some random Internet site.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  17. Mostly, yes by DrYak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a small addendum to what rasmusbr has already said:

    if the wallet file is lost or destroyed, the coins within it are effectively gone, correct?

    The short answer is yes. The long answer is a little bit more complicated.
    If hacker still has copy of the wallet.dat file, the coin could still be stolen (in theory the file can optionnally be encrypted. In practice we all know how good humans are at picking good passwords).

    key pairs in a wallet can also be generated using passphrases (so called brain wallet).
    in theory the owner is the only one to know the passphrases generating the key pair and thus the only one able to use the private key.
    in practice, again, we all know how good humans are at that task
    (and before you ask: yes someone has decided to make a keypair using xkcd's "correct horse battery staple" comic).

    worst citizens are the web services. they use their own wallet to process coin. you sent an amount to them, and then they process on your behalf. (some even allow you to upload key pairs). You have to trust that they are honnest people. You have also to trust their security measures that their key don't get stolen.

    So out of all the various "lost" coins, some are possibly going to re-appear due to poor password strategies, or due to less scrupulous online companie which will decide to re-purpose un-claimed bitcoin account, or outright scam people into giving them coins and then running away with them.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  18. ha! by globaljustin · · Score: 2

    this is fun...I appreciate that you know how the system works, for real

    As for the hidden ways Bitcoin can be influenced... can you name some examples?

    I just said a bunch, plus other points (what happens after 21,000,000 BTC)...but you can always come up with an academic response that makes your argument at least seem plausible

    like this:

    Some times miners do solve the next block more or less simultaneously.....The shorter chain then gets discarded, its blocks becoming 'orphaned'. This happens regularly and is expected.

    not exactly! it is **expected** to happen regularly...that's the whole point...

    you basically admit that my idea would work with enough computing power...in theory...

    but whatever...I'm not doing this for posterity anymore as anyone who is still undecided about BTC at this point in the conversation can't be pursuaded by any other evidence

    good luck to you...if I had BTC i'd be parlaying that shit...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  19. Re:Why steal bitcoins? by mysidia · · Score: 2

    It seems to me that we could follow the trail from source to destination accounts in the block chain, so we can identify who has the stolen bitcoins.

    That depends on what the person who got illicit control of the BTC does.

    What do you suppose occurs, if the "thief" doesn't spend their illicit booty? Perhaps they have their lawyer figure out the statute of limitations for any potential crime they might get charged with, and plan their BTC transactions to occur, after that all runs out.

    Perhaps they will pass the private key to access the BTC down to their great-great grandchildren; and the spends may occur, 100 years after the crimes have been forgotten.

    If they go deposit it in an exchange account, and take out $1m in US Dollars; then, yes, they will be identifiable.

    On the other hand.... what if they only use BTC in anonymous transactions with other criminals?

    Whether such evil black market transactions can ever be traced someday or not, depends if their partners in crime get caught.

    Other possibilities are: the thief just takes the BTC out of the market --- and benefits from the other BTC they are holding increasing in value (due to less BTC in the market).

  20. Re:Real value? by davidhoude · · Score: 2

    I have a hard time believing that you refuse to do a few minutes worth of research to claim over $150,000. If you did, you'd know that there are places that will make deposits into your bank account fairly easily. There may be delays involved, but it can be done. You should be doing your own homework when it comes to this stuff, asking strangers will result in your wallet becoming one of these statistics.

  21. Re:still: still arbitrary by ArbitraryName · · Score: 2

    Who do you believe is setting "hidden rules" on a decentralized network using open source clients? That's a pretty significant level of paranoia.

  22. they **already do** that's the problem by globaljustin · · Score: 2

    yes...banks charge ridiculous fees...everyone knows this...

    ***your solution is to add another processing fee***

    the processing fees are the whole problem that BTC was made to solve...now I have to **pay** for the privilidge of accepting the currency???

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  23. So... you are actually insane, what is that like? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You are talking of a single transaction shifting the market 5% and you call that small?

    Real economic markets panic of fractions of a percent shift with billions in transactions.

    If a real currency could suffer a 5% inflation with the selling of a single million, everyone would conclude that currency is totally non-viable.

    Basically you are saying that if you own bitcoins, you could lose 5% anytime someone sells a single million of a currency supposedly worth billions. That is NOT a stable reliable currency.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.