Pages:
Author

Topic: [2014-02-13] Forbes: Mt Gox CEO Mark Karpeles Responds To Widespread Bitcoin Cri - page 2. (Read 2435 times)

newbie
Activity: 51
Merit: 0
Quote
Mark Karpeles: First, you need to understand that the Bitcoin implementation we use in MtGox was created back in 2011. The bitcoin client is not meant to handle the kind of load MtGox has and was having more and more troubles, lagging and crashing. We created our own implementation to solve those issues and to offer a better flexibility to our customers.

Over time Bitcoin changed and started implementing changes that would require people using previous versions of the software to upgrade. While we followed most of those update(s) we were more and more busy and couldn’t keep up with all the changes.

With bitcoin 0.8.0 (released 19 feb 2013) a breaking change has been included that would prevent transactions to be accepted if their signature did not include the right number of zeroes in front of the signature values (in an effort to reduce risks of transaction malleability). We did not notice this change but a few of the transactions we were sending would become invalid because of this.


So let me get this straight: you wrote your own software, were well aware that Bitcoin is regularly updated, and even though it is the CORE of your business you didn't bother to keep up with the software? Oh it's because you were "too busy"? I'm sorry, is this a multi-million dollar company or one guy working out of his mother's garage? As your business grows you need to hire more employees to keep up with the workload - it's not like you couldn't afford it.

"We did not notice this change" is a ridiculous thing to come from one of the largest Bitcoin exchanges. You should have someone CONSTANTLY monitoring the community to keep abreast of all changes that could affect your business. You have a fiduciary duty to your clients to properly handle their money and at this Mt. Gox has clearly failed.

Well what are a few more lawsuits thrown on the pile, right?
hero member
Activity: 715
Merit: 500
Quote
I guess the most puzzling part is why this issue hasn’t be[en] solved since 2011.

Hard to argue against that.

It's not a serious issue that needs solving, but it could use further consideration which is happening now. However, what's more puzzling is how irresponsible Mt. Gox is in general and why people listen to anything Karpeles has to say. In the interview he states that they were too busy to keep up with changes in the protocol and then blames it on the protocol.

Quote
Over time Bitcoin changed and started implementing changes that would require people using previous versions of the software to upgrade. While we followed most of those updates we were more and more busy and couldn’t keep up with all the changes... We did not notice this change.

This is a horribly run company, and I think the community at large would agree. What kind of company is too busy to keep up with changes in its only product!?!? The same company that is too dumb to follow guidance from the U.S. Treasury Department resulting in frozen bank accounts. Bitcoin is just too much for Magic The Gathering Online Xchange.
full member
Activity: 168
Merit: 100
Quote
I guess the most puzzling part is why this issue hasn’t be[en] solved since 2011.

Hard to argue against that.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1019
Who is to blame?

When asked whether the problem was caused by the Bitcoin protocol itself or Mt. Gox’s implementation, Karpeles told Forbes that the Bitcoin client is simply not designed to handle the sort of load that Mt. Gox experiences.

He added that the exchange chose to develop its own implementation to overcome lagging and crashing. However, as the Bitcoin protocol was constantly updated, Mt. Gox simply could not keep up. Karpeles explained:

    “With bitcoin 0.8.0 [...] a breaking change has been included that would prevent transactions to be accepted if their signature did not include the right number of zeroes in front of the signature values (in an effort to reduce risks of transaction malleability). We did not notice this change but a few of the transactions we were sending would become invalid because of this.”
Pages:
Jump to: