Pages:
Author

Topic: ==== Eligius, please pay my 200+ BTC ==== - page 5. (Read 12592 times)

legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
You previously said that eligius lost ~400 BTC, based on $571 for 1 BTC that comes out to ~$228,400 that was stolen. Your largest mining address lost ~$14,850 from the selfish miner. If you look at your number 5 mining address they only lost ~$3,300 from the selfish miner. The point is that the amounts of individual miners are relatively small and probably would not be worth hiring an attorney over, also attorneys would probably want to be paid by the hour for a case with that much is dispute. If you were to hire an attorney to bring a case trying to recover the entire $228,400 (400 BTC) then there would be a better chance that an attorney would work on a contingent basis (agree to only get paid if they win and the payment would be taken out of the settlement/judgment).
Probably right. Which would mean it'd have to be a class-action case (if there even is such a thing in China).
As far as I know, nobody ever wins in class-action lawsuits... Sad

2 - Individual miners may not have standing to sue the selfish miner. In a civil case (involving money/damages) you must prove that damages be caused, but also that he damages were against you. There is clearly a relationship between the miners and the pool (the miners provide work for the pool and in exchange for each unit of work the pool provides a maximum amount of payment, if payment is less then the maximum then when the pool can afford to pay more then the maximum the units that got paid less get paid more). The relationship between miners at the pool are not as clear. I am not an attorney, but I think a likely ruling would be if a miner tried to sue another miner at the same pool, the judge would say that their "beef" is with the pool operator, not the selfish miner. On the other hand if the pool operator were to sue a miner the damages are more clear, as the miner did not provide the work, the miner said they provided the work, and the pool operator paid for the work that was not done. There is clearly a fraud here.
Pools don't pay miners for work, merely coordinate cooperation between miners who pay each other.
This is especially clear-cut on Eligius, where most of the funds never pass through the pool operator's hands.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
In regards to the proof holding up in a criminal case it is important to understand how complex Bitcoin is. You need to be smart to understand even much of the basics as to how Bitcoin works. I would be surprised if you could explain to a jury (made of up "average" people, most of which likely would not have any technical background) how a pool works or how miners work in enough detail that would allow you to explain the evidence.
I don't think courts usually require a full explanation of the technical details, just expert witness testimony that such and such is fact.
If you were to testify, the defense attorney would ask what you think he did. Your response would be something along the lines of he withheld blocks that he founds while mining on our pool (you would explain what mining, pools are and what with holding blocks mean). The next thing he would ask is "how do you know" you would respond by saying something along the lines of "I looked at our pool records and saw x y and z" The defense attorney would ask to see the records and for you to explain what they mean. Having the records in a presettable format may be the difference between guilty and not guilty or 400 BTC or 0 BTC
Perhaps. But should criminal charges be filed, the prosecutors probably have a budget for discovery, which I presume would include doing this kind of organisation of data.

In regards to should he be paid if he is withholding blocks, if it appears that he withheld three blocks (for example) then 76 BTC (I would be aggressive with TX fees) should be withheld from his payment, at the very least. This is regardless if he was doing this intentionally or not and is especially true for such a large mining farm.
Unfortunately, even after withholding the ~200 BTC, he still owes us like ~400 BTC. Sad
If you could find out his identity with relative certainty you could pursue civil charges against him. Assuming he was not mining via tor finding his identity shouldn't be more difficult then filing a lawsuit against the alias, then sending a subpoena to the ISP, data center until you can connect the dots to his identity.
Yes, but arguably it should be some high-loss miner who would file these charges.
I think wizkid057 is prepared to provide IP addresses to assist in any such lawsuit.

I think there are two issues with this:

1 - Per the top contributors page on the eligius website, the address with the most hashpower only contributes ~6.5% (6.4736%) of the hashpower of the pool over the last three hours. CPPSRB is really not something that people would generally leave and/or start mining with over the short term. Other major pool operators use PPLnS (discus fish uses PPS) and they are the same way. This isn't a discussion about what method is best, I am trying to say that miners have no real reason to go from pool to pool based on payment method (at least among the major pools). Therefore it would be fair to say that the 3 hour average would be roughly the same as a 1 week average or the average when the selfish miner was on eligius.

You previously said that eligius lost ~400 BTC, based on $571 for 1 BTC that comes out to ~$228,400 that was stolen. Your largest mining address lost ~$14,850 from the selfish miner. If you look at your number 5 mining address they only lost ~$3,300 from the selfish miner. The point is that the amounts of individual miners are relatively small and probably would not be worth hiring an attorney over, also attorneys would probably want to be paid by the hour for a case with that much is dispute. If you were to hire an attorney to bring a case trying to recover the entire $228,400 (400 BTC) then there would be a better chance that an attorney would work on a contingent basis (agree to only get paid if they win and the payment would be taken out of the settlement/judgment).

2 - Individual miners may not have standing to sue the selfish miner. In a civil case (involving money/damages) you must prove that damages be caused, but also that he damages were against you. There is clearly a relationship between the miners and the pool (the miners provide work for the pool and in exchange for each unit of work the pool provides a maximum amount of payment, if payment is less then the maximum then when the pool can afford to pay more then the maximum the units that got paid less get paid more). The relationship between miners at the pool are not as clear. I am not an attorney, but I think a likely ruling would be if a miner tried to sue another miner at the same pool, the judge would say that their "beef" is with the pool operator, not the selfish miner. On the other hand if the pool operator were to sue a miner the damages are more clear, as the miner did not provide the work, the miner said they provided the work, and the pool operator paid for the work that was not done. There is clearly a fraud here.

My analysis may or may not be correct. I do think that a pool operator sueing a scammer miner would send a strong message to scammers in the Bitcoin world. That they can no longer scam/steal and get away with it. To my knowledge none of the thefts/scams that have taken place that have been bitcoin related have been prosecuted (I think a few people have been doxed, but no prosecutions to my knowledge).

Just my two cents......
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
In regards to the proof holding up in a criminal case it is important to understand how complex Bitcoin is. You need to be smart to understand even much of the basics as to how Bitcoin works. I would be surprised if you could explain to a jury (made of up "average" people, most of which likely would not have any technical background) how a pool works or how miners work in enough detail that would allow you to explain the evidence.
I don't think courts usually require a full explanation of the technical details, just expert witness testimony that such and such is fact.
If you were to testify, the defense attorney would ask what you think he did. Your response would be something along the lines of he withheld blocks that he founds while mining on our pool (you would explain what mining, pools are and what with holding blocks mean). The next thing he would ask is "how do you know" you would respond by saying something along the lines of "I looked at our pool records and saw x y and z" The defense attorney would ask to see the records and for you to explain what they mean. Having the records in a presettable format may be the difference between guilty and not guilty or 400 BTC or 0 BTC
Perhaps. But should criminal charges be filed, the prosecutors probably have a budget for discovery, which I presume would include doing this kind of organisation of data.

In regards to should he be paid if he is withholding blocks, if it appears that he withheld three blocks (for example) then 76 BTC (I would be aggressive with TX fees) should be withheld from his payment, at the very least. This is regardless if he was doing this intentionally or not and is especially true for such a large mining farm.
Unfortunately, even after withholding the ~200 BTC, he still owes us like ~400 BTC. Sad
If you could find out his identity with relative certainty you could pursue civil charges against him. Assuming he was not mining via tor finding his identity shouldn't be more difficult then filing a lawsuit against the alias, then sending a subpoena to the ISP, data center until you can connect the dots to his identity.
Yes, but arguably it should be some high-loss miner who would file these charges.
I think wizkid057 is prepared to provide IP addresses to assist in any such lawsuit.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
One additional thing-

I checked both the addresses from the OP on blockchain.info
https://blockchain.info/address/17JkL94B2ngJg4QQZuiozDQjnxXB6B7yTc?offset=50&filter=0
https://blockchain.info/address/1Gu8zxRi8cyENV8CQe52D7QEsiZ7ruT73u?offset=50&filter=0

And it looks like that both are receiving payouts from BTC Guild.

If they are selfish mining there BTC Guild would likely be appreciative of the heads up, if they are not selfish mining then it may be a possible source of a way to make somewhat of a recovery.

EDIT: I would say that they are almost certainly selfish mining at BTC Guild: Here is the "luck" as per the BTC PPLNS stats page:

Quote
Approximate Pool Luck* (24H / 3D / 1W / 2W / 1M / 3M / All Time): 79.021% / 67.264% / 83.068% / 88.530% / 93.371% / 89.219% / 97.849%
*Luck is how much each share was paid compared to 0% fee PPS (ideal earnings). All-Time calculations started in Sept 2013.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
One additional thing-

I checked both the addresses from the OP on blockchain.info
https://blockchain.info/address/17JkL94B2ngJg4QQZuiozDQjnxXB6B7yTc?offset=50&filter=0
https://blockchain.info/address/1Gu8zxRi8cyENV8CQe52D7QEsiZ7ruT73u?offset=50&filter=0

And it looks like that both are receiving payouts from BTC Guild.

If they are selfish mining there BTC Guild would likely be appreciative of the heads up, if they are not selfish mining then it may be a possible source of a way to make somewhat of a recovery.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Yea this is ridiculous.

Not only that but noone has any real proof of any of this.
There is sufficient proof to easily hold up in a criminal court case, IMO.

I respect eligius a lot and would say that the reputation of eligius would be sufficient to believe you if you say that there is proof. However I would be very interested to see proof.



I respect eligius a lot and would say that the reputation of eligius would be sufficient to believe you if you say that there is proof. However I would be very interested to see proof.
That is something up to wizkid057 to try to organise and present.
If it were me, I'd consider the effort to try to put it in a form understandable by anyone to be more trouble than it's worth.

In regards to the proof holding up in a criminal case it is important to understand how complex Bitcoin is. You need to be smart to understand even much of the basics as to how Bitcoin works. I would be surprised if you could explain to a jury (made of up "average" people, most of which likely would not have any technical background) how a pool works or how miners work in enough detail that would allow you to explain the evidence.
I don't think courts usually require a full explanation of the technical details, just expert witness testimony that such and such is fact.

If you were to testify, the defense attorney would ask what you think he did. Your response would be something along the lines of he withheld blocks that he founds while mining on our pool (you would explain what mining, pools are and what with holding blocks mean). The next thing he would ask is "how do you know" you would respond by saying something along the lines of "I looked at our pool records and saw x y and z" The defense attorney would ask to see the records and for you to explain what they mean. Having the records in a presettable format may be the difference between guilty and not guilty or 400 BTC or 0 BTC

In regards to should he be paid if he is withholding blocks, if it appears that he withheld three blocks (for example) then 76 BTC (I would be aggressive with TX fees) should be withheld from his payment, at the very least. This is regardless if he was doing this intentionally or not and is especially true for such a large mining farm.
Unfortunately, even after withholding the ~200 BTC, he still owes us like ~400 BTC. Sad
If you could find out his identity with relative certainty you could pursue civil charges against him. Assuming he was not mining via tor finding his identity shouldn't be more difficult then filing a lawsuit against the alias, then sending a subpoena to the ISP, data center until you can connect the dots to his identity.

Have you considered "flagging" accounts/addresses/ipaddresses that have more then x hashpower or less then y luck to be manually reviewed for this type of attack prior to them entering the payment que? IP addresses would probably be best.
If it is apparent that he was doing this on purpose (if this person is who he says he is then he was doing it on purpose) then there is no reason to provide payment at all IMO. Intentionally withholding blocks from pools will degrade confidence in pools, which would lead to a decreased number of people mining in the first place (they would only solo mine and only if they could do it when they have enough hahspower that luck will not be a big issue), which would lead to centralization of mining.
The more he talks, the more I get convinced it was intentional.
But we may never know for sure.

I read something somewhere that said BTC Guild banned a bunch of accounts that were having very bad luck. I don't think it was on these forums (it may have been one of those agitators that pull from the forums - it was defiantly not from the news page on BTC Guild -  here, I found it - http://www.bcoinnews.com/btcguild-bans-accounts/ but I am not sure where their quote is from) that said it appeared that those accounts were behind their very bad luck. It mentioned that they were contacted by the owner of one of the accounts and were going over the configuration to check for problems. The quote said they were having 90% and 80% luck, but I think their PPLNS page was showing even worse luck then that. Regardless if this is the same person then I would find it very doubtful it was anything but intentional. 
   
member
Activity: 189
Merit: 11

I'm innocent until proven guilty in your country.
Luckily, I have no need to prove that I'm innocent both under my government and bitcoin way, since it is a by-default. If someone wants to announce that I'm guilty, Hi must prove.
I just want someone to get my money back according to his public visible account page.
I don't like to announce something which I cannot prove, this is not a bitcoin way.



So would you mind to explain what happend at BTCGuild?

We have some issue with our mining infrastructure, which caused BTCGuild froze our account on the beginning of May.
After a fast fix and a test on various pool include Eligius, we saw block solved (totally 5) on Eligius block page and think that the issue was resolved, then we switch back to BTCguild under its administrator's checking on the log of our share we mine after this incident.
But we found that Eligius refused to pay for shares of our test.
In a internal review of this issue, we think that eligius may know this issue and build a plot aimed to this issue.
Then, the left is all known by all here.


So you're either scamming or your gear isn't working right.  Either way you shouldn't expect to get paid.

My gears is working wrong on BTCguild, after fixing we move to eligius for test, and see all things correct in its own block list.
Especially For 1Gu8zxRi8cyENV8CQe52D7QEsiZ7ruT73u, it is a brand new account and begining it's mining just after the fix and block was found by it, so why eligius ban it?


who the fuck would trust your scammy ass..  ban you and your shit miners into the grave

legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
What was being presented was really noting more then accusations.
This is simply not so. For example:

"The mathematical probability of you not finding a block with the amount of work required to find 24 blocks is:
One in 81,000,000"

Also, we have his own words, such as his response to murdof.


full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
Kia ora!
He tried something, he got caught,now he owes 400 BTC and is trying to refocus the discussion away from that fact.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Yea this is ridiculous.

Not only that but noone has any real proof of any of this.
There is sufficient proof to easily hold up in a criminal court case, IMO.

I respect eligius a lot and would say that the reputation of eligius would be sufficient to believe you if you say that there is proof. However I would be very interested to see proof.
That is something up to wizkid057 to try to organise and present.
If it were me, I'd consider the effort to try to put it in a form understandable by anyone to be more trouble than it's worth.

In regards to the proof holding up in a criminal case it is important to understand how complex Bitcoin is. You need to be smart to understand even much of the basics as to how Bitcoin works. I would be surprised if you could explain to a jury (made of up "average" people, most of which likely would not have any technical background) how a pool works or how miners work in enough detail that would allow you to explain the evidence.
I don't think courts usually require a full explanation of the technical details, just expert witness testimony that such and such is fact.

In regards to should he be paid if he is withholding blocks, if it appears that he withheld three blocks (for example) then 76 BTC (I would be aggressive with TX fees) should be withheld from his payment, at the very least. This is regardless if he was doing this intentionally or not and is especially true for such a large mining farm.
Unfortunately, even after withholding the ~200 BTC, he still owes us like ~400 BTC. Sad

If it is apparent that he was doing this on purpose (if this person is who he says he is then he was doing it on purpose) then there is no reason to provide payment at all IMO. Intentionally withholding blocks from pools will degrade confidence in pools, which would lead to a decreased number of people mining in the first place (they would only solo mine and only if they could do it when they have enough hahspower that luck will not be a big issue), which would lead to centralization of mining.
The more he talks, the more I get convinced it was intentional.
But we may never know for sure.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
Not only that but noone has any real proof of any of this.
We have "real proof" of very, very few things in life. Nevertheless, we have no difficulty making decisions based on the preponderance of available evidence. This isn't a metaphysical "how do you know you exist" kind of thing, nor is it a criminal case. This is just an ordinary "make the best decision you can with the evidence available to you" thing.


I would consider "real" proof something that a reasonable person that has a reasonable understanding of the facts and situation would believe.

What was being presented was really noting more then accusations.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Yea this is ridiculous.

Not only that but noone has any real proof of any of this.
There is sufficient proof to easily hold up in a criminal court case, IMO.

I respect eligius a lot and would say that the reputation of eligius would be sufficient to believe you if you say that there is proof. However I would be very interested to see proof.

In regards to the proof holding up in a criminal case it is important to understand how complex Bitcoin is. You need to be smart to understand even much of the basics as to how Bitcoin works. I would be surprised if you could explain to a jury (made of up "average" people, most of which likely would not have any technical background) how a pool works or how miners work in enough detail that would allow you to explain the evidence.

In regards to should he be paid if he is withholding blocks, if it appears that he withheld three blocks (for example) then 76 BTC (I would be aggressive with TX fees) should be withheld from his payment, at the very least. This is regardless if he was doing this intentionally or not and is especially true for such a large mining farm.

If it is apparent that he was doing this on purpose (if this person is who he says he is then he was doing it on purpose) then there is no reason to provide payment at all IMO. Intentionally withholding blocks from pools will degrade confidence in pools, which would lead to a decreased number of people mining in the first place (they would only solo mine and only if they could do it when they have enough hahspower that luck will not be a big issue), which would lead to centralization of mining.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
Not only that but noone has any real proof of any of this.
We have "real proof" of very, very few things in life. Nevertheless, we have no difficulty making decisions based on the preponderance of available evidence. This isn't a metaphysical "how do you know you exist" kind of thing, nor is it a criminal case. This is just an ordinary "make the best decision you can with the evidence available to you" thing.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy

Yea this is ridiculous.

Not only that but noone has any real proof of any of this.
That's like saying that if someone wins the lottery 5 times in a row there is no real proof that they are cheating.

Well I have not seen any logs from eligius that would backup the fact that blocks were withheld nor have I looked into the cheater's address's nor eligius stats to see if payments are where they "should" be.

Most importantly I have not seen any proof that this person really is the person who was mining on eligius. 
hero member
Activity: 1582
Merit: 502
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Go for the Snow Caps next!
Blasphemy...1st popcorn, then gummy bears, finally snow caps.

Wait....were we dealing with something important in this thread?

Oh, yeah that was it....Coke or Pepsi?

-Dave


 Grin neither MD all the way!!
Unless we are at the drive-in.  Then it's B.Y.O.B, of course.

oh yeah even better

B.Y.O.B what?
what does it mean?
B.Y.O.B. = Bring your own booze.

Got it.
Thanks! Smiley
member
Activity: 65
Merit: 10
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Go for the Snow Caps next!
Blasphemy...1st popcorn, then gummy bears, finally snow caps.

Wait....were we dealing with something important in this thread?

Oh, yeah that was it....Coke or Pepsi?

-Dave


 Grin neither MD all the way!!
Unless we are at the drive-in.  Then it's B.Y.O.B, of course.

oh yeah even better

B.Y.O.B what?
what does it mean?
B.Y.O.B. = Bring your own booze.
hero member
Activity: 1582
Merit: 502
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Go for the Snow Caps next!
Blasphemy...1st popcorn, then gummy bears, finally snow caps.

Wait....were we dealing with something important in this thread?

Oh, yeah that was it....Coke or Pepsi?

-Dave


 Grin neither MD all the way!!
Unless we are at the drive-in.  Then it's B.Y.O.B, of course.

oh yeah even better

B.Y.O.B what?
what does it mean?
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 504
Dream become broken often
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Go for the Snow Caps next!
Blasphemy...1st popcorn, then gummy bears, finally snow caps.

Wait....were we dealing with something important in this thread?

Oh, yeah that was it....Coke or Pepsi?

-Dave


 Grin neither MD all the way!!
Unless we are at the drive-in.  Then it's B.Y.O.B, of course.

oh yeah even better
member
Activity: 65
Merit: 10
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Go for the Snow Caps next!
Blasphemy...1st popcorn, then gummy bears, finally snow caps.

Wait....were we dealing with something important in this thread?

Oh, yeah that was it....Coke or Pepsi?

-Dave


 Grin neither MD all the way!!
Unless we are at the drive-in.  Then it's B.Y.O.B, of course.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 504
Dream become broken often
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Cheesy
Go for the Snow Caps next!
Blasphemy...1st popcorn, then gummy bears, finally snow caps.

Wait....were we dealing with something important in this thread?

Oh, yeah that was it....Coke or Pepsi?

-Dave


 Grin neither MD all the way!!
Pages:
Jump to: