Slashdot Mirror


Digital Exchange Loses $137 Million As Founder Takes Passwords To the Grave (arstechnica.com)

A cryptocurrency exchange in Canada has lost control of at least $137 million of its customers' assets following the sudden death of its founder, who was the only person known to have access to the offline wallet that stored the digital coins. British Columbia-based QuadrigaCX is unable to access most or all of another $53 million because it's tied up in disputes with third parties. Ars Technica reports: The dramatic misstep was reported in a sworn affidavit that was obtained by CoinDesk. The affidavit was filed Thursday by Jennifer Robertson, widow of QuadrigaCX's sole director and officer Gerry Cotten. Robertson testified that Cotten died of Crohn's disease in India in December at the age of 30. Following standard security practices by many holders of cryptocurrency, QuadrigaCX stored the vast majority of its cryptocurrency holdings in a "cold wallet," meaning a digital wallet that wasn't connected to the Internet. The measure is designed to prevent hacks that regularly drain hot wallets of millions of dollars. Thursday's court filing, however, demonstrates that cold wallets are by no means a surefire way to secure digital coins. Robertson testified that Cotten stored the cold wallet on an encrypted laptop that only he could decrypt. Based on company records, she said the cold wallet stored $180 million in Canadian dollars ($137 million in US dollars), all of which is currently inaccessible to QuadrigaCX and more than 100,000 customers. "The laptop computer from which Gerry carried out the Companies' business is encrypted, and I do not know the password or recovery key," Robertson wrote. "Despite repeated and diligent searches, I have not been able to find them written down anywhere."

The mismanaged cold wallet is only one of the problems besieging QuadrigaCX. Differences with at least three third-party partners has tied up most or all of an additional $53 million in assets. Making matters worse, many QuadrigaCX customers continued to make automatic transfers into the service following Cotten's death. On Monday, the site became inaccessible with little explanation, except for this status update, which was later taken down. On Thursday, QuadrigaCX said it would file for creditor protection as it worked to regain control of its assets. As of Thursday, the site had 115,000 customers with outstanding balances.

160 of 252 comments (clear)

  1. Banking by the seat of your pants. by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is why well established insured banking establishments are used. But hey, it was your money - do what you want with it, they didn't!

    1. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by zlives · · Score: 4, Funny

      did they check the bottom of the keyboard...

    2. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by Locke2005 · · Score: 2

      It's usually a post-it note in the top drawer... that's how I "hacked" the Admissions and Records office at the college I went to! (True story!) I then got in trouble for playing games using the Admissions and Record's account (strangely, games were disabled for student accounts but not for staff).

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    3. Re: Banking by the seat of your pants. by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      Look under the cpu...

    4. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by zlives · · Score: 4, Insightful

      outlook contacts -notes field was the big find for me... you wouldn't believe how many people use their contacts for saving auth credentials. biggest reason third party mobile apps skimming contacts was an actual topic of conversation with our BYOD deployment.

    5. Re: Banking by the seat of your pants. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean on the motherboard socket?

    6. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When cryptocoins are lost, the value of the remainder go up. The net loss is zero. If your coin stash was at QuadrigaCX, you lost. If it wasn't, you win.

    7. Re: Banking by the seat of your pants. by Cito · · Score: 1

      that's the only way to hack a gibson!

    8. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When cryptocoins are lost, the value of the remainder go up. The net loss is zero. If your coin stash was at QuadrigaCX, you lost. If it wasn't, you win.

      But when you realize that the entire worth of your bitcoin portfolio can disappear because of someone's stupid behavior and nobody is accountable then everyone who trades in bitcoin loses.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      He/they appear to still have access to the bitcoin...

      I just can't keep all these new gender pronouns straight.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re: Banking by the seat of your pants. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      And that's why Trump will win in 2020: the left is divided (seriously, would it hurt you to not make jokes about gender? People are trying to be taken seriously here). Howard Schultz is on one side of the divide, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez on the other. Kamela Harris is trying to sit in the middle, but will she succeed?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    11. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by NFN_NLN · · Score: 5, Informative

      > But when you realize that the entire worth of your bitcoin portfolio can disappear because of someone's stupid behavior

      Don't use an exchange. You can opt to manage a wallet yourself so you're only beholden to your own stupidity.

    12. Re: Banking by the seat of your pants. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      People are trying to be taken seriously here

      You must be new.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    13. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Don't use an exchange.

      Or, don't use bitcoin.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    14. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by Harvey+Manfrenjenson · · Score: 2

      Indeed. As a casual observer this sort of thing makes me absolutely uninterested in participating in any unregulated Bitcoin exchange, not that I had any significant level of interest to begin with. I was curious so I looked at a bitcoin price chart-- doesn't seem to have dropped in response to this news, which is surprising.

    15. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Funny

      I just can't keep all these new gender pronouns straight.

      Because the new pronouns arent for straight people

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    16. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by vtcodger · · Score: 2

      One possibility is that the price of Bitcoin is being manipulated. Ordinarily, I don'r find conspiracy theories very credible. But because of the poor visibility into who "owns" (i.e. controls) which units of Bitcoin it appears at least theoretically possible for malevolent individuals/organizations to manipulate Bitcoin markets. e,g https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/1...

      Would "they" do that? If "they" can, "they" probably would.. The world of cryptocurrency is for sure a digital bad neighborhood.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    17. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Never, in the history of man, has there been a quantifiable, limited, commodity, that can be so effortlessly, so completely, so absolutely, 'taken to the grave;' such that there is not a graverobber that can unearth it.

      "Take secrets to the grave" is not exactly a new concept.

      Much of the worth of humanity is what is inside the human head, and that is frequently lost to the world, whether it's a great writer dying before penning his last book, a smith who could make something no one else could, or a mathematician who hadn't written down his proof yet.

    18. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      "When cryptocoins are lost, the value of the remainder go up."

      When cryptocoins are *known* to be lost, the value of the remainder go up. Therefore if you are holding a particular coin it is in your interest for lost of dramatic stories to be spread about how you lost a significant fraction of the money supply, whether or not it actually happened.

    19. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "... I do not know the password or recovery key,"

      Yeah, right.

      --
      No sig today...
    20. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      I have found this to be true as well.

      I can imagine the "eureka" moment when they are like "Nobody will ever think to look here! AND it syncs across all my devices! Brilliant!"

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    21. Re: Banking by the seat of your pants. by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Way to get inside the head of a user.....

      Careful though, someday you may not come back....

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    22. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      Normal people: "It turns out that with Bitcoin you can lose millions if you lose a password, someone just did!"
      Bitcoin advocates: "This is good news for Bitcoin!"

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    23. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      The advantage of an exchange is liquidity, which translates into more consistent and predictable pricing.

      An individual dealing in pocket change perhaps does not care. But if you are running a business, it can matter.

    24. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 1

      He/they appear to still have access to the bitcoin...

      https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinCA/comments/amrnte/results_of_the_bitcoin_chain_analysis/

      Upon reading the summary they published, looks like they were running something similar to a Ponzi scheme.

      --
      You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
    25. Re: Banking by the seat of your pants. by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      Find that hard to believe, please link.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    26. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by hawk · · Score: 1

      The price of the *remaining* bitcoin didn't change . . .

      There should presumably be a positive effect due to increased scarcity, and a negative effect due to loss of confidence in the asset class.

    27. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

      Around 2 year ago now I read a "news" article in which a top silicon valley investor claimed that within 1 year bitcoin will be 10 times its price at 20000 USD. I though to myself, "just another person who invested in bitcoin and is not trying to manipulate the stocks". Lo and behold, bitcoin price started rising from the very next day and witihin 1 month it was twice its value, and within 3 months it had already reached 20000.

      I knew right then that the whole thing is

      a) result of market manipulation
      b) bound to crash
      c) gambling on when the big investors (sitting in wall street) decide it is time to pull out.

      It seems that they decided to pull out within 1 year, and bitcoin has been going down since then.

    28. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by fropenn · · Score: 2

      It's not complicated. Just ask the person what pronoun would be preferred. Done.

    29. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      When cryptocoins are lost, the value of the remainder go up.

      ...Each time making crypto a little less useful as a currency, and a little more of a fake digital "investment."

    30. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by zlives · · Score: 1

      not to mention angry birds has a back up copy just in case :)

    31. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      It's not complicated. Just ask the person what pronoun would be preferred. Done.

      Of course it's not complicated. I was just joking off the clumsy use of "he/they" in the comment above and the fact that right-wing jackoffs are always complaining about all the gender pronouns. The other day on a conservative talk radio station out of Fresno, they were complaining that the didn't know how to pluralize "they" because they encountered some people online who go by "they/them".

      I guess I don't always make it clear that I'm ridiculing. Either that, or Poe's law is coming down hard on me.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    32. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      Bingo.

      In the long run, Bitcoin is only a meaningful currency if there are multiple large exchanges, to provide liquidity and value/price stability.

      The death of yet another exchange under suspicious circumstances is another reason to avoid Bitcoin, another nail in its coffin.

    33. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by brunes69 · · Score: 1

      Unless your employer pays you in Bitcoin and your power utility and mortgage provider accepts bitcoin, you're using an exchange at some point.

    34. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by ememisya · · Score: 1

      Yea I've lost $536 million dollars in WhatevsCoin just yesterday, so I started WhatevsCoin2 worth $677.2 million dollars.

    35. Re:Banking by the seat of your pants. by redshirt · · Score: 1

      Was one of those games Global Thermo-Nuclear War?

  2. Lowest possible amateur level by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Obviously, these people have never heard of Business Continuity Management. Fits however nicely with the "greed and stupidity FIRST" mindset of the cryptocurrency community. This is hilarious!

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by zlives · · Score: 4, Interesting

      or she gots the wallet and now everyone else is on a wild goose chase... how can anyone prove otherwise, including her.

    2. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by Narcocide · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, it could have been worse. The money could all have been stolen. At least this way they know where it is. In a sense, it is still perfectly secure, too...

    3. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by godel_56 · · Score: 2

      Well, it could have been worse. The money could all have been stolen. At least this way they know where it is. In a sense, it is still perfectly secure, too...

      And it's perfectly safe because the only copy is stored on a laptop.

    4. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by ewibble · · Score: 1

      I don't know wouldn't you see the wallet in the block chain if it was used?

    5. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by Kjella · · Score: 2

      And it's perfectly safe because the only copy is stored on a laptop.

      Where the money is located is on the blockchain that's distributed for the whole world to see. They can point to it and say here's our cold wallet with the $137 million that we lost the key to. It wouldn't bring the money back but it would prove nobody else took it as part of a scam. Now if they say we don't know where the cold wallet is and that information was only on the laptop too then I'm thinking exit scam.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by Lorens · · Score: 1

      These supposed crypto experts have never even heard of a physical HSM with multi-key.

      They have never heard of bitcoin multi-sig or Shamir's Secret Sharing either. (For perspective, bitcoin multi-sig was created in 2012, and Shamir is the S in RSA, his SSS algorithm was published in 1979).

      Slightly reduced life expectancy

      However, for Chrohn's disease, accidents happen. I don't know that it would be so sudden as to prevent him gasping out the password to someone, though, but probably your clients are the last thing on your mind when suddenly confronted by your own mortality.

    7. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      how can anyone prove otherwise

      Maybe if Bitcoin had some sort of public ledger we can establish if anyone ever accessed the funds... It's a shame they didn't implement such a feature.

    8. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by willaien · · Score: 2

      Indeed. In fact, there's some evidence that coins are being transferred out of some of the "cold" wallets. https://cointelegraph.com/news...

    9. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      Pretty much all these exchange failures look like inside jobs. A little actual thievery is a useful distraction to cover for massive looting (MtGOX). In this case the "unexpected" death is a useful crisis with an obvious scapegoat.

    10. Re:Lowest possible amateur level by zlives · · Score: 1

      its those hackers that hacked the wallett, woes me

  3. Re:Real security... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    Virgins or cattle? We're writing our continuity plan. Just want to make sure to have plenty of whatever it is security requires to be satiated.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  4. Only one person with password? by jfdavis668 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    $137 million, and they didn't think to store the password somewhere it wouldn't be lost? They didn't think to ask the guy before he died? What a stupid company.

    1. Re:Only one person with password? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Anybody else think this is a scam? Hell, even if the original guy is dead, this leaves the possibility for a huge windfall to whoever he decided to share it with.

      Gotta love pirates, thar's truth in them thar words, "Dead men tell no tales" arrrgh

    2. Re:Only one person with password? by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Ready for a good conspiracy theory?

      1) Ask boss to make sure the backup password is recorded. Boss complies.
      2) Kill boss, hide evidence, get away with it.
      3) Find out the "backup password" he put down was a decoy. Woops, I guess he didn't trust you after all.
      4) Panic!

    3. Re:Only one person with password? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Banks do it because they are required to. This was just an amateur with something that is not actually money.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Only one person with password? by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

      $137 million, and they didn't think to store the password somewhere it wouldn't be lost? They didn't think to ask the guy before he died? What a stupid company.

      What kind of security is this?

      TRUE security requires TWO factors (or more) so why in blazes didn't they store multiple copies of the key where multiple people have only part of the key? Then your backup to this "offline key" is having multiple partial copies of it in different hands, with the assurance that at least TWO or more people would be required to agree to provide their portion of the key to open the encrypted file.

      Handing any one person the key for "safe keeping" is stupid. You should always have accountability and require agreement of more than one person for such things.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    5. Re:Only one person with password? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      TRUE security requires TWO factors (or more) so why in blazes didn't they store multiple copies of the key where multiple people have only part of the key? Then your backup to this "offline key" is having multiple partial copies of it in different hands, with the assurance that at least TWO or more people would be required to agree to provide their portion of the key to open the encrypted file.

      Something like this?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re:Only one person with password? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      If he memorized it, there's a good chance it could be brute forced. You can get through a lot of passwords with $137million worth of hardware.

      Not that I care, everyone involved seems like an awful person.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:Only one person with password? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      If you swap 2 & 3, you can skip 4.

    8. Re:Only one person with password? by quantaman · · Score: 1

      $137 million, and they didn't think to store the password somewhere it wouldn't be lost? They didn't think to ask the guy before he died? What a stupid company.

      What kind of security is this?

      TRUE security requires TWO factors (or more) so why in blazes didn't they store multiple copies of the key where multiple people have only part of the key? Then your backup to this "offline key" is having multiple partial copies of it in different hands, with the assurance that at least TWO or more people would be required to agree to provide their portion of the key to open the encrypted file.

      Handing any one person the key for "safe keeping" is stupid. You should always have accountability and require agreement of more than one person for such things.

      It's wonderful security. A password that only you know is a password that you don't have to trust anyone else with. Sure there's a risk that you get kidnapped and tortured for it, or you get a head injury and forget it, but otherwise it's really great security. If you're the founder.

      If you're an employee it's less great but still decent, you don't need to bother with the red tape of a distributed system and if something ever does happen to the founder you can just get a new job.

      If you're a customer it obvious sucks since the founder can die or run off and take all your money with them. Of course, if you're a customer how are you actually going to know what kind of security and safeguards they have in place. I suppose you could put a bunch of regulations in place to ensure good practices... but doesn't that kinda defeat the purpose of cryptocurrency?

      --
      I stole this Sig
    9. Re:Only one person with password? by Lorens · · Score: 1

      Or bitcoin multi-sig.

      However, there still has to be money there to use it, and it appears there is none.

    10. Re:Only one person with password? by dmesg0 · · Score: 2

      Such scam is impossible to hide: the cold wallets are very easy to trace (the blockchain database is visible to anyone), but impossible to withdraw without knowing the private key.

    11. Re:Only one person with password? by coofercat · · Score: 1

      It is indeed a stupid company. He could have stored that password in a million secure ways that his successors could get access to.

      I guess the point here is: how would you know a good exchange from a bad one?

      You can spot a good 'bank' from a bad one because the good one is government regulated, has to pay insurance and so on, and can show you certificates and whatnot to prove it. A bad 'bank' is a guy in jogging bottoms with baseball bat in his coat, who will only meet you in quiet places.

      A good exchange has a nice website, has a good privacy policy, legal terms and has an impressive looking list of clients. A bad exchange has a nice website, a good privacy policy, legal terms and has an impressive looking list of clients. How do you tell the difference?

  5. Did he REALLY die? by Goldenhawk · · Score: 1

    Did he actually die...?

    Just think about the implications of $137mil of untraceable funds that aren't strictly controlled by any national regulations.

    --
    --Brandon / Split Infinity Music

    1. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Barny · · Score: 5, Informative

      See, now this is the thing. Crohn's disease doesn't kill you. I have it, and as you can imagine I looked into what it does that will eventually kill you. It doesn't.

      Since it's an autoimmune disease, however, you need to take two kinds of meds to deal with it:

      Anti-immune drugs
      Anti-inflamatory drugs

      Unless he had a severe reaction to either, the main killer of a crohn's sufferer is infection due to lowered immune system. While this definitely is dangerous, like diabetic patients it is drummed into you that if you get ANY kind of infection, you go straight to hospital to have it dealt with.

      If the person died, they died of stupidity (either their own or whatever doctor they ran to not taking it seriously enough), but they didn't die of crohn's disease.

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    2. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Narcocide · · Score: 2

      The only real mystery is how he survived this long with such a huge target hanging around his neck.

    3. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Hentes · · Score: 1

      Unlikely, withdrawing the cash from the wallet would give it away immediately.

    4. Re:Did he REALLY die? by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, it is probably not that hard to get an official death certificate in India while still alive.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Untraceable? How do you figure? The blockchain on which Bitcoin is built contains a record of both the payer and payee for each and every transaction. At best it's pseudonymous, but there's nothing untraceable about it in the least. If that cold wallet ever sees a transaction, everyone will know something hinky is going on.

    6. Re:Did he REALLY die? by bobbied · · Score: 4, Informative

      It most surely *can* kill you.. True, it can usually be managed if you *know* what it is... However, not everybody who has it, knows what it is and is being properly treated for it.

      And yes, I have experience with this. My Mother in law has Crohn's and she very nearly died from it. They mis-diagnosed the problem and her gut leaked for days until they opened her up to take a look. She lost the majority of her small intestines, all of her colon and spent nearly a year in the hospital, half in a coma in intensive care. She now must be given IV fluids every other day and can barely get enough nutrition to stay alive eating.

      It was woefully managed by her doctors, but Crohn's all but killed her.

      So I'm not as ready to dismiss this story as impossible. It most assuredly IS possible.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    7. Re:Did he REALLY die? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      If that cold wallet ever sees a transaction, everyone will know something hinky is going on.

      So . . . ? So everyone knows that somthing hinky is going on.

      Is anyone capable of doing anything about it . . . ? Can the coins be blocked from further trading . . . ? Or from being exchanged for cash . . . ?

      It seems to me like it will be, "We know we've been robbed . . . but we can't catch the thief!"

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    8. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Crohn's disease doesn't kill you"

      Tell that to my pal sitting in the ground right now, dead from the shock of the pain Chron's inflicts upon you.

      Fucktard.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    9. Re:Did he REALLY die? by guruevi · · Score: 1

      On the other hand he was in India. Not sure if you want to go to a hospital in rural India as you most likely will get more infections if you're already immunocompromised. Even the US has problems with hospital-grade diseases.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    10. Re:Did he REALLY die? by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Likely easier than after you're dead. Bribes don't pay themselves.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    11. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      While this definitely is dangerous, like diabetic patients it is drummed into you that if you get ANY kind of infection, you go straight to hospital to have it dealt with.

      If he was stupid enough to be the only person with access to the cold storage he was certainly stupid enough to not go to a hospital with an infection.

    12. Re:Did he REALLY die? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      That's the beauty of the whole drive being encrypted. But they will still be found, when they check what wallet he transferred funds into form the hot one.

      If he used a tumbler between hot and cold, we know he's running.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    13. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Fraud is fraud, so yes, there are a number of enforcement agencies that can taken action if someone starts moving those coins. And yes, a lot of exchanges will block conversion to cash. And yes, they can tell who a thief is by tracking how the coins get spent or transferred and then subpoenaing the records of whoever they go to, given that most of these organizations are required by law to obtain and retain certain records across a number of jurisdictions.

      Right now, this is like a treasure ship sinking in the ocean. If that gold ever turns up somewhere, there would be a lot of questions to answer.

    14. Re:Did he REALLY die? by dnaumov · · Score: 2

      What on Earth could possibly make you think crypto is untraceable? The whole point of a PUBLIC blockchain is literally the opposite.

    15. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Barny · · Score: 2

      Fair point. But I imagine it doesn't "suddenly" kill. I had symptoms of crohn's disease for six months before the anal bleeding actually started (that's kinda a good wakeup call). My doctor had it diagnosed within a week (colonoscopy) and had me on powerful anti-inflammatory drugs, anti-immune drugs, and antibiotics.

      The immune inhibitors suck ass pretty badly, but not as much as the pain when you're not on them.

      I guess I should have included a statement that "sudden" death from crohn's doesn't happen, and death from it is unheard of if it is being managed properly.

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    16. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      And yes, they can tell who a thief is by tracking how the coins get spent or transferred

      The problem with you is that you know some things about bitcoin, but then you say this shit proving that you barely know anything about it, but amazingly are acting like an expert.

      There are dozens and dozens of anonymity services that will co-mingle coins with others from other wallets and then redistribute them to fresh wallets.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    17. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      The problem with you is that you know some things about bitcoin, but then you say this shit proving that you barely know anything about it

      Alternative and actual explanation: I intentionally left it out. I saw no reason to point it out, particularly when it only speaks to one of the things I was saying. It’s a valid confounding factor to part of what I said, but that’s no reason for me to be the one to bring it up.

      Even so, fair point, and I don’t object at all to your contention that it would make tracking significantly more difficult.

    18. Re:Did he REALLY die? by quantaman · · Score: 2

      Did he actually die...?

      Just think about the implications of $137mil of untraceable funds that aren't strictly controlled by any national regulations.

      It seems a bit suspicious:

      As many as 115,000 account holders are owed $250 million, which is locked up in “cold storage” only accessible to the recently deceased founder and CEO, Gerald Cotten

      At the time of the bankruptcy filing, QuadrigaCX held 26,500 Bitcoin worth $120 million, 430,000 Ether worth $60 million and several million dollars worth of Bitcoin Cash SV, Bitcoin Gold, and Litecoin, according to court documents.

      QuadrigaCX’s troubles started early last year when CIBC froze accounts affecting 388 customers worth $28 million, citing confusion about ownership of those funds. Those funds were finally released by an Ontario court in December, according to a statement from QuadrigaCX.

      Just days later, Jennifer Robertson announced that her husband Gerald Cotten, 30, had died of complications due to Crohn’s disease in India on Dec. 9, while opening an orphanage.

      So already we seem to be looking at a gap of 250 - (120 + 60 ( +28 ? ) ) either 30 or 60 million if I'm reading properly, and then in the midst of these legal issues he's off in India opening an orphanage when he suddenly dies.

      Then again this shouldn't be a subject of debate. It's not the 1800s, if someone dies in India the body is repatriated as a standard practice.

      If there's a body it's trivial to confirm it's him and it lays some really ugly speculation to rest. If there's no body then a new batch of questions pop up.

      Btw, I'm guessing the identity of those "lost" coins are known, if he were faking I don't think he'd be able to dip very far into that bank before people figured out what was happening.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    19. Re:Did he REALLY die? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      the main killer of a crohn's sufferer is infection due to lowered immune system

      Phew. Thank god he was in India and not some 3rd world country.

    20. Re:Did he REALLY die? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If he was stupid enough to be the only person with access to the cold storage he was certainly stupid enough to not go to a hospital with an infection.

      Why come to this conclusion?

      One scenario affects a person physically.
      The other scenario he likely couldn't give a fuck about. You can go ask him if he cares that his company is in the shitter. Ask him to say "yes" if he does and let us know how you go.

    21. Re:Did he REALLY die? by Mryll · · Score: 1

      Ceaseless abdominal pain and lack of energy from food really paralyze productivity or constructive thinking

    22. Re:Did he REALLY die? by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 1

      See, now this is the thing. Crohn's disease doesn't kill you. I have it, and as you can imagine I looked into what it does that will eventually kill you. It doesn't.

      I have Crohns Disease and yes it CAN kill you. I had a flare up some years ago that no medication would deal with. It was attacking my piping and cat scan revealed fistulas developing in more than one place - leaking fecal matter into my bloodstream. Had that gone untreated, sepsis would had set in and killed me.

      The disease may not directly kill you, but it can trigger a chain of events that leads to death. Colon cancer does the same thing.

      The key is seeking treatment when symptoms are serious enough. Ignoring them or hoping they will go away on their own can be fatal.

      --
      Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
    23. Re:Did he REALLY die? by baerd · · Score: 1

      He was diagnosed at 24 and died at 30. I doubt any kind of misdiagnosis had anything to do with it. His stupidity might have killed him, and he was in India apparently. No explanation for why he was there, which is what I find to be unusual.

      --
      I wish I had a lawn.
    24. Re:Did he REALLY die? by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Maybe trying to find a good doctor? Thats where the good ones are trained.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
  6. Re:Real security... by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    Some combination of convenience and money. Strike the wrong balance between the two though, and it can be worse than no security at all.

  7. For $137 million... by I+kan+Spl · · Score: 1

    You would think it would be worth it to brute force the password for that much money.

    --
    My UID is prime and so is this number: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0.
    1. Re:For $137 million... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      If the encryption is sound (e.g. LUKS with a reasonable password), then that is not possible. Also, who pays for it? The coins in there still belong to somebody.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:For $137 million... by burtosis · · Score: 1

      If the encryption is sound (e.g. LUKS with a reasonable password), then that is not possible. Also, who pays for it? The coins in there still belong to somebody.

      Hmm, 137 million... no one thought to write another copy down or adhere to any kind of best practices. I bet the password is the same as his TSA certified luggage.

    3. Re: For $137 million... by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Man can make it, man can break it. Trust me. Nothing is that secure excepting you being the only one with the code, and you hold nukes at the same time with the ability to launch, guide, and detonate them.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    4. Re: For $137 million... by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      This isn't the movies. AES128/256 is effectively impossible to break through brute force. You have no idea how many PBKDF2 iterations were used before even the encryption was applied, let alone how large or random the chars were in the password used. The universe would end before you got anywhere close

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    5. Re:For $137 million... by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      You are literally saying there is a chance you can break the encryption by guessing the right number from -infinity to +infinity...

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    6. Re: For $137 million... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      128-bit? secure?

      now thats some funny shit.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    7. Re: For $137 million... by HarrySquatter · · Score: 1

      The only thing funny is your laughable knowledge of cryptography. 128-bit symmetric-key crytography (such as AES) is very secure. You seem to be confusing it with asymmetric-key cryptography where 128-bit would be mostly a joke.

      Trying to brute-force AES-128 even with the best known attack has a computational complexity of 2^126. Good luck in getting that done anybtime soon.

    8. Re:For $137 million... by gravewax · · Score: 1

      well in reality their is a tiny chance. But just like Lotto it isn't a smart investment of resources as unless you are incredibly lucky (win the lotto multiple times in a row kind of lucky) you are going to spend many times 137 million and get nothing for it.

    9. Re: For $137 million... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      However, with a $137m pay-off I'd be tempted to buy a pi and leave it running.

      Sure, it'd be lucky if it fluked the key, but people buy lottery tickets too.

    10. Re:For $137 million... by tazan · · Score: 1

      Probably a better chance of guessing that number than that there is any money left in the the wallet.

    11. Re: For $137 million... by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Bruce Schneier once calculated that just increment a 128-bit integer from 0 to MAX would take more energy than you could extract from the sun (from now to it turns supernova) even if you enclosed it in a dyson sphere, and that even if the increment was implemented in the most efficient way possible (by just moving a single atom one step).

    12. Re: For $137 million... by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      Go right ahead. You obviously don't understand the sheer mathematical improbability of it, but have a go. Hell, why stop there? Start guessing private keys for bitcoin addresses...

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    13. Re:For $137 million... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      You are wayyyyyyy off. And you have no clue what you are talking about. First, 0.000000000001% is not a chance to anybody sane (you are either dumb or not sane) and second, if you have to spend, say, $100M in computing power for that chance, then this makes no sense at all. The funny thing is that anybody mining crypto-currencies should understand that cost/benefit idea. Apparently at least you are completely clueless.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    14. Re:For $137 million... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      It really depends. If a good passphrase is used, then the effective difficulty is likely > 100 bit and that is way outside of what can be cracked in this universe.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    15. Re: For $137 million... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Me: chuck a couple of days of CPU at something for fun
      You: why not break the law too

      Yeah, maybe I wont listen to you.

    16. Re:For $137 million... by Khyber · · Score: 1

      " First, 0.000000000001% is not a chance to anybody sane"

      Yet people play the lottery with far worse odds, and win.

      Try again when you understand statistics, fool.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  8. Re:They say.... by Narcocide · · Score: 2

    And will any of us be as sorely missed as he? Probably not.

  9. Dead man's switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Maybe he has a dead man's switch active on his account, and it hasn't yet noticed that he's dead.

  10. Re:Real security... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    Better be cattle, where the heck are you going to find a virgin these days? (Fortnite players never leave their mom's basement.)

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  11. When the keystone cops are your banker... by DidgetMaster · · Score: 1

    I guess this is what you get. It sounds like everything was stored on a laptop as well, so even if he didn't die but just had the laptop lost/stolen/destroyed/etc. then the data was gone too. Since crypto-currency is nothing but data, poof goes your equity. Assuming of course that this whole story isn't just about a scam where he didn't really die but is on a yacht somewhere in the Mediterranean instead.

    1. Re:When the keystone cops are your banker... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      You know, the more I think about it, the more this looks like a scam to me. What is interesting is that the wive is still visible, but maybe he got rid of her this way too.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:When the keystone cops are your banker... by ichimunki · · Score: 2

      If they both disappear at the same time, it's an obvious scam and scrutiny will be intense. Either they are waiting for the heat to die down before she joins him or like you said, she's just a patsy in all this.

      --
      I do not have a signature
  12. There's one other person by PJ6 · · Score: 1

    and that would be the one with the backup copy, which nobody knows about for obvious reasons.

    1. Re:There's one other person by Megane · · Score: 1

      No need to worry, he put the backup on a Batman flash drive!

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  13. Not sure who's dumber ... by mattyj · · Score: 1

    ... the guy who died without a password post-it in his safety deposit box or people that converted their actual cash into imaginary money and trusted it to some random 30 year-old with a laptop. I'd posit that the customers got what was coming to them.

  14. Dunning-Krugerrands by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know who coined this term, but given the very expensive rookie mistakes I keep seeing, not to mention the claims of security that keep falling apart, the term "Dunning-Krugerrand" for BitCoin seems apt.

    1. Re:Dunning-Krugerrands by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      "Dunning-Krugerrand"

      Well done.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Dunning-Krugerrands by billybob2001 · · Score: 1

      That's very good.

      Extra points for saying "coined this term".

  15. Sheesh. He never heard of Shamir Secret Sharing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    One would think these blockchain wizzes would have chosen a way to share such an important secret amongst a trusted group for situations ike this.

  16. Are clever people morons? by TJHook3r · · Score: 1

    It's certainly a cunning plan, worthy of the great Baldrick himself! A single laptop and only one person knows the password, that man has a chronic disease and is travelling in a third world country *facepalm*

    1. Re:Are clever people morons? by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      While I don’t run a multi-million dollar crypto currency exchange, a fair amount of my personal net worth would be quite difficult for my wife to access if I died. We keep meaning to set up a revocable trust for that purpose, but it isn’t a quick and easy thing to do.

      When you are dumb and 30, some of these things don’t register quite the same way. Especially when you are paranoid. The laptop might have an encrypted backup ...somewhere, same for the cold wallet keys, but finding it might be hell.

    2. Re:Are clever people morons? by Megane · · Score: 1

      Somehow I don't think they were ISO-9000 certified.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  17. Schadenfreude by Brannon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not proud to say that one of the things I find most satisfying is watching anti-establishment types painfully discover why the establishment exists.

    Yep, this is why we have real banks, dummies.

    1. Re:Schadenfreude by ewibble · · Score: 2

      Why do you think banks don't do stupid things with security, I used to work for a bank and I assure you they do. Ok when the screw up they get bailed out by the public, that is better? maybe? The lesson here is you need base your trust in the company that you invest in on something, that should require having transparency of process. also, was there a backup for this laptop?

    2. Re: Schadenfreude by SirSlud · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's because of insurance. No system, company, etc is perfect. Of course banks do stupid shit. But they're insured. It's the social arrangements that make them valuable, not that they're magically filled with perfect people.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:Schadenfreude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Granted I have zero insider information about any large bank's security practices, but I'm going to go on a limb and bet that under no theoretical circumstances would Wells Fargo lose control of all its customers' money after one dude in some third world shithole dies of an easily treatable disease.

    4. Re:Schadenfreude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's more what happens when establishment types go and recreate the establishment, poorly. The whole point of cryptocurrency is that it's decentralized; there's a hash that you hold yourself either electronically or written down which the network recognizes as having value. Why would you then give your money over to someone who maintains a centralized spreadsheet? It's not like these coin exchanges do loans to earn a return on idle money.

    5. Re:Schadenfreude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course when establishment institutions do stupid things it's all good. We give them free passes or slaps on the wrist at worst because they're the enlightened ones.

    6. Re:Schadenfreude by gravewax · · Score: 1

      yes they get bailed out because they are insured either by the government or by 3rd party that is why I keep my money in a bank. What insurance did QuadrigaCX's depositors have?

    7. Re: Schadenfreude by houghi · · Score: 1

      I am hold eniugh to know how money in the banks went poof.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    8. Re:Schadenfreude by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Why would you then give your money over to someone who maintains a centralized spreadsheet?

      I think there are three major reasons:

      1: You can't buy and sell much with actual bitcoin, and when you want to make a purchase is not the time to look for an exchange.
      2: Acquiring validation for each transaction is a heck of a lot of work for individuals. It's not just pushing a button, it's asking and paying fees, and waiting an awful long time. Exchanges take up much of that slack by fronting the transaction for you.
      3: Most bitcoin "investors" are not all that savvy - they likely don't understand the technology (or good old ledgers, for that matter), and don't want to.

    9. Re:Schadenfreude by BlackOverflow · · Score: 1

      Crohn's disease is anything but easily treatable. Scientists don't know the cause, and there is no cure for Crohn's. It is a fatal disease. There are various medications, but they can only treat the symptoms. Most Crohn's patients undergo dozens of surgeries that remove different parts of the entire digestive tract, and they eventually die due to complications from the disease. Life with Crohn's is miserable with frequent pain, going to the bathroom 20 times per day, and bleeding.

    10. Re:Schadenfreude by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Why do you think banks don't do stupid things with security

      I don't. What I do think is that banks have multiple insurance policies against various types of problems that they may encounter, the ultimate one being too big to fail.

      The local neighbourhood idiot with a bit-coin wallet offers no such protection. Go ahead, hack my bank. Even if you take their money I will be unaffected.

    11. Re: Schadenfreude by swillden · · Score: 2

      It's because of insurance. No system, company, etc is perfect. Of course banks do stupid shit. But they're insured.

      It's got nothing to do with insurance. Banks aren't insured against stupidity. Smallish demand-deposit accounts are insured by the FDIC against bank insolvency, but that isn't really relevant to why these kinds of things don't happen to banks.

      The real reason that this isn't a problem for traditional banks is that mistakes -- and fraud -- are nearly always reversible, because the security and integrity of the systems is based on auditability, not on perfect correctness. If Chase had accidentally deleted a row in their ledger system that held $137M (I'm sure it's happened plenty of times), they can examine the transaction logs and recover the state. And even if they somehow lost their logs, and all of their backups (data that needn't be kept secret is much easier to back up), all of the parties they transact with have their own logs, and can prove what money should have been where.

      BTC is an interesting case because the transaction ledger is intact (the blockchain is a transaction ledger, no more, no less), but the identities that transact are defined by the ability to produce cryptographic signatures., and in this case the keys that define those entities have been lost.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    12. Re:Schadenfreude by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 1

      I'm not proud to say that one of the things I find most satisfying is watching anti-establishment types painfully discover why the establishment exists. Yep, this is why we have real banks, dummies.

      Schadenfreude is a hoot, isn't it? I thought the same thing....

      --
      You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
    13. Re:Schadenfreude by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 1

      Crohn's disease is anything but easily treatable. Scientists don't know the cause, and there is no cure for Crohn's. It is a fatal disease. There are various medications, but they can only treat the symptoms. Most Crohn's patients undergo dozens of surgeries that remove different parts of the entire digestive tract, and they eventually die due to complications from the disease. Life with Crohn's is miserable with frequent pain, going to the bathroom 20 times per day, and bleeding.

      Agreed, but still the guy (or a close adviser) should have realized that (his possible impending death) and did some estate planning to prevent this type of issue from occurring.

      --
      You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
    14. Re:Schadenfreude by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Paul Krugman once said the Great Depression of 2008 was caused by a bunch of financial innovators whose main innovation was figuring out how to get around the safety rails we'd set up.

    15. Re: Schadenfreude by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      Moving and storing non-small amounts of money has associated costs, whether that comes in the form of guards standing in front of the pile of bullion with AK-47s or it is layers of bureaucracy that allow for paper trails and insurance (and gov't bailouts).

      The idea of the "untrusted player" to serve your needs as an individual small fish might be just fine, as you can hedge your bets by spreading your exposure across different kinds of risks. But doing that kind of thing wisely also has costs, at the minimum it means you have to research several options carefully enough to know you are not blindly guessing. (Or perhaps you are blindly guessing, and you are only kidding yourself that what you are doing is cheaper in the long run than paying The Man for the stupidity tax.)

      Big fish have too much money to do what an individual might do. They need better liquidity and bureaucratic controls. Unfortunately it seems many people who should know better are vastly underestimating the risk profile of cryptocurrencies, that they are inherently riskier than fiat currencies in certain important respects.

    16. Re:Schadenfreude by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      There is a pretty good chance that did happen. Are we so sure those coins are actually lost?

    17. Re: Schadenfreude by captaindomon · · Score: 1

      This should have more upvotes. The difference is that with a fiat currency, the actual âoemoneyâ is an abstract concept that can be fixed as needed, and the register is just something to help keep track of it. With BitCoin, the transaction âoeregisterâ is the âoeactual money valueâ, and thatâ(TM)s why things like this can happen.

      --
      Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
  18. Good thing the customers avoided central banks. by Jason1729 · · Score: 1

    Their customers who are out the money are such geniuses for avoiding central banks and pesky things like deposit insurance. I really can't feel sorry for anyone who loses money when things like this happen, they're victims of their own ignorance.

  19. Look at the bright side of the situation by timholman · · Score: 1

    Since that BTC is now lost forever, this means the remaining pool of accessible BTC is even more valuable. Oh, the joys of a deflationary currency!

    Everyone holding BTC just got wealthier. So get to it, and start figuring out how to sabotage the wallets of everyone else, and you will eventually be the richest person on earth. (Cue the dramatic music.)

  20. It turned out the password is: by Drunkulus · · Score: 1

    $l37Mi11ioN

    1. Re:It turned out the password is: by hamburger+lady · · Score: 1

      did anyone try "Zihuatanejo"?

      --

      ---
      Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
  21. Re:Obligatory Munson by Khyber · · Score: 1

    You've obviously missed the trend of doing reversal replacements. Munson is a mix of Nelson Muntz, backwards. MUNtz nelSON.

    Fuck I'm old as dirt and I still keep up with the times. What's your excuse?

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  22. Re:Real security... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    (Fortnite players never leave their mom's basement.)

    Just wait until mom goes out to get more cheetos and mt.dew, and you can walk in and lure them out with twinkies. Or maybe twinks.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  23. Re:Real security... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    Virgins or cattle?

    A heifer is both.

  24. Rest of the quote by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

    “Despite repeated and diligent searches, I have not been able to find them written down anywhere. I am forced to proceed to the next stage of the recovery plan - spending long periods at numerous luxury villas around the globe, tirelessly searching for the location of that elusive password! Do not despair... I will not halt my efforts, no matter how many decades it may take, until your funds are completely spent. I mean RECOVERED. Yes, recovered is the word I was looking for.“

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  25. Not lost, used to pay the ferryman by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    Charon now accepts Bitcoin, though $137M seems a bit stiff for a ferry ride -- let's face it, cryptocurrency people are probably all going to Hell...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  26. It could just be fraud by Ecuador · · Score: 1

    People are saying that this "convenient" "stupidity" as you call it is simply an attempt to defraud their customers.

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    1. Re:It could just be fraud by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      More like the intentional stupidity was its own insurance device...

      ..but somebody killed him anyways

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
  27. Re:Real security... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Strike the wrong balance between the two though, and it can be worse than no security at all.

    Just a guess here, but I will bet that it's not actually worse than no security at all.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  28. cold wallets.. what? by fred911 · · Score: 1

    "Thursday's court filing, however, demonstrates that cold wallets are by no means a surefire way to secure digital coins."

      Time will tell, but this seems pretty good way to assure they are secure. Probably guaranteed. If that address records transfers, then we have an issue. The security issue is the idiots that allow transfers to be made by a third party (and allow them to stagnate there).

      Excuse my ignorance but isn't elimination of a third party to facilitate transfer a major reason to record your own transfers on the blockchain? Why trust others to verify trust, because you're too lazy? Short resources? Stupid?

      If you're trading on someone's market there's absolutely no reason not to be fully settled ASAP. Or find a better market.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  29. gold-like-thing rush by epine · · Score: 1

    Since that BTC is now lost forever, this means the remaining pool of accessible BTC is even more valuable. Oh, the joys of a deflationary currency!

    Nice whoosh porn: the inscrutable superposition of a bag of hammers with an gloating, goateed hipster.

    Interestingly, it made think just enough to realize that the limited supply of gold is not nearly a sufficient condition: gold must itself be limited, but also gold-like things must also be limited. What cryptocurrencies have done is to make the category of gold-like things inexhaustible. Want a new limited-supply currency? Not a problem: there's an IPO at every Starbucks (or there was, until IPO exhaustion).

    We're presently living through a gold-like-thing rush.

    I think what we're looking at here is Marx's vaunted network effect: those who hold power and wealth are automatically a shrinking group. So the real reason crytocurrency is conceptually in short supply is because ultimately only one crytocurrency can rule the roost (the impostor half-calf almond-milk latte-coin is sure to finally fade away). When there remains One True Coin of finite supply, we will truly have our limited gold replacement (now tradable anonymously over a wire).

    Meanwhile, some people seem to (wishfully) believe that any finite number k of finite crytocurrencies are conceptually still a finite supply (yet also somehow an unlimited finite supply). We await the exponential network-effect event horizon to somehow permanently constrain k to a value ranging from 1 to 3 (the network, plus the alternative network, plus an optional the wannabe network—which sometimes merges into #1 or #2 and then sprouts a new head).

    How one conceptualizes the disappearance of a hundred million dollars of BTC entirely depends on how one conceptualizes the future boundary condition: will coinspace become functionally finite, and if it does, will BTC be one of the surviving coins, and does this kind of nasty story about BTC value destruction (for the actually coin holders) have anything to say about the probability that BTC itself survives???

    A 1% decline in the perceived BTC endgame survivorship function could wipe out $100 million of perceived equity all by itself (much the way the general relativity is entirely defined by differential quantities under coordinate transformation—deriving non-differential quantities from the finished theory is mainly left as an exercise for the motivated reader—perceived value rules cybermath).

    One thing about gold: you couldn't just pick up and squeeze another isotope or another isomer into the periodic table, and then the next day open up a new mine in South Africa to mint this isomer in droves (until the carefully architected day comes to pass where your mine runs dry and there's no more— which was your main story about why anyone should have desired to possess your half-calf almond-milk isogold in the first place).

  30. MCF by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Sounds like a multi-cluster fuck

  31. no means to secure ... by houghi · · Score: 1

    I don't think it means what you think it means.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  32. Re:nice by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    You can't recoop money, only chickens.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  33. Re:Obligatory Munson by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    You've obviously missed the trend of doing reversal replacements. Munson is a mix of Nelson Muntz, backwards. MUNtz nelSON.

    Fuck I'm old as dirt and I still keep up with the times. What's your excuse?

    I thought you were only supposed to do that for cute celebrity couples or whatever.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  34. Heat death of limited supply crypto by iTrawl · · Score: 1

    As a limited supply crypto reaches its supply cap, and wallets get lost, can anybody draw a graph of how long it will take before either there's no more crypto in circulation (it's all locked up in forgotten wallets) or what is left is deemed pointless?

    --
    "Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
  35. Re: Sheesh. He never heard of Shamir Secret Sharin by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    If it was me, I would use a "deadhand switch" to send a email to my lawyer and month or so after my death.

    If it was me I would've gone somewhere to fake my own death and then do a runner with the cash.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  36. Said before and will say again by istartedi · · Score: 1

    Crypto currency advocates make gold bugs look sane by comparison. At least with gold, there would be something left behind.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  37. A lot of electricity was lost by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    And expensive graphics cards for a lot of people.

  38. Well Now... by tonecapo · · Score: 1

    The currency is now truly encrypted.