Exchange accidentally sent 512 bitcoins after coding error - page 22.

sliderider

copper member

Activity: 658

Merit: 0

Quote from: nighteyes on September 02, 2011, 01:27:30 PM

Quote from: Vladimir on September 02, 2011, 01:01:07 PM

@casascius, of course you are correct here. It's amazing how many ridiculous misconceptions about law most people have and how sure are they about own infallibility.

Note to self: never ever talk about law on forums (except consumeractiongroup.co.uk and likes), wrestling with pigs is not a good idea.

The law of kids is finders keepers, losers weepers for everything....what a PITA it must be to find out there is theft by disposition/conversion and minors are not exempt.Another problem for the kids is the law of finders keepers never existed for non treasures (http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/services/233/hisfind.html).

Bitcoin=treasure therefore finders keepers applies.

sliderider

copper member

Activity: 658

Merit: 0

Quote from: nighteyes on September 02, 2011, 01:27:30 PM

Quote from: Vladimir on September 02, 2011, 01:01:07 PM

@casascius, of course you are correct here. It's amazing how many ridiculous misconceptions about law most people have and how sure are they about own infallibility.

Note to self: never ever talk about law on forums (except consumeractiongroup.co.uk and likes), wrestling with pigs is not a good idea.

The law of kids is finders keepers, losers weepers for everything....what a PITA it must be to find out there is theft by disposition/conversion and minors are not exempt.Another problem for the kids is the law of finders keepers never existed for non treasures (http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/services/233/hisfind.html).

We live in a society where the burden of proof is on the accuser. The loser of the item must prove that it is his. It is not the burden of the finder to prove that it isn't. In the absence of proof, the person who loses the item also loses the case. In this case the block chain proves the ownership of the bitcoins to be whoever is in possession at the moment.

nighteyes

member

Activity: 105

Merit: 10

Quote from: Vladimir on September 02, 2011, 01:01:07 PM

@casascius, of course you are correct here. It's amazing how many ridiculous misconceptions about law most people have and how sure are they about own infallibility.

Note to self: never ever talk about law on forums (except consumeractiongroup.co.uk and likes), wrestling with pigs is not a good idea.

The law of kids is finders keepers, losers weepers for everything....what a PITA it must be to find out there is theft by disposition/conversion and minors are not exempt.Another problem for the kids is the law of finders keepers never existed for non treasures (http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/services/233/hisfind.html).

sliderider

copper member

Activity: 658

Merit: 0

Quote from: molecular on September 02, 2011, 01:17:33 PM

Quote from: JeffK on September 02, 2011, 12:11:50 PM

Quote from: N12 on September 02, 2011, 11:36:57 AM

Quote from: johnj on September 02, 2011, 11:31:56 AM

Waking up to find 512 btc in your account =/= stealing/thieving.

He sold those Bitcoins shortly thereafter. So yes, it is stealing.

Transactions aren't reversible by design - those Bitcoins are now his.

You can't have it both ways people - you cannot have a system with 'no chargebacks' but call the lack of a receiving party to return mistakenly sent funds 'theft'.

Any and all rsposibility, if any at this point, falls on the programmer who coded this, not the person who received the funds.

This is a stupid way to think: "Oh, this grandma dropped her purse and it landed in mine. Well tought luck, it's her fault and now my money.", "This guy didn't lock his door, well, his fault, I can walk in and take his stuff, that's the physical world".

Of course we can have it both ways: on the technical side, a transaction is final. But it can well be reversed socially by making a new transanction to give it back.

If a friend lends you a 100-dollar-bill, the physical process of him giving it to you is not reversible. Yet you give it back, unless you are an anti-social asshole.

If someone accidentially give you a 100-dollar-bill, you give it back, unless you are some anti-social asshole.

Anyone who says "tough luck" or "coders fault" here, should go back to the jungle or maybe in jail. But probably even there, some decency exists.

This is sad. What has become of this once awesome community?

If someone drops a $50 bill on the street and I come along after they are gone and pick it up, it is mine. It is not stolen. It is lost. I am not liable for the other person losing their $50.

hightax

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: molecular on September 02, 2011, 01:17:33 PM

If a friend lends you a 100-dollar-bill, the physical process of him giving it to you is not reversible. Yet you give it back, unless you are an anti-social asshole.

That's a verbal contract with the explicit obligation to return the money.

Quote from: molecular on September 02, 2011, 01:17:33 PM

Anyone who says "tough luck" or "coders fault" here, should go back to the jungle or maybe in jail. But probably even there, some decency exists.

This post? Here on the same forums where there are multiple pyramid schemes, ponzi schemes, scammers, admitted real estate fraudsters, and a BTC loan-bank that can't even get its customers to pay back their loans?

Really? Huh

Quote from: casascius on September 02, 2011, 01:21:20 PM

Last I checked, Ayn Rand wasn't ever a politician with the authority to write laws. Ever remember what happened to the person who tried offering parts of the Columbia space shuttle wreckage on eBay? Would getting penetrated by Bubba in prison be equivalent to getting penetrated by bullets in your view?

I've been reading these forums since before mtgox hit $30/btc, and RAND IS LAW here.

casascius

vip

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1140

The Casascius 1oz 10BTC Silver Round (w/ Gold B)

Quote from: Surawit on September 02, 2011, 01:10:05 PM

Slight correction: You would have to return it, because you are a snivelling weakling slave collaborator to the nanny state. If anything of value landed on my property, you can be damn sure the feds would have to wrench it from my bullet-ridden corpse. This is an issue of FREEDOM. Have you ever even read Atlas Shrugged?

Last I checked, Ayn Rand wasn't ever a politician with the authority to write laws. Ever remember what happened to the person who tried offering parts of the Columbia space shuttle wreckage on eBay? Would getting penetrated by Bubba in prison be equivalent to getting penetrated by bullets in your view?

JeffK

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

I never hashed for this...

Quote from: molecular on September 02, 2011, 01:17:33 PM

Quote from: JeffK on September 02, 2011, 12:11:50 PM

Quote from: N12 on September 02, 2011, 11:36:57 AM

Quote from: johnj on September 02, 2011, 11:31:56 AM

Waking up to find 512 btc in your account =/= stealing/thieving.

He sold those Bitcoins shortly thereafter. So yes, it is stealing.

Transactions aren't reversible by design - those Bitcoins are now his.

You can't have it both ways people - you cannot have a system with 'no chargebacks' but call the lack of a receiving party to return mistakenly sent funds 'theft'.

Any and all rsposibility, if any at this point, falls on the programmer who coded this, not the person who received the funds.

This is a stupid way to think: "Oh, this grandma dropped her purse and it landed in mine. Well tought luck, it's her fault and now my money.", "This guy didn't lock his door, well, his fault, I can walk in and take his stuff, that's the physical world".

Of course we can have it both ways: on the technical side, a transaction is final. But it can well be reversed socially by making a new transanction to give it back.

If a friend lends you a 100-dollar-bill, the physical process of him giving it to you is not reversible. Yet you give it back, unless you are an anti-social asshole.

If someone accidentially give you a 100-dollar-bill, you give it back, unless you are some anti-social asshole.

Anyone who says "tough luck" or "coders fault" here, should go back to the jungle or maybe in jail. But probably even there, some decency exists.

This is sad. What has become of this once awesome community?

This is an absolutely awful set of analogies.

The transaction is not only made, it is being verified as valid by peers. Therefore, in the eyes of those in the blockchain, it is indeed 'valid'

JeffK

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

I never hashed for this...

Quote from: Vladimir on September 02, 2011, 01:14:56 PM

johnj, sliderider, JeffK, if I ever forget remind me that I should not ever have any biz with you.

I totally agree that they should have been given back, and I certainly have the conscience to do so, but given the technology involved it can in no way be classified a 'theft', and depending on people to be honorable and do something the monetary system doesn't require does not make the basis for a solid and trustworthy economy.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: Vladimir on September 02, 2011, 12:14:41 PM

Irreversible transactions do not make honour, ethic and law irrelevant.

Shit, it just took me like 20 times more words to say the same thing. +1 vladimir and another one for hitting the nail on the head.

johnj

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

Quote from: Vladimir on September 02, 2011, 01:14:56 PM

johnj, sliderider, JeffK, if I ever forget remind me that I should not ever have any biz with you.

Really? I've agreed that it's ethical to return it, but both parties were being douches. But somehow I'm untrustworthy?

Sorry guy if I don't roll with the mob mentality.

I guess its your choice to do business with who you choose.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: JeffK on September 02, 2011, 12:11:50 PM

Quote from: N12 on September 02, 2011, 11:36:57 AM

Quote from: johnj on September 02, 2011, 11:31:56 AM

Waking up to find 512 btc in your account =/= stealing/thieving.

He sold those Bitcoins shortly thereafter. So yes, it is stealing.

Transactions aren't reversible by design - those Bitcoins are now his.

You can't have it both ways people - you cannot have a system with 'no chargebacks' but call the lack of a receiving party to return mistakenly sent funds 'theft'.

Any and all rsposibility, if any at this point, falls on the programmer who coded this, not the person who received the funds.

This is a stupid way to think: "Oh, this grandma dropped her purse and it landed in mine. Well tought luck, it's her fault and now my money.", "This guy didn't lock his door, well, his fault, I can walk in and take his stuff, that's the physical world".

Of course we can have it both ways: on the technical side, a transaction is final. But it can well be reversed socially by making a new transanction to give it back.

If a friend lends you a 100-dollar-bill, the physical process of him giving it to you is not reversible. Yet you give it back, unless you are an anti-social asshole.

If someone accidentially give you a 100-dollar-bill, you give it back, unless you are some anti-social asshole.

Anyone who says "tough luck" or "coders fault" here, should go back to the jungle or maybe in jail. But probably even there, some decency exists.

This is sad. What has become of this once awesome community?

JeffK

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

I never hashed for this...

Quote from: casascius on September 02, 2011, 01:07:32 PM

Quote from: JeffK on September 02, 2011, 01:00:45 PM

As far as 'who owns what', the blockchain has the final say. This is an underlying concept of Bitcoin.

Not true. The blockchain is a record of who possesses what. It is not a record of ownership or title.

If you send me 100 BTC for safekeeping, or loan me your car, I possess it, but you still own it.

But the proof lies in the blockchain, which says I did own them and gave them to you, in a way that looks exactly like every other transaction.

Unless, of course, you have an explicit contract involved identifying the transaction, but even then it is hard to prove.

Quote from: johnj on September 02, 2011, 01:13:34 PM

I'm unaware of where the exchange is located, or what the laws there are... but couldn't you write off the loss on taxes?

Dangerous door you are opening up there.

casascius

vip

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1140

The Casascius 1oz 10BTC Silver Round (w/ Gold B)

Quote from: hightax on September 02, 2011, 01:11:23 PM

If those salesmen unload a pallet of toner in your drive way and drive off (just like delivering bitcoins) then yes, you do take ownership of them as the goods were abandoned on your property.

If they did so in error and you refused to make them available for them back when timely asked, you'd be liable to them for the tort of conversion (if not the crime of theft) just about everywhere civilized.

hightax

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: johnj on September 02, 2011, 01:13:34 PM

I'm unaware of where the exchange is located, or what the laws there are... but couldn't you write off the loss on taxes?

People are paying taxes on bitcoins? Really?

Vladimir

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

-

johnj, sliderider, JeffK, if I ever forget remind me that I should not ever have any biz with you.

skilo

sr. member

Activity: 321

Merit: 250

Quote from: molecular on September 02, 2011, 01:09:12 PM

Quote from: skilo on September 02, 2011, 11:23:44 AM

Its the fault of the guy that made the coding error, Not the fault of the guy that got the BTC accidentally.
...
Al it boils down to is this, Someone made an error and that error cost them alot of BTC.

Tuff luck.

This is not about whose fault it is. It's about being civilized and making things right. I think the money should be returned.. clearly a mistake was made.

If you accidentally receive too much change in a shop... what do you do? Take the money and run? If so: what are you, some sort of ape?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8y6DJAeolo

casascius

vip

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1140

The Casascius 1oz 10BTC Silver Round (w/ Gold B)

Quote from: sliderider on September 02, 2011, 01:07:23 PM

Quote from: casascius on September 02, 2011, 01:05:47 PM

If toner salesmen park a truck full of toner cartridges in your driveway, you don't suddenly own their truck and their toner, as the exception no longer applies.

Anything on my property belongs to me and I'd like to see them try to get it back.

You could reasonably anticipate legal trouble trying to assert that position, but of course I doubt you really mean it. Have you ever called a plumber or a repairman or had friends over? And then asserted ownership of their vehicles because they were on your property? I didn't think so.

johnj

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

I'm unaware of where the exchange is located, or what the laws there are... but couldn't you write off the loss on taxes?

hightax

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: casascius on September 02, 2011, 01:05:47 PM

Quote from: hightax on September 02, 2011, 12:59:44 PM

When toner sales men ship you a crate of toner cartridges you didn't ask for, and then sends you a bill for those toner cartridges, you don't have to send them back, and you don't have to pay for them either. Welcome to the real world.

http://www.snopes.com/crime/fraud/supplies.asp

That's only because the law explicitly allows for this, as a way to prevent unscrupulous scammers from sending you things on purpose just to compel you to buy them. It's a notable exception to prevent abuse of the mail for fraud.

If toner salesmen park a truck full of toner cartridges in your driveway, you don't suddenly own their truck and their toner, as the exception no longer applies.

If those salesmen unload a pallet of toner in your drive way and drive off (just like delivering bitcoins) then yes, you do take ownership of them as the goods were abandoned on your property.

Surawit

newbie

Activity: 28

Merit: 0

Quote from: casascius on September 02, 2011, 01:01:23 PM

Not a really relevant example, because the cost of compelling them to give it back vastly exceeds the value of the item you want back. If what went through your window was a fallen piece of a jet airplane and the airline wanted it back, you would damn well have to return it.

Slight correction: You would have to return it, because you are a snivelling weakling slave collaborator to the nanny state. If anything of value landed on my property, you can be damn sure the feds would have to wrench it from my bullet-ridden corpse. This is an issue of FREEDOM. Have you ever even read Atlas Shrugged?

Topic: Exchange accidentally sent 512 bitcoins after coding error - page 22. (Read 35497 times)