Topic: Someone just paid 94.35425882 BTC in transaction fee - page 2. (Read 6745 times)

I read that as ckolivas believing that eleuthria's hope of an attempt to return the mistake as being laughably unlikely, without any specific statement of whether he would keep or return himself...

Of course he does.  I was given my own access by him, and there has been no reason for his own access to be removed.  However, he only really ever needs to do anything for the pool itself really when something breaks and I'm not around.

The entire reward system was written from scratch by me making the pool as a whole essentially rewritten by me.  Obviously the pool still uses Eloipool, written by Luke-Jr, along with the corresponding Eligius bitcoin branch for bitcoind, and I have no issue with him pulling updates to these things himself.

But no one besides myself ever touches any of the code for what really makes the pool a working pool (reward system, stats, back-end database structure, etc).  There is very little code left related to the "pre-wizkid" Eligius running on the pool server.  One example would be the namecoin SMPPS code, which is scheduled for shutdown in a couple of weeks anyway, leaving really next to nothing from the old Eligius as part of the pool.

Also, there really aren't many "private details" at Eligius.  Almost everything running is either open source, exposed via API or stats, announced, or otherwise as transparent as possible.  (A notable exception being the CPPSRB reward system code itself, which I am still actively developing and testing. Since this code directly handles payouts of actual coins, I'm not quite ready for the code to see the light of day until I've had the time to fully dot my I's, cross my T's, and audit it for any potential security issues.)

But, back to the topic at hand, fees from Eligius blocks are, under the hosting agreement, to be shared with the server sponsor.  It is being discussed on how this agreement can be changed to benefit Eligius miners.

Also, if someone comes forward soon with properly signed messages proving original ownership of this obviously large mistake of a transaction fee, I will be glad to speak with them about it.

-wk

I guess we already know ckolivas would keep the money. Honest fellow that ckolivas.
Mental note: No business with this dude whatsoever.

Just a hypothetical question:  If the 94.35425882 were stolen, is the entire output of the generation transaction now "clean money" or is everything, including the virgin 25BTC, now "dirty money".

And could miners deliberately use this technique to launder dirty money?

And if a miner wanted to ensure he mined perfectly virgin, untainted, clean money, does the miner have to reject all transactions that include a fee?

What's the consensus?

No, he was not funny. Your comment, however, is alarming.

P.S.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1445271

What's so funny?
Returning it makes a great story, and might be/is the right thing to do.

But he still has full access to the private details of the pool ... so it's not like anything has really changed ...

Ahahaha you so funny 

I certainly hope some attempt is being made to return this obvious mistake back to the person who made the transaction.

Actually, Luke-Jr doesn't have a whole lot to do with that anymore.  (See this post).

And I'm currently trying to work out a way to be able to distribute fees to miners under the CPPSRB system, so, bear with me!

-wk

Someone really wanted their transaction to go through? More likely another raw transaction mistake. Just included in the last block:

http://blockchain.info/tx/13dffdaef097881acfe9bdb5e6338192242d80161ffec264ee61cf23bc9a1164

TL;DClick: Transaction with 94.35425882 BTC paid in fees. Just a $4000 mistake...

BTW, Luke-Jr doesn't share with miners, it looks like Eligius keeps all the fees...