Pages:
Author

Topic: [PROPOSAL] - lock the apparent Mt. Gox coins for now (Read 4956 times)

legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1087
Given the possible recent leak of the Mt. Gox source code and database, what would the core developers and mining community think of locking the apparent large wallet balances belonging to Mt. Gox, Mark Karpeles, and Jeb McCaleb by changing the protocol for now?

The idea would not be to accept any transactions spending these bitcoin until the Mt. Gox bankruptcy case is sorted out. A committee, possibly appointed by the Bitcoin Foundation, could verify proper ownership before the coins are cleared for spending and a change back is made.

This would be a bit different than the idea of taking the coins permanently, or permanently invalidating them. The intention here would be to simply assist the legal process.

I know this is not something which can be done for every theft, etc., but we are talking about 6% of all bitcoin mined to date, which are presently tangled up in a real legal mess.

I suppose a general principle to govern this could be that when an entity controlling greater than some number of fraction of bitcoin is subject to legal action, such as a bankruptcy, charges of fraud, lawsuits, etc., that coins may be locked pending the outcome of litigation.

A committee? pfft. All that hassle of having to get more than one person to agree, the pesky distinction between majority and consensus? pit pat piffy wing wong wang just make it one person with sole control over whether or not to allow any transaction they feel like. So long as they are trustworthy, I'm sure it will all work out for the best for everyone.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Born to chew bubble gum and kick ass
Given the possible recent leak of the Mt. Gox source code and database, what would the core developers and mining community think of locking the apparent large wallet balances belonging to Mt. Gox, Mark Karpeles, and Jeb McCaleb by changing the protocol for now?

To my knowledge there was a case of a mining pool operator who was robbed. The victim alarmed the community quickly (this is what a victim normally does when robbed) and the community could react also quickly and some portion of the stolen coins were retrieved.

Unfortunately for the goxed and fortunately for the ''thieves'', Mark Karpeles had allowed about a month before announcing that ''theft'' happened. He didn't even tell to which addresses the ''stolen'' coins were sent. MtGox is under civil rehabilitation, meaning Karpeles will probably never reveal to which addresses the ''stolen'' coins were withdrawn.


The idea would not be to accept any transactions spending these bitcoin until the Mt. Gox bankruptcy case is sorted out.

Only some portion of the ''stolen'' coins are in static addresses now. Majority was simply divided by four, divided by four, divided by four*, then sent to an exchange, sold and or bought back. Most reasonable here is to look for the so called theives' names in exchanges' records - only in case you are absolutely 100% sure (you can't be 100% sure because Karpeles - unlike the robbed ones in the past - did not tell to which addresses the ''stolen'' coins were sent).


A committee, possibly appointed by the Bitcoin Foundation, could verify proper ownership before the coins are cleared for spending and a change back is made.

If what happened was a real theft TBF might do something. Nothing so far (Karapeles' bahaviour and other stuff) indicates this was a theft.


*EDIT: now they are being divided by 8, 18, etc.: https://blockchain.info/address/12WFth5HabiVrcj5waHtDP1b7gXSQPuDPz still not sure if these are the ''disappeared'' / ''unaccounted for'' / ''stolen'' coins.
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1006
100 satoshis -> ISO code
Best not to call the new forked coin Bitcoin, as it will cause confusion. Maybe 'untrustworthyCoin', 'bailoutCoin' or even 'CannotTrustCoinAsMaybeFrozenAtSomeFuturePointInTimeCoin'?

The thing is that even if "apparent" gox addresses are locked, never mind the collateral damage of locked coins on non-gox addresses of innocent bitcoin holders, this would not return any funds to people who had their coins lost on gox.

It is purely an act of revenge. So the the forked Bitcoin is best called RevengeCoin.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
10 of those "Gox coins" are mine!   How about we lock them where they belong, back on my paper wallet.  I deposited them after the withdrawal stoppage, so I know damn well they have not left Gox's pocket!

God give me strength. I'm beginning to lose the will to live. Roll Eyes

Yeah. I know, I was thinking of similar events like someone giving money to Nigerian email scammers and complaining afterwards, but you sum up the situation perfectly.

So the ripoff of Gox is comparable to a Nigerian Craigslist scam?

One is the friggin' Battleship of fraud, the other is a one man dingy.



The end result is the same. The coins/money have disappeared, you won't be getting them back.


Why don't we stop talking about it and release a new bitcoin-qt and miner that invalidates transactions from their wallets?

Go for it, Bitcoin is free (as in speech).

But remember; others are also free to use your new fork or not. This is where your greatest challenge exists.

Best not to call the new forked coin Bitcoin, as it will cause confusion. Maybe 'untrustworthyCoin', 'bailoutCoin' or even 'CannotTrustCoinAsMaybeFrozenAtSomeFuturePointInTimeCoin'?
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
Put your trust in MATH.
10 of those "Gox coins" are mine!   How about we lock them where they belong, back on my paper wallet.  I deposited them after the withdrawal stoppage, so I know damn well they have not left Gox's pocket!

God give me strength. I'm beginning to lose the will to live. Roll Eyes

Yeah. I know, I was thinking of similar events like someone giving money to Nigerian email scammers and complaining afterwards, but you sum up the situation perfectly.

So the ripoff of Gox is comparable to a Nigerian Craigslist scam?

One is the friggin' Battleship of fraud, the other is a one man dingy.

newbie
Activity: 46
Merit: 0
Why don't we stop talking about it and release a new bitcoin-qt and miner that invalidates transactions from their wallets?

Tongue

+1 id run it! Tongue
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
Why don't we stop talking about it and release a new bitcoin-qt and miner that invalidates transactions from their wallets?

Tongue
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1006
100 satoshis -> ISO code
10 of those "Gox coins" are mine!   How about we lock them where they belong, back on my paper wallet.  I deposited them after the withdrawal stoppage, so I know damn well they have not left Gox's pocket!

God give me strength. I'm beginning to lose the will to live. Roll Eyes

Yeah. I know, I was thinking of similar events like someone giving money to Nigerian email scammers and complaining afterwards, but you sum up the situation perfectly.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
10 of those "Gox coins" are mine!   How about we lock them where they belong, back on my paper wallet.  I deposited them after the withdrawal stoppage, so I know damn well they have not left Gox's pocket!

God give me strength. I'm beginning to lose the will to live. Roll Eyes
sr. member
Activity: 332
Merit: 253
Do you have any suggestions on how much "taint" is sufficient to authorize a "lock"?  Will the output have to be proven to be 100% entirely from the MtGox theft?  Maybe anything more than 90% tainted should be locked?  Really since we are using 50% of the hashing power to enforce the rules, perhaps we should consider anything more than 50% tainted should be locked.  Come to think of it, given the "ethical imperative" and the "massive fraud or theft", I suppose the best thing to do is consider anything more than 0.1% tainted to be lockable.  It should be acceptable to temporarily lock valid bitcoins to protect the community from assisting the thief.

So glad to see that this idea is being taken seriously  Smiley

This raises an interesting point though. My original proposal was only to lock coins presently belonging to Mt. Gox. I don't think it would be wise to lock coins belonging to others which might have been derived from stolen Mt. Gox coins, as this does become an even harder problem from an evidence point of view. Also, those others are not presently under legal action concerning the missing coins, whereas Mt. Gox is.

Clearly the evidentiary standards would need to be seriously considered.

You raise a good point though that this really is up to the miners. Sounds like the lock would be technically feasible, actually, not that hard.

10 of those "Gox coins" are mine!   How about we lock them where they belong, back on my paper wallet.  I deposited them after the withdrawal stoppage, so I know damn well they have not left Gox's pocket!

Here's an example of a user that might benefit from this. With the Gox coins locked, at least they wouldn't be stolen or leaked to someone else until after the court proceedings.


legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
We should urgently the lock the full blockchain for a few years, until a self appointed team decides which ones to unlock!
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
Put your trust in MATH.
10 of those "Gox coins" are mine!   How about we lock them where they belong, back on my paper wallet.  I deposited them after the withdrawal stoppage, so I know damn well they have not left Gox's pocket!

Thief!
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
why is it that the most ridiculous threads get the most action...people must love to argue Smiley
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 4801
It would be ridiculously funny if he pulled it off. I'm relatively certain that Eligius would never go for it, but I'm not so sure about ghash.io, and nobody seems to know shit about Discus Fish. All the other pools would get one hell of a boost!

I highly doubt any pool is going to go out into the yard and kill the goose that lays the golden eggs just because some random internet user tells them that the goose will taste good for dinner.

If they do, they deserve to eat the meal that they cook.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
Wow Danny, calm down.  You're being baited.

I think you got that backwards...

Shhhhh.  You'll ruin my fun.

 Grin

@Danny, I think I would survive your schema unscathed. Almost all of my coins from beginning to end have been generated at Eliigius, BTCguild or Bitparking Cheesy

You'd think so, but when computing "taint" I intend to consider mining fees that are included in the coinbase transaction.  If any of those mining fees are "tainted", then the resulting coinbase is "tainted" proportionally.

 Grin

That's just the kind of guy I am.  If we're going to do this, then we need to get serious about it.
It would be ridiculously funny if he pulled it off. I'm relatively certain that Eligius would never go for it, but I'm not so sure about ghash.io, and nobody seems to know shit about Discus Fish. All the other pools would get one hell of a boost!
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 4801
Wow Danny, calm down.  You're being baited.

I think you got that backwards...

Shhhhh.  You'll ruin my fun.

 Grin

@Danny, I think I would survive your schema unscathed. Almost all of my coins from beginning to end have been generated at Eliigius, BTCguild or Bitparking Cheesy

You'd think so, but when computing "taint" I intend to consider mining fees that are included in the coinbase transaction.  If any of those mining fees are "tainted", then the resulting coinbase is "tainted" proportionally.

 Grin

That's just the kind of guy I am.  If we're going to do this, then we need to get serious about it.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
Wow Danny, calm down.  You're being baited.

I think you got that backwards...

@Danny, I think I would survive your schema unscathed. Almost all of my coins from beginning to end have been generated at Eliigius, BTCguild or Bitparking Cheesy

legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1022
Anarchy is not chaos.
I've had a change of heart.

I think there's only one way some people will learn this lesson.  Therefore, I'm willing to put my belief to the test.

If you can get me digitally signed statement from the operator of even one of the largest pools:

  • GHash.IO
  • Eligius
  • BTC Guild
  • Discus Fish
  • BitMinter
  • Slush

stating that they agree with your concept and will implement it, then I'll personally fork the github repository and create the necessary bitcoind and bitcoin-qt software to implement the address ignoring.

Of course, along with the changes, I'll also be widely advertising to everyone the pools willingness to go along with the plan.  It will be very interesting to see how many miners will abandon the pool.

Let me know when any of the listed pools accept your idea.  Until then, any discussion is an exercise in futility (you aren't going to get 50%+ without getting at least 2 of these pools).



You're wasting your time. Very few people here are sophisticated (old) enough to know what a gauntlet is or what throwing down a gauntlet means.
I suspect you might be surprised.
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 4801
Wow Danny, calm down.  You're being baited.

I know.  But I'm bored, and this concept is so dumb it's entertaining me.  It's a bit like watching The Three Stooges.

The OP has created a fantasy in his mind from the land of unicorns and leprechauns, and is acting like it has real bearing in the real world.

I like a good fantasy story once in a while.

I'm true to my word though...  If I'm wrong and the OP can actually find support from major mining pools, I'll get it coded for him.

I'll be happy to be rid of the mining pool when they fork the blockchain.  I have no desire for any such miners or pools in the real bitcoin.
sr. member
Activity: 367
Merit: 250
Find me at Bitrated
Wow Danny, calm down.  You're being baited.
Pages:
Jump to: