Topic: bter hacked and lost 50m nxt - page 17. (Read 25441 times)
If they survive they won't see a single nxt from me anymore
This incident will make NXT stronger.
I think i saw those kind of statements in the vrc thread also...What happened next?
the bag holders will have their way i bet
5% or 30%, accept your fate just like Bitcoin has with the Mtgox scandal.
You are absolutely correct, but these guys want a crypto currency to works like their credit cards. And if crypto does not, than it's played off like the whole movement is the "wild west"
I take offense to this and will fight it all the way
Majority voting (democracy) in Parliament or even in popular vote (referendum) is one typical example of centralized solutions. It doesn't matter how many people share the same authority. Power is united in one centralized vote.
So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
And here we have precedent. Only because of a relatively minor theft (less than 5%). It was much more with Vericoin. Who will be next?
I don't agree with the premise that the democratic process you describe should not be actuated. However, I see your argument and suggest that the solution to your predicament would be to develop an alt coin based on a blockchain that is inherently protected against rollbacks or blockchain malleability of any such kind.So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
And here we have precedent. Only because of a relatively minor theft (less than 5%). It was much more with Vericoin. Who will be next?
I would not use it as I and many others agree that the capacity for the majority to take action based on a distributed form of consensus is a brilliant feature of the blockchain and PoS systems, but I would welcome the apparition of such a coin and the possibilities it would offer.
If you want a rollback-resistant coin, then implement it and use it. I suspect this would go against the laws of physics (how could you prevent 51% of clients from using another data set than the rest?), but then again that maybe means your ideologies are inapplicable?
What you call "dictature of the majority" in a crypto-currency has always been the case since day one. From the genesis block, the majority of nodes or hashing power or stakeholders or what-have-you decide on what the longest and most official blockchain is. There is no "precedent" to set here, this scenario will present itself again and again, and the outcome will always be different. Why not take advantage of a clearcut case like the BTER theft to demonstrate the capacity of a community to agree on defending the integrity of its blockchain from unauthorised attacks?
The blockchain was not attacked lol. This is the biggest bunch of mumbo jumbo I have read in a long time. Your points do not even connect with each other
This incident will make NXT stronger.
I think i saw those kind of statements in the vrc thread also...What happened next?
the bag holders will have their way i bet
5% or 30%, accept your fate just like Bitcoin has with the Mtgox scandal.
You are retarded right?
If the majority of the forging power wants to forge in an alternative chain, it is the most decentralized decision ever made. Every forger has in his hands to forge or not the alternative chain.
It's also a the dumbest decision ever made. You can not rewrite history because it is the right thing to do. Rewriting history is NEVER the right thing to do, if you want ANY credibility that is.If the majority of the forging power wants to forge in an alternative chain, it is the most decentralized decision ever made. Every forger has in his hands to forge or not the alternative chain.
Wouldn't it all be better?
Indeed.
One of the selling points of crypto I keep reading about is how crypto will take over credit cards because there's no charge backs. Never done the research but I don't think even VISA or MasterCard ever considered a charge back worth around 1.65 million USD.
Correct me if I'm wrong but reversing a transaction was only a much more doable option because NXT and VRC are POS and not as widely distributed as other coins. Less forgers/miners/stakers with control over the network to convince this transaction shouldn't be counted.
The brilliant thing is that the chargeback is not being executed by a single party, but by the decentralised consensus built by the majority. This is exactly how the blockchain works in the first place, and all the actors in the network rallying against an attacker only reaffirms this principle. This is a feature.Correct me if I'm wrong but reversing a transaction was only a much more doable option because NXT and VRC are POS and not as widely distributed as other coins. Less forgers/miners/stakers with control over the network to convince this transaction shouldn't be counted.
This is NOT a feature. You are acting like the crypto that makes it to mass adoption will have this charge back "feature".
The crypto that "makes it" on a large scale will have transactions that are not reversible, and can be trusted. You are in fantasy land if you think people are going to get behind a coin in which the majority can get together and decide that the coins in your wallet will disappear.
You are not thinking this whole thing thru all the way to the end.
People will never trust Nxt again if this happens, and will do major damage to crypto as a whole, that a coin that is so high up on the list would even contemplate such a thing.
YES EXACTLY !
what if i dumped all my coins on an exchange to buy up dumped but stolen NXT ?
then what if they roll it back ? then what ? then i am screwed !
This sort of happened for guys who bought up Points on Cryptsy when their was a "points exploit" that happened a couple months ago.
i know because guys kept telling me they sold off every coin they owned to go and buy cheap points
only to have their coins(points) vanish on a roll back of sorts.
sorry Cryptsy not trying to drag you guys into this but it's a good point i think
and as crypto world grows, there will be less and less people sticking to principles (ideologues as you call them). We can see this now already. So it shows that in future there will be rollbacks, frozen accounts, selective rewrites and all this. Somebody powerful enough (government) just has to push and threaten a bit and endangered panicking majority of stakeholders will do the rest.
The same as in the real world. Liberty and rights of minorities will not be protected. Cryptocurrency is a failure
The same as in the real world. Liberty and rights of minorities will not be protected. Cryptocurrency is a failure
And in the real world the NSA can simply 51% any and every coin they so choose. Don't be so naive.
i added a poll to vote on a rollback..
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poll-should-nxt-rollback-the-blockchain-after-the-bter-hack-740504
also Litoshi reported that BTER tried paying them 100BTC but the hacker didn't give the coins back..
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poll-should-nxt-rollback-the-blockchain-after-the-bter-hack-740504
also Litoshi reported that BTER tried paying them 100BTC but the hacker didn't give the coins back..
Yeah, it was not that simple, BTER botched it up.
First tried to alter the agreement after the first transaction, then panicked.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8366365
Majority voting (democracy) in Parliament or even in popular vote (referendum) is one typical example of centralized solutions. It doesn't matter how many people share the same authority. Power is united in one centralized vote.
So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
And here we have precedent. Only because of a relatively minor theft (less than 5%). It was much more with Vericoin. Who will be next?
So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
And here we have precedent. Only because of a relatively minor theft (less than 5%). It was much more with Vericoin. Who will be next?
No. Crypto coins are based on distributed consensus.
This incident will make NXT stronger.
I think i saw those kind of statements in the vrc thread also...What happened next?
the bag holders will have their way i bet
One of the selling points of crypto I keep reading about is how crypto will take over credit cards because there's no charge backs. Never done the research but I don't think even VISA or MasterCard ever considered a charge back worth around 1.65 million USD.
Correct me if I'm wrong but reversing a transaction was only a much more doable option because NXT and VRC are POS and not as widely distributed as other coins. Less forgers/miners/stakers with control over the network to convince this transaction shouldn't be counted.
The brilliant thing is that the chargeback is not being executed by a single party, but by the decentralised consensus built by the majority. This is exactly how the blockchain works in the first place, and all the actors in the network rallying against an attacker only reaffirms this principle. This is a feature.Correct me if I'm wrong but reversing a transaction was only a much more doable option because NXT and VRC are POS and not as widely distributed as other coins. Less forgers/miners/stakers with control over the network to convince this transaction shouldn't be counted.
This is NOT a feature. You are acting like the crypto that makes it to mass adoption will have this charge back "feature".
The crypto that "makes it" on a large scale will have transactions that are not reversible, and can be trusted. You are in fantasy land if you think people are going to get behind a coin in which the majority can get together and decide that the coins in your wallet will disappear.
You are not thinking this whole thing thru all the way to the end.
People will never trust Nxt again if this happens, and will do major damage to crypto as a whole, that a coin that is so high up on the list would even contemplate such a thing.
i added a poll to vote on a rollback..
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poll-should-nxt-rollback-the-blockchain-after-the-bter-hack-740504
also Litoshi reported that BTER tried paying them 100BTC but the hacker didn't give the coins back..
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poll-should-nxt-rollback-the-blockchain-after-the-bter-hack-740504
also Litoshi reported that BTER tried paying them 100BTC but the hacker didn't give the coins back..
They're referring to how they attained the hacker's IP through the email they used.
Not sure why they think that's leverage, it's not.
When has anyone ever gone to jail over a crypto currency? Only person who has gone to jail has pretty much been Charlie Shrem and that was due to the DEA (for drugs - not theft).
Not sure why they think that's leverage, it's not.
When has anyone ever gone to jail over a crypto currency? Only person who has gone to jail has pretty much been Charlie Shrem and that was due to the DEA (for drugs - not theft).
This incident will make NXT stronger.
I think i saw those kind of statements in the vrc thread also...What happened next?
Majority voting (democracy) in Parliament or even in popular vote (referendum) is one typical example of centralized solutions. It doesn't matter how many people share the same authority. Power is united in one centralized vote.
So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
And here we have precedent. Only because of a relatively minor theft (less than 5%). It was much more with Vericoin. Who will be next?
I don't agree with the premise that the democratic process you describe should not be actuated. However, I see your argument and suggest that the solution to your predicament would be to develop an alt coin based on a blockchain that is inherently protected against rollbacks or blockchain malleability of any such kind.So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
And here we have precedent. Only because of a relatively minor theft (less than 5%). It was much more with Vericoin. Who will be next?
I would not use it as I and many others agree that the capacity for the majority to take action based on a distributed form of consensus is a brilliant feature of the blockchain and PoS systems, but I would welcome the apparition of such a coin and the possibilities it would offer.
If you want a rollback-resistant coin, then implement it and use it. I suspect this would go against the laws of physics (how could you prevent 51% of clients from using another data set than the rest?), but then again that maybe means your ideologies are inapplicable?
What you call "dictature of the majority" in a crypto-currency has always been the case since day one. From the genesis block, the majority of nodes or hashing power or stakeholders or what-have-you decide on what the longest and most official blockchain is. There is no "precedent" to set here, this scenario will present itself again and again, and the outcome will always be different. Why not take advantage of a clearcut case like the BTER theft to demonstrate the capacity of a community to agree on defending the integrity of its blockchain from unauthorised attacks?
Probably no reorg happening. Consensus says no.
They decided? With what, their remaining few thousand coins?
Majority voting (democracy) in Parliament or even in popular vote (referendum) is one typical example of centralized solutions. It doesn't matter how many people share the same authority. Power is united in one centralized vote.
So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
So if majority has ability to falsify ledger records, it's the same as the majority having the authority to take the physical gold out of your pocket. This is called tyranny of majority.
How is that any different than all of the cryptos where 51% can control it all and do just what you've outlined? It may not have happened yet, but it will eventually.
and as crypto world grows, there will be less and less people sticking to principles (ideologues as you call them). We can see this now already. So it shows that in future there will be rollbacks, frozen accounts, selective rewrites and all this. Somebody powerful enough (government) just has to push and threaten a bit and endangered panicking majority of stakeholders will do the rest.
The same as in the real world. Liberty and rights of minorities will not be protected. Cryptocurrency is a failure
The same as in the real world. Liberty and rights of minorities will not be protected. Cryptocurrency is a failure
Jump to: