Pages:
Author

Topic: bitfloor needs your help! - page 25. (Read 177473 times)

hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1002
September 05, 2012, 01:17:07 PM
He admitted he had an unencrypted wallet file on an online computer.

There's no excuse for someone with fifty bitcoins to have that, let alone someone with twenty-five thousand, on a (relatively) high-profile website.
He didn't have them "on a high-profile website." Thanks for proving my point.

Did he make a mistake? Sure. Hindsight is 20/20. Does this mistake equal "gross negligence?" It's possible, but you don't know.

Feel free to keep running your mouth, I'm sure it will help.
hero member
Activity: 675
Merit: 502
September 05, 2012, 01:00:52 PM
Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.
+1, unfortunately. My life experience suggests that people actually don't learn lessons and instead repeat prior behavior if they can get away with it. (This is not a personal judgment about any particular person.)
The operators of Bitfloor should have learned their lesson from the hacks of all the other Bitcoin exchanges. That they did not points to either gross negligence or criminal intent, neither of which should instill confidence in anyone.
Bullshit. That's like saying that because a car wreck has happened before, every future car wreck points to "gross negligence or criminal intent."  

How Roman resolves the current situation can certainly lead to further confidence in him.
Holding unencrypted wallet files on online computers in a business where you know you are likely to be a target is either gross negligence or it's a fake story to cover criminal intent.

To extend your car analogy, if you had seen many of your friends die in car crashes from not wearing a seatbelt, and you drive without a seatbelt and allow your children to ride with you without a seatbelt, you are grossly negligent.

You are working on very limited information and yet you're speaking in absolutes. Sounds like you're just here to bash him, or you love speaking in unsupported hyperbole.

He admitted he had an unencrypted wallet file on an online computer.

There's no excuse for someone with fifty bitcoins to have that, let alone someone with twenty-five thousand, on a (relatively) high-profile website.
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
September 05, 2012, 01:00:31 PM
You are working on very limited information and yet you're speaking in absolutes. Sounds like you're just here to bash him, or you love speaking in unsupported hyperbole.

Let them bash him. Frustrated people who lost money need an outlet for their anger, and Roman admittedly deserves the scolding  Tongue
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1002
September 05, 2012, 12:55:27 PM
Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.
+1, unfortunately. My life experience suggests that people actually don't learn lessons and instead repeat prior behavior if they can get away with it. (This is not a personal judgment about any particular person.)
The operators of Bitfloor should have learned their lesson from the hacks of all the other Bitcoin exchanges. That they did not points to either gross negligence or criminal intent, neither of which should instill confidence in anyone.
Bullshit. That's like saying that because a car wreck has happened before, every future car wreck points to "gross negligence or criminal intent."  

How Roman resolves the current situation can certainly lead to further confidence in him.
Holding unencrypted wallet files on online computers in a business where you know you are likely to be a target is either gross negligence or it's a fake story to cover criminal intent.

To extend your car analogy, if you had seen many of your friends die in car crashes from not wearing a seatbelt, and you drive without a seatbelt and allow your children to ride with you without a seatbelt, you are grossly negligent.

You are working on very limited information and yet you're speaking in absolutes. Sounds like you're just here to bash him, or you love speaking in unsupported hyperbole.
hero member
Activity: 675
Merit: 502
September 05, 2012, 12:52:10 PM
Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.
+1, unfortunately. My life experience suggests that people actually don't learn lessons and instead repeat prior behavior if they can get away with it. (This is not a personal judgment about any particular person.)
The operators of Bitfloor should have learned their lesson from the hacks of all the other Bitcoin exchanges. That they did not points to either gross negligence or criminal intent, neither of which should instill confidence in anyone.
Bullshit. That's like saying that because a car wreck has happened before, every future car wreck points to "gross negligence or criminal intent."  

How Roman resolves the current situation can certainly lead to further confidence in him.
Holding unencrypted wallet files on online computers in a business where you know you are likely to be a target is either gross negligence or it's a fake story to cover criminal intent.

To extend your car analogy, if you had seen many of your friends die in car crashes from not wearing a seatbelt, and you drive without a seatbelt and allow your children to ride with you without a seatbelt, you are grossly negligent.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1002
September 05, 2012, 12:43:04 PM
Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.
+1, unfortunately. My life experience suggests that people actually don't learn lessons and instead repeat prior behavior if they can get away with it. (This is not a personal judgment about any particular person.)
The operators of Bitfloor should have learned their lesson from the hacks of all the other Bitcoin exchanges. That they did not points to either gross negligence or criminal intent, neither of which should instill confidence in anyone.
Bullshit. That's like saying that because a car wreck has happened before, every future car wreck points to "gross negligence or criminal intent."  

How Roman resolves the current situation can certainly lead to further confidence in him.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
September 05, 2012, 12:42:45 PM
And one more thought, the professional software industry knows very well how to avoid these types of failures.

There just isn't enough money / ROI involved here to make it worth applying full-scale software engineering practices.

--

And that goes well beyond just 'slinging code'. It gets into Project Management, Administration Practices, Policies and Procedures, etc.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
September 05, 2012, 12:37:37 PM
Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.
+1, unfortunately. My life experience suggests that people actually don't learn lessons and instead repeat prior behavior if they can get away with it. (This is not a personal judgment about any particular person.)
The operators of Bitfloor should have learned their lesson from the hacks of all the other Bitcoin exchanges. That they did not points to either gross negligence or criminal intent, neither of which should instill confidence in anyone.
Tis a valid point, but not everyone learns well secondhand.  Many people learn best by failure.  I don't think failure implies purposeful negligence in all cases.

No, I am saying I trust people more who have "learned their lesson" already vs people who haven't.  I trust someone who has been through the hell of losing $200k of customer funds more than someone who hasn't, because they're going to do everything in their power to make sure it doesn't happen again.  They will have better security practices, procedures, and knowledge the second time around.

There are two different qualities at issue here - the first is a person's diligence/competence, the second is their honesty.

A painful mistake is likely to help a person learn to be more diligent/careful in the future, because they do not want to experience the consequences again.

A painful mistake won't make a dishonest person into an honest person.

I don't know the man personally but my impression is that Roman is an honest person who was insufficiently diligent/competent in the operation of his business. His behavior post-event seems to be that of a person owning up to and trying to fix the error in the best way possible.
Absolutely agree.  I believe Roman to be honest, and I wasn't trying to say that I would trust a dishonest person more after they stole people's money.  I trust an honest person more if they make a mistake, own up to it, and learn from it.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
September 05, 2012, 12:32:27 PM
Well, my impression is just that the operator of Bitfloor is young and inexperienced. With age and wide experience, not just ten or twenty years of the same thing over and over, Murphy's Laws become entrenched. Just automatic habit.

And paranoia becomes a professional asset. Smiley

--

I do praise him for immediately coming forward / fessing up.
Most people's first inclination is usually to hide or attempt a cover-up.
member
Activity: 113
Merit: 10
September 05, 2012, 12:25:35 PM
No, I am saying I trust people more who have "learned their lesson" already vs people who haven't.  I trust someone who has been through the hell of losing $200k of customer funds more than someone who hasn't, because they're going to do everything in their power to make sure it doesn't happen again.  They will have better security practices, procedures, and knowledge the second time around.

There are two different qualities at issue here - the first is a person's diligence/competence, the second is their honesty.

A painful mistake is likely to help a person learn to be more diligent/careful in the future, because they do not want to experience the consequences again.

A painful mistake won't make a dishonest person into an honest person.

I don't know the man personally but my impression is that Roman is an honest person who was insufficiently diligent/competent in the operation of his business. His behavior post-event seems to be that of a person owning up to and trying to fix the error in the best way possible.
hero member
Activity: 675
Merit: 502
September 05, 2012, 12:21:25 PM
Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.
+1, unfortunately. My life experience suggests that people actually don't learn lessons and instead repeat prior behavior if they can get away with it. (This is not a personal judgment about any particular person.)
The operators of Bitfloor should have learned their lesson from the hacks of all the other Bitcoin exchanges. That they did not points to either gross negligence or criminal intent, neither of which should instill confidence in anyone.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
September 05, 2012, 12:07:03 PM
+1 to this.  If Bitfloor comes back, I would trust it a lot more than any new exchange that might come to take its place, because I know Bitfloor has learned its lesson the hard way already, and hopefully won't have to learn it again.  A new guy will probably fall into the same "oh, it won't happen to ME" trap that Roman did.

Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.

No, I am saying I trust people more who have "learned their lesson" already vs people who haven't.  I trust someone who has been through the hell of losing $200k of customer funds more than someone who hasn't, because they're going to do everything in their power to make sure it doesn't happen again.  They will have better security practices, procedures, and knowledge the second time around.

Of course, that's not a statement that stands entirely on its own.  Obviously, I will do my own due diligence to make sure that they actually have implemented better security measures, and that I am satisfied with the way they have resolved the prior security breach, etc.

It's like riding a bike up a hill.  Some people may try to ride straight up the hill, but it is too steep to do it - they will fail.  Others will take the longer path that winds around the hill.  Now, I don't know who is taking the path and who is trying to ride straight up, but I know that if someone DOES try to ride straight up, and fails, they're unlikely to try it again.  Therefore, anyone who fails is more likely to take the longer path that winds around than anyone who hasn't failed yet.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1012
Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.
September 05, 2012, 12:01:35 PM
Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.
+1, unfortunately. My life experience suggests that people actually don't learn lessons and instead repeat prior behavior if they can get away with it. (This is not a personal judgment about any particular person.)
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
I am the one who knocks
September 05, 2012, 11:56:03 AM
1) All the money needed to cover stolen BTC are raised immediately
Did you account for slippage in your calculation?  I have not ran the numbers but highly doubt that you could acquire that many coins all at once for one price point.
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
September 05, 2012, 11:54:33 AM
+1 to this.  If Bitfloor comes back, I would trust it a lot more than any new exchange that might come to take its place, because I know Bitfloor has learned its lesson the hard way already, and hopefully won't have to learn it again.  A new guy will probably fall into the same "oh, it won't happen to ME" trap that Roman did.

Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.

If I understand what happened correctly, the issue was not as much security related as just a dumb, careless mistake. I.e. this may have happened even on a very well secured system (though not to this extent if cold storage was used). Having this happen to an operator instills some really healthy paranoia, and changes their operating procedures, i.e. the human factor of security. Despite MtGox having vastly improved their technical security, we still don't really know if they have standard procedures that everyone must follow, and if they might not accidentally copy a wallet someplace unsafe while upgrading as well.

I do understand your point though, and mine does seem counterintuitive.
sd
hero member
Activity: 730
Merit: 500
September 05, 2012, 11:39:54 AM
+1 to this.  If Bitfloor comes back, I would trust it a lot more than any new exchange that might come to take its place, because I know Bitfloor has learned its lesson the hard way already, and hopefully won't have to learn it again.  A new guy will probably fall into the same "oh, it won't happen to ME" trap that Roman did.

Sorry, but that's flawed reasoning. You are saying you trust people more because they have proved they are not trustworthy. By that reasoning you should trust bitcoinica with everything you have.
hero member
Activity: 520
Merit: 500
September 05, 2012, 11:33:47 AM
Also, I trust MtGox because it was previously hacked, and was forced to review its security procedures. Someone new may not care until they got hurt badly. Should it come back, I would trust Bitfloor more than other new exchanges (assuming their security policies we're also publicly scrutinized), because, like MtGox, they were forced to learn from mistakes and the owner knows just now much stupid oversights can cost him.
+1 to this.  If Bitfloor comes back, I would trust it a lot more than any new exchange that might come to take its place, because I know Bitfloor has learned its lesson the hard way already, and hopefully won't have to learn it again.  A new guy will probably fall into the same "oh, it won't happen to ME" trap that Roman did.

Any bussiness that has to learn all the lessons the hard way instead of avoiding the mistakes of predecessors is going to have a tough time being competitive. That goes for life too.
legendary
Activity: 1022
Merit: 1001
I'd fight Gandhi.
September 05, 2012, 11:28:47 AM
Interestingly, Mt.Gox is down also it seems.

False.  Good one though.
I was having a lot of trouble with it last night. Very slow loading, sometimes would just time out. Works fine now.
legendary
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1000
September 05, 2012, 11:28:13 AM
Also, I trust MtGox because it was previously hacked, and was forced to review its security procedures. Someone new may not care until they got hurt badly. Should it come back, I would trust Bitfloor more than other new exchanges (assuming their security policies we're also publicly scrutinized), because, like MtGox, they were forced to learn from mistakes and the owner knows just now much stupid oversights can cost him.



Do not forget about the LR hack that BTC-E went through in July. BTC-E covered all the users losses through a rollback and was up and running about a day later with most of the customers funds back in place.

I now trust them equally to  GOX and more than any of the others, but GOX can be so difficult and slow to withdrawal USD.

I had the unfortunate luck of transferring some 60 BTC to Bitfloor that I wanted to cash out the night Bitfloor got hacked...... Sad





legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
September 05, 2012, 11:08:40 AM
Also, I trust MtGox because it was previously hacked, and was forced to review its security procedures. Someone new may not care until they got hurt badly. Should it come back, I would trust Bitfloor more than other new exchanges (assuming their security policies we're also publicly scrutinized), because, like MtGox, they were forced to learn from mistakes and the owner knows just now much stupid oversights can cost him.
+1 to this.  If Bitfloor comes back, I would trust it a lot more than any new exchange that might come to take its place, because I know Bitfloor has learned its lesson the hard way already, and hopefully won't have to learn it again.  A new guy will probably fall into the same "oh, it won't happen to ME" trap that Roman did.
Pages:
Jump to: