Topic: Should miners collude to steal funds from wallet confiscated by US government? - page 5. (Read 12919 times)
October 08, 2013, 11:01:12 PM
"In other news, a group of hackers, against all mathematical odds, stole over $1 billion worth of the online digital currency "Bitcoin" from the US government, proving once and for all that the only way your money is safe is in a federal bank."
October 08, 2013, 05:57:01 PM
Oh you've got to be kidding me. 25% of people think we should burn bitcoin to the ground.
Not really. 25% of the people who bothered to vote in a poll in the most moronic thread in Bitcoin history said that.
The only "votes" that count in this are the votes of the mining pools, really. And in this case, good. The miners supporting this appear to be at about 0%.
October 08, 2013, 05:45:13 PM
51% or hard fork maybe. I'm sure it could be done with the top three pools pretty easily.
51% or hard fork is not needed at all.
October 08, 2013, 05:41:54 PM
of course but we should use big magnets like in breaking bad
I support the big magnet approach.
October 08, 2013, 05:05:37 PM
If someone is to "steal it" (I'd use the word "retrieve") it only should be those to whom the bitcoins belong. I wish them good luck because so far the news are that the FBI wants to "liquidate them". Not the nicest thing to do considering the fact that not all products were of illegal nature and of those products that were illegal in US some of them were legal elsewhere (e.g. prescription medication).
So I think unless you were personally affected by the confiscation of the SR wallet or you're working on the behalf of and with consent of the victims, you shouldn't be playing Robin Hood because it can only give other bitcoiners a bad reputation.
So I think unless you were personally affected by the confiscation of the SR wallet or you're working on the behalf of and with consent of the victims, you shouldn't be playing Robin Hood because it can only give other bitcoiners a bad reputation.
October 08, 2013, 04:25:30 PM
sorry, i did not even read all posts .
I think it is just funny.
At first, who said that money is still there?
It would be funny if after all huge work you will find empty wallet.
Money already somewhere else: in another wallet, or just converted to some that government can really use.
Really funny post.
I think it is just funny.
At first, who said that money is still there?
It would be funny if after all huge work you will find empty wallet.
Money already somewhere else: in another wallet, or just converted to some that government can really use.
Really funny post.
Its right here.
http://blockchain.info/address/1F1tAaz5x1HUXrCNLbtMDqcw6o5GNn4xqX
What if during the organization of the "51% attack", they decide to move the money?
October 08, 2013, 04:17:24 PM
Not only would this kill bitcoin, but it would set back the cryoto currency movement, perhaps beyond return. You would be shitting all over Satoshi's vision. You would have proved that crypto currency is just an impossible dream and decentralised money will always end up centralised.
October 08, 2013, 04:11:20 PM
Oh you've got to be kidding me. 25% of people think we should burn bitcoin to the ground. What idiots. If this ever got close to happening, say goodbye the value of bitcoin. It would go from being a high quality, ground breaking currency to being "anarchist nerd credits", and the value would collapse.
October 08, 2013, 04:02:54 PM
I think the coins should be stolen, but that it should be done using the good'ol method of simply stealing the private keys for that wallet. That may involve some more difficult work of actually hacking FBI's computers to find out where their keys are stored at. Miners and futzing with the blockchain should definitely be left out of it.
You are some kind of nut. Don't you work for the State of Maryland? You are advocating hacking federal computers to disrupt a murder-for-hire prosecution. Legitimate businesses and people should steer clear of you and your Bitcoin101 project (and anything else you are involved with).
You do realize that the abolity to spend, or not having that money in their posession, does not in any way affect their ability to actually prosecute him, right? It's not like they have to bring big stacks of cash into the court room to show it as evidence. They can just point to the public blockchain, and show all the transactions leading in and out of the address in question. Just because they themselves can't spend the money doesn't matter.
That being said, I'd much rather have that money be spent by someone else other than the FBI. Both because, as you said, I work in government, and I understand that it will be either wasted, or worse, used for bad things, AND because I don't believe what DPR was doing with Silk Road was inherently wrong, and thus the FBI effectively stole money that didn't belong to them (it didn't belong to DPR, either, since that money was merchant, customer, and anyone who wanted to use the SR tumbler money).
Do you realize you are talking about tampering with evidence in a murder for hire trial? Do you realize that Silk Road was selling things that could easily kill someone if they used it wrong? Do you realize he is accused of ordering the torture and murder of a Father of 3? Do you realize you will end up in jail if you hack into a federal computer to steal funds that belong to others and may have to be returned? Do you realize you will probably be fired from your State of MD job once they find out you are advocating breaking into FBI computers to tamper with evidence in a serious prosecution?
If you ever see me at any Bitcoin event stay at least 100 feet from me at all times.
Don't worry, those aren't even the worst comments I've seen here recently.. they're quite mild I'd say!
October 08, 2013, 03:45:16 PM
Gov owning BTCs is the worst thing we can imagine.
and block Gov "seized" BTCs using the miners is even worse. (for the image of bitcoin etc)
But we refuse accepting BTC from these address or stop using the exchanges who accept BTC from them in a white/clean protest, is it possible?
and block Gov "seized" BTCs using the miners is even worse. (for the image of bitcoin etc)
But we refuse accepting BTC from these address or stop using the exchanges who accept BTC from them in a white/clean protest, is it possible?
Stopping BTC from being spent sets an awful precedent. Who decides if we can spend BTC in that situation? This would be regulation on top of Bitcoin, something I thought most people here didn't want.
Yeah, white/black lists of coins are a terrible idea. This has come up quite a bit before. The consensus around here is that would drastically reduce the fungibility (one "coin" is the same/same-value as another) of coins which is a core property of an ideal money. Without it, bitcoin loses a key aspect of what makes it viable as a long-term money well-suited to the needs of global electronic exchange.
October 08, 2013, 03:29:03 PM
Gov owning BTCs is the worst thing we can imagine.
and block Gov "seized" BTCs using the miners is even worse. (for the image of bitcoin etc)
But we refuse accepting BTC from these address or stop using the exchanges who accept BTC from them in a white/clean protest, is it possible?
and block Gov "seized" BTCs using the miners is even worse. (for the image of bitcoin etc)
But we refuse accepting BTC from these address or stop using the exchanges who accept BTC from them in a white/clean protest, is it possible?
Stopping BTC from being spent sets an awful precedent. Who decides if we can spend BTC in that situation? This would be regulation on top of Bitcoin, something I thought most people here didn't want.
October 08, 2013, 03:05:26 PM
Gov owning BTCs is the worst thing we can imagine.
and block Gov "seized" BTCs using the miners is even worse. (for the image of bitcoin etc)
But we refuse accepting BTC from these address or stop using the exchanges who accept BTC from them in a white/clean protest, is it possible?
and block Gov "seized" BTCs using the miners is even worse. (for the image of bitcoin etc)
But we refuse accepting BTC from these address or stop using the exchanges who accept BTC from them in a white/clean protest, is it possible?
October 08, 2013, 03:04:48 PM
You're seriously advocating stealing millions of dollars from the FBI? You realize you don't live inside a movie, right?
You do realize it could quite conceivably be done, right?
Definitely. I also hear it's possible to contract to hire someone to murder someone else.
How well does this kind of thing usually turn out when someone tries it in reality, though?
October 08, 2013, 02:58:00 PM
You're seriously advocating stealing millions of dollars from the FBI? You realize you don't live inside a movie, right?
You do realize it could quite conceivably be done, right?
We shouldn't do it, because it would make Bitcoin look bad, but the way the FBI has literally put all their money in a single address like noobs, it could be quite easily done with the cooperation of major mining pools. Heck, even just the top 2 could probably at the very least make it take an extraordinarly long time to confirm.
October 08, 2013, 02:50:59 PM
You're seriously advocating stealing millions of dollars from the FBI? You realize you don't live inside a movie, right?
Ahahahaha, the best (and more meaningful) comment I have see here so far! 
October 08, 2013, 02:39:52 PM
You're seriously advocating stealing millions of dollars from the FBI? You realize you don't live inside a movie, right?
October 08, 2013, 02:30:50 PM
I think the coins should be stolen, but that it should be done using the good'ol method of simply stealing the private keys for that wallet. That may involve some more difficult work of actually hacking FBI's computers to find out where their keys are stored at. Miners and futzing with the blockchain should definitely be left out of it.
You are some kind of nut. Don't you work for the State of Maryland? You are advocating hacking federal computers to disrupt a murder-for-hire prosecution. Legitimate businesses and people should steer clear of you and your Bitcoin101 project (and anything else you are involved with).
You do realize that the abolity to spend, or not having that money in their posession, does not in any way affect their ability to actually prosecute him, right? It's not like they have to bring big stacks of cash into the court room to show it as evidence. They can just point to the public blockchain, and show all the transactions leading in and out of the address in question. Just because they themselves can't spend the money doesn't matter.
That being said, I'd much rather have that money be spent by someone else other than the FBI. Both because, as you said, I work in government, and I understand that it will be either wasted, or worse, used for bad things, AND because I don't believe what DPR was doing with Silk Road was inherently wrong, and thus the FBI effectively stole money that didn't belong to them (it didn't belong to DPR, either, since that money was merchant, customer, and anyone who wanted to use the SR tumbler money).
October 08, 2013, 02:12:07 PM
I also don't see any evidence that .gov actually has exclusive control of the private key(s) that controls the 27,000 bitcoins. Think about it. Every report about this is consistent with them simply knowing the public address of the 27k coins, nothing more. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary either in the news or in blockchain activity.
Excuse me if I disagree with you, but I don't think they simply gained access to the wallet where the 26,000 (or 27,000) bitcoins used to seat. That wallet was created on October 2nd, the same day SR was shut down. And it wouldn't be very smart to hold on the bitcoins in that wallet since they don't know who else got the private key for that. Most likely they created a wallet on their own (probably offline) and then moved all the bitcoins from the wallets they could grab from DPR (as shown by the big transactions pointing to that particular address right after its creation). Looking forward to knowing how did they manage to have access to those wallets in the first place and obtaining the private keys.. DPR himself provided them? The Agents found them somewhere, maybe in the form of paper wallets? Keylogger in his laptop?
Thanks for the info, wasn't aware of that detail. So the FBI has at least one guy that knows what he's doing wrt Bitcoin.
Ahahahaha, you're right, one at least!!!
Moreover, as you can see here (http://blockchain.info/address/1F1tAaz5x1HUXrCNLbtMDqcw6o5GNn4xqX?offset=200&filter=0), money is still flowing to that (probably cold) wallet. I am not referring to the small transactions, made just to send messages to the FBI. There are bigger transactions (253, 10, 15, etc BTC) still going on right now. They could be other BTC discovered by FBI or standing payouts from pools still going to the seized wallets.
How does the community simultaneously say "Bitcoin is easy to learn, everyone should use it!" and then act surprised when an FBI agent attached to a cybercrime unit figures out how to move coins to a new wallet?
October 08, 2013, 04:20:30 AM
I also don't see any evidence that .gov actually has exclusive control of the private key(s) that controls the 27,000 bitcoins. Think about it. Every report about this is consistent with them simply knowing the public address of the 27k coins, nothing more. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary either in the news or in blockchain activity.
Excuse me if I disagree with you, but I don't think they simply gained access to the wallet where the 26,000 (or 27,000) bitcoins used to seat. That wallet was created on October 2nd, the same day SR was shut down. And it wouldn't be very smart to hold on the bitcoins in that wallet since they don't know who else got the private key for that. Most likely they created a wallet on their own (probably offline) and then moved all the bitcoins from the wallets they could grab from DPR (as shown by the big transactions pointing to that particular address right after its creation). Looking forward to knowing how did they manage to have access to those wallets in the first place and obtaining the private keys.. DPR himself provided them? The Agents found them somewhere, maybe in the form of paper wallets? Keylogger in his laptop?
Thanks for the info, wasn't aware of that detail. So the FBI has at least one guy that knows what he's doing wrt Bitcoin.
Ahahahaha, you're right, one at least!!!
Moreover, as you can see here (http://blockchain.info/address/1F1tAaz5x1HUXrCNLbtMDqcw6o5GNn4xqX?offset=200&filter=0), money is still flowing to that (probably cold) wallet. I am not referring to the small transactions, made just to send messages to the FBI. There are bigger transactions (253, 10, 15, etc BTC) still going on right now. They could be other BTC discovered by FBI or standing payouts from pools still going to the seized wallets.
October 08, 2013, 03:29:08 AM
I also don't see any evidence that .gov actually has exclusive control of the private key(s) that controls the 27,000 bitcoins. Think about it. Every report about this is consistent with them simply knowing the public address of the 27k coins, nothing more. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary either in the news or in blockchain activity.
Excuse me if I disagree with you, but I don't think they simply gained access to the wallet where the 26,000 (or 27,000) bitcoins used to seat. That wallet was created on October 2nd, the same day SR was shut down. And it wouldn't be very smart to hold on the bitcoins in that wallet since they don't know who else got the private key for that. Most likely they created a wallet on their own (probably offline) and then moved all the bitcoins from the wallets they could grab from DPR (as shown by the big transactions pointing to that particular address right after its creation). Looking forward to knowing how did they manage to have access to those wallets in the first place and obtaining the private keys.. DPR himself provided them? The Agents found them somewhere, maybe in the form of paper wallets? Keylogger in his laptop?
Thanks for the info, wasn't aware of that detail. So the FBI has at least one guy that knows what he's doing wrt Bitcoin.
Jump to: