Slashdot Mirror


Early Bitcoin Adopters Facing Extortion Threats

An anonymous reader writes Wired recounts the story of Hal Finney, one of the very first adopters of Bitcoin. Finney died earlier this year after a long fight with Lou Gehrig's disease. But for months before his death, he was a victim of constant harassment from somebody trying to extort his Bitcoins. He and his family faced a variety of threats, and had a SWAT team called on their residence. And it turns out Finney is not alone — other early adopters are being targeted with similar threats. "That's when someone using the names Nitrous and Savaged hacked into [early adopter Roger Ver's] email accounts and demanded that he cough up 37 bitcoins—about $20,000 at the time—in order to prevent his private information from being published online. Ver refused, and the hacker apparently backed off after Ver put a 37 bitcoin bounty on his head. Ver, who was himself sentenced to 10 months in federal prison for illegally shipping explosive across state lines, believes that Savaged is not only the same person who swatted Hal Finney, but also the person who gained access to Satoshi Nakamoto's email account earlier this year."

18 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. Still can't believe by Kobun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That swatting is a thing. How can it be that a single, anonymous phone call is all it takes to deploy a militarized police team to your front door? It blows my mind. That it keeps happening over and over ... ugh.

    1. Re:Still can't believe by Cigarra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because police departments have all this budget and military gear and they're itching to use it?

      --
      I don't have a sig.
    2. Re:Still can't believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because if someone calls in and they don't break your house and kill your dogs, someone will sue them?

      Whereas if they follow procedure, heed the call, break your house and kill your dogs, they're in the clear.

      Doing this creates wealth (jobs).

      It's Capitalism 101.

      Captcha: misuses

    3. Re:Still can't believe by Translation+Error · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because if someone calls in and they don't break your house and kill your dogs, someone will sue them?

      Suing the police for not responding to actual violent crimes has been tried. The courts ruled that the police have no obligation.

      --
      When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
    4. Re:Still can't believe by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That assumes they even are "departments". Here in MA swat teams are private companies, which seems to have gone unnoticed until someone tried to file FOIA requests for information about how often they are deployed; and they refused to answer.

      Because of course, knowing how often and why they are deployed is only reporting to the public on exactly what we pay them for, its not something the public has any right to know or anything.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    5. Re:Still can't believe by ultranova · · Score: 4, Interesting

      when you give people the simplified choice of, should this tragedy have happened, or do we prevent it in the future, they will always pick the "lets prevent this in the future option". Because they are not writing the budges, they are not directly taking money out of schools or medical care. They are not deciding exactly what rights to trampled on.

      Yes, it's the dumb public who's at fault. Except... for some strange reason the police don't behave this way in, say, Nordic countries, despite them being openly and officially huge-government welfare nanny states straight from Ayn Rand's worst nightmares. So perhaps, just perhaps, the problem behind the police acting like an occupying force is not the public but the police themselves?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    6. Re:Still can't believe by VGPowerlord · · Score: 2

      What happens when you file a FOIA against the police/911 office that dispatched them?

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  2. Fireworks by Orgasmatron · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://dailyanarchist.com/2012...

    http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Newsroo...

    He was charged for selling agricultural fireworks (to scare away pests) on ebay. Turns out that the manufacturer was making them too powerful and/or not following regulations that limit their sale to farmers, ranchers, and growers.

    He was also the only person prosecuted over the incident, despite the same fireworks being sold all over, including Cabelas. (Ken Shearer is mentioned in the CPSC press release, but his case is unrelated.)

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
  3. Re:Told you so by Shakrai · · Score: 2

    Petro-Euro could easily replace Petro-Dollar (but ask Saddam Hussien how that turned out).

    Only when the EU decides to try its hand at keeping the Middle East stable. You might wish to keep the Brits (and French) out of it though, I hear they like to draw borders with no regards to ethic or tribal history. :)

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  4. Cojones by puddingebola · · Score: 2

    I don't know, extortion is evil but you've got some cojones to try and squeeze somebody who ships explosives across state lines. Maybe you're 37 bitcoins will include a special package delivery from Hal Finney. That's odd, this box is ticking.

  5. Take a pack of Black Cats camping by raymorris · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you go camping and take a pack of Black Cats with you, you may have just illegally transported explosives. Details matter.

  6. anonymous! by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Aren't bitcoins supposed to be anonymous? So anonymous no government jack booted thugs can find you? So great you could pay off goons in bitcoins to knock off spouses with inconvenient pre-nuptial agreements?

    If random hackers find you and shake you down, your imagined immunity from FBI is just imaginary, isn't it? Shows without a legal government backing it up and providing for a non-violent conflict resolution options and contract enforcement options, all these "digital anonymous currencies" are just jokes, created by folks unconnected with reality creating castles in the air.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:anonymous! by koan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They can be, however people keeping their mouths shut is another thing all together.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  7. Re:Told you so by sanvila · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Euro, is very spendable, mostly stable.

    Then you've never watched it's 25%+ fluctuations up and down over the last 10 years.

    You can't measure the stability of a currency just by comparing it to your own currency. If we followed that line of reasoning, the only stable currency to you would be one which is pegged to the US Dollar. The price of one Euro fluctuates if you measure it in Dollars, yes, but that does not speak against the stability of the Euro more than it does against the stability of the Dollar.

  8. Re:Told you so by ultranova · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unregulated currency FTW

    Bitcoin's not unregulated. Its regulations are simply enforced by technical rather than legal means. Or are you perhaps confusing currency regulations with regulations against extortion?

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  9. Re:Told you so by ultranova · · Score: 2

    US Dollar is not worth its weight in paper.

    According to Wikipedia, a dollar bill weights around 1g. According to Alibaba, a ton of offset printing paper costs around $600 per ton. That means paper costs around 0.06 cents per gram, or put another way, a dollar bill is about 16 times its weight in paper.

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  10. Re:Bitcoin by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

    Anonymous

    The creators of bitcoin never claimed that.

    and secure. LOL.

    That's more or less equivalent to saying "lol RSA 4096 isn't secure because someone can beat you up and force you to reveal the password lol". Bitcoin is secure.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  11. China owns 8% of US debt. Just 8% by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Really? US dollar?

    Absolutely.

    Swiss Franc is much more stable.

    The Swiss Franc is the currency of a relatively small country with a GDP around $350 billion. That is not big enough to protect itself against heavy currency speculation and certainly isn't big enough to be as safe as the dollar, yuan or euro. The Swiss economy is increasingly dependent on foreign investment and that should be worrisome if you think it is some sort of safe haven.

    Euro, is very spendable, mostly stable

    The Euro may not even exist in 10 years and it is anything but stable. Have you paid NO attention to the currency crises in Europe for the last 5 years?

    US Dollar is not worth its weight in paper.

    Really? Because the people who actually put their money where their mouth is completely disagree with you. If the dollar wasn't considered safe then interest rates should be going through the roof. Instead interest rates are near all time lows meaning that investors consider the dollar to be among the safest places to invest.

    China holds vast amount of US Dollars and the moment they decide to sell some or all of these, the currency will start to look like the Zimbabwe Dollar.

    Who do you think China is going to sell them to? Seriously, who? The answer is no one. There isn't another buyer that can buy or wants to buy $1 Trillion in US debt. China owns that US debt so that they can keep their currency cheap and thereby support their export driven economy. The moment they sell a substantial portion of their US debt holdings, the yuan will appreciate in value and every single export from China will immediately become more expensive overseas. There is NOTHING China can do to dump their US debt holdings that will not hurt China worse than it will hurt the US. China only holds about 8% of US debt. It's a nice sound bite but the notion that they somehow now "own" the US is absurd to anyone who isn't clueless.