Bitcoinica stolen coin returns

[Luke-Jr]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

The cracker who stole 18kBTC from Bitcoinica was on IRC this morning giving them away. A number of us posted our addresses with the intent of returning the stolen coins to Bitcoinica. I have setup an address that will be handed over to Bitcoinica (as a wallet.dat file) at some point when they have figured out where I should send it. Therefore, if you have been sent any stolen coins and wish to return them, please forward them on to 1BPKHoL1sAVnfzxnH38RfXYYcHrEcniUKW (see balance).

Note that with Bitcoin-Qt, you will generally not be able to control which coins you are sending. Since a lot of people got the coins in their main wallet, I have backported coderrr's Coin Control to Bitcoin-Qt 0.6.2.

Windows: installer or zip
Source: tar.gz

e3d2ec5694f26eb5f45ea6244aa1c2792ac3e7c87113e0dfae827469eaf31499  bitcoin-0.6.2+coincontrol-win32-setup.exe
a3a067273027232ef009c20a4e0e91410cd59820d7c80c89a45780ad3ba23426  bitcoin-0.6.2+coincontrol-win32.zip
42d04be61b340a17bf8ee8607079c90ddb067300cf1fbb041744c5e162f0bc1a  bitcoin-0.6.2+coincontrol.tar.gz

If someone could post exact instructions on how to use Coin Control for this purpose, I'm sure it would be appreciated!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
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=
=zZ1y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[1713308524]

1713308524

[1713308524]

1713308524

[1713308524]

1713308524

[1713308524]

1713308524

[1713308524]

1713308524

[Luke-Jr]

NO, he is NOT still on IRC giving them away. -.-

[Nyaaan]

Which IRC chan are we talking about here?
bitcoin-otc?

[gmaxwell]

If someone could post exact instructions on how to use Coin Control for this purpose, I'm sure it would be appreciated!

Quick coin-control instructions:

0) Shut down cleanly and install the software luke linked to.
1) Start back up, wait until you have 6 confirms on the coins you want to spend.
2)settings -> options -> display -> check display coin-control features (a coin control tab appears in the main window)
3) Go to the coin control tab and select the address(es) you want to send from.
4) go to the send coins tab, the send from box at the bottom will show the addresses you just selected
5) send the coins like normal

This will probably fail if you only have 6 confirms unless you reduce the amount by 0.0005 fee needed because it's a fast turnaround.  You can either wait 144 transactions or reduce the amount that you're sending by 0.0005.

Please report any problems or other feedback you have related to coincontrol— we'd like to get it in as an official feature in the next version.


We live in a bizarre world— as he was giving out these coins the cracker wrote:

Code:

STATEMENT:: Bitcoinica caused much harm to the value of Bitcoin. They were targeted and destroyed. As sure as Bitcoinica fell, the
value of Bitcoin rose. Profit from devaluation surely destroys a currency.

He also claimed to have deleted all of Bitcoinica's data.

Regardless of how you may or may not agree with his sentiment about Bitcoinica (I think I've previously made my negative views of it clear enough),  theft isn't a noble act— nor is receiving stolen goods. Returning the funds won't bring Bitcoinica back, nor will failing to return them prevent it from coming back.  Keeping the funds will also potentially create annoyances for you down the road when you are mistaken for someone affiliated with the thief.

If you don't like Bitcoinica and wish it didn't exist, the best thing you can do is to keep reminding people about its poor security track record (At least three known coin theft incidents), and that fact that it was a bucketshop— a kind of casino in the guise of a stockmarket where people trade on large multiples of the change in a commodities price— and not a legitimate exchange where actual bitcoins were bought and sold (a fact their FAQ admitted but only in rather technical terms).

In any case, I hope and expect most people will return these coins.

[apetersson]

do you have a link to any of the transactions where he returned the coins?

[geebus]

he has now setup a channel on freenode called #fuckBitcoinica where he continues to give out stolen coins... I urge you all to return them to the address luke-jr has provided.

[CIYAM]

Please report any problems or other feedback you have related to coincontrol— we'd like to get it in as an official feature in the next version.

Great - will be trying out the patched software shortly - not sure if you or others had noticed my bounty offer but if possible I'd really like to also be able to explicitly specify a "change" address (RPC only would be no problem).

The reason for wanting this additional amount of "coin control" is for non-profit orgs to be able to use the blockchain as a true "public ledger" that can be searched via blockchain.info or blockexplorer.com from a single address.

[Phraust]

Just sent 1.00 btc of my money to the address Luke provided:

https://blockchain.info/tx-index/6266664/e853f94841e00560f4d42cb201bed54b36abce201da52c3a4d348b737b1c9670

The original transaction from BitcoinHacker is here:

https://blockchain.info/tx-index/6236920/d43282f1ec433cb896ddf7d4a88faa4a202c97ac6e60568eaecfd1df53d82ef6

It's still in the same address.  I'm using blockchain.info, so Luke, if you'd like, I can send you the private keys.

[Bigpiggy01]

Sweet that coin control worked exactly as it should 

[wachtwoord]

The cracker who stole 18kBTC from Bitcoinica was on IRC this morning giving them away.

Does anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision ....

[Clipse]

The cracker who stole 18kBTC from Bitcoinica was on IRC this morning giving them away.

Does anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision ....

Something awefull member perhaps? Elitist to the max who doesnt see any value in bitcoin and oblivious to the exchange rate.

[ildubbioso]

And how many stolen BTC he returned?

[check_status]

A religious nutter that believes Digital Currency is the road to Babylon and the Beasts calling card.

The cracker who stole 18kBTC from Bitcoinica was on IRC this morning giving them away. A number of us posted our addresses with the intent of returning the stolen coins to Bitcoinica. I have setup an address that will be handed over to Bitcoinica (as a wallet.dat file) at some point when they have figured out where I should send it. Therefore, if you have been sent any stolen coins and wish to return them, please forward them on to 1BPKHoL1sAVnfzxnH38RfXYYcHrEcniUKW (see balance).

Did you use Vanitygen to create the address? How long did it take you to create that 10 character address?

None of the addresses show any hint of 18K BTC. Maybe something indirectly, I'll have to check the original theft thread.

[sebastian]

check_status: I don't see where the "vanity" in the adress is.

[Scott J]

So has anyone confirmed that they are coins from Bitcoinica he's giving away?

[check_status]

check_status: I don't see where the "vanity" in the adress is.

We all have limitations.

[Kettenmonster]

Does anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision ....

... uhm why not? Just because you don´t understand?
In my eyes it is rather stupid not to see loads of possible reasonings behind this attack.
 ... could be just for the fun.
Maybe it´s a well planned attack and some bad coins are now starting to infect the chain.
Oh I praise you glorious crusaders and true believers, carry on to hunt them, doing your part of the work to destroy Bitcoin.

[gmaxwell]

So has anyone confirmed that they are coins from Bitcoinica he's giving away?

I did.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

Does anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision ....

Judging by the little amounts in the address OP provided, I guess he just wants to distribute the coins the most he can so that following them becomes a harder task.

[bulanula]

Hacker seems to have left the channel.

What nick and IP was he using ?

[Luke-Jr]

oes anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision ....

Based on his comments on IRC, it seems his intention is to harm Bitcoinica more than anything else.

1BPKHoL1sAVnfzxnH38RfXYYcHrEcniUKW

Did you use Vanitygen to create the address? How long did it take you to create that 10 character address?

It's an ordinary address, with quite a bit more than 10 characters...

[wachtwoord]

Haha Luke-jr isn't pretending to be Bitcoins holy saviour  (where would the PK stand for anyway?)

[elux]

Could anyone be so sweet as to pastebin the relevant IRC logs?

How much was returned in all, the full 18k? Or just specks and dust?

[Raoul Duke]

Could anyone be so sweet as to pastebin the relevant IRC logs?

How much was returned in all, the full 18k? Or just specks and dust?

This? http://pastebin.com/3ukW7NpN

[giszmo]

WTF? Ah!! I want to know the reasoning!?!? If he wanted to return the money he could give it to any public address of Gavin or any other honorable member here. The stunt doesn't look like good intention to me.
OTOH for mixing he could have done other things. I'm curious for your analysis and guess he is, too.

[apetersson]

[Serith]

oes anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision ....

Based on his comments on IRC, it seems his intention is to harm Bitcoinica more than anything else.

I am sure that not everyone who got bitcoins will return it to Bitcoinica, so  it's a clever way to launder bitcoins by giving portion of it to random people.

[hazek]

oes anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision ....

Based on his comments on IRC, it seems his intention is to harm Bitcoinica more than anything else.

I am sure that not everyone who got bitcoins will return it to Bitcoinica, so  it's a clever way to launder bitcoins by giving portion of it to random people.

That's what I was thinking. Now he can simply claim he got them donated when the hacker was giving them away.. reasonable doubt established.

[R-]

I am sure that not everyone who got bitcoins will return it to Bitcoinica, so  it's an expensive way to launder bitcoins by giving portion of it to random people.

Fixed your statement.

[lulzplzkthx]

Just thought I'd remind people of this.

[Daily Anarchist]

So we know he doesn't like Bitcoinica because he thinks it harms Bitcoin. So, he likes Bitcoin but not Bitcoinica.

The only extrapolation I would make is that he doesn't understand economics very well and thinks derivatives, short-selling, etc. are evil capitalist things.

The problem is that this guy sees what Wall Street does and thinks when Bitcoinica does it it must also be evil. The evil part of Wall Street is not the derivatives, short-selling, etc. It's the fact that when their investments and risks go bust they get FedGov to print new money up out of thin air to bail them out. This leads to moral hazard by essentially risking other people's money.

But when individuals risk their OWN money, it's not the same thing as evil Wall Street.

 

[elux]

So we know he doesn't like Bitcoinica because he thinks it harms Bitcoin. So, he likes Bitcoin but not Bitcoinica.

Maybe.

[EskimoBob]

oes anyone know , or have any idea about, his reasoning? Doesn't seem like a rational decision ....

Based on his comments on IRC, it seems his intention is to harm Bitcoinica more than anything else.

1BPKHoL1sAVnfzxnH38RfXYYcHrEcniUKW

Did you use Vanitygen to create the address? How long did it take you to create that 10 character address?

It's an ordinary address, with quite a bit more than 10 characters...

This was the topic of the IRC channel, before luke-jr started to act like a frack'n lunatic and change it.

"<BitcoinicaHacker> STATEMENT:: Bitcoinica caused much harm to the value of Bitcoin. They were targeted and destroyed. As sure as Bitcoinica fell, the value of Bitcoin rose. Profit from devaluation surely destroys a currency."

[wachtwoord]

So we know he doesn't like Bitcoinica because he thinks it harms Bitcoin. So, he likes Bitcoin but not Bitcoinica.

The only extrapolation I would make is that he doesn't understand economics very well and thinks derivatives, short-selling, etc. are evil capitalist things.

The problem is that this guy sees what Wall Street does and thinks when Bitcoinica does it it must also be evil. The evil part of Wall Street is not the derivatives, short-selling, etc. It's the fact that when their investments and risks go bust they get FedGov to print new money up out of thin air to bail them out. This leads to moral hazard by essentially risking other people's money.

But when individuals risk their OWN money, it's not the same thing as evil Wall Street.

 

So much this^^

We should embrace freedom and if people want to gamble (erm: speculate ) with their money that's their own choice.

[elux]

So we know he doesn't like Bitcoinica because he thinks it harms Bitcoin. So, he likes Bitcoin but not Bitcoinica.

Maybe.

This was the topic of the IRC channel, before luke-jr started to act like a frack'n lunatic and change it.

"<BitcoinicaHacker> STATEMENT:: Bitcoinica caused much harm to the value of Bitcoin. They were targeted and destroyed. As sure as Bitcoinica fell, the value of Bitcoin rose. Profit from devaluation surely destroys a currency."

Ahh. Thanks. That clears it up.

[gmaxwell]

The problem is that this guy sees what Wall Street does and thinks when Bitcoinica does it it must also be evil.

What Bitcoinica does is not what Wall street does.  The trader's positions on Bitcoinica were not backed by actual (virtual) assets—  As their FAQ said: "To make things simple, there are no deliveries of Bitcoins."  Bitcoinica was not a brokerage, it was not a stock market, it was not engaging in margin trading of any kind most people are familial with. Nor was it a derivative markets with contracts backed by assets or at least strong, enforceable, obligations to furnish the assets.

Bitcoinica was a bucket shop, a kinda of gambling business that looks on its surface like a brokerage house.  Bucketshops had waves of popularity after the invention of live stock tickers allowed realtime stock data in hotels and bars all over the country. They were roundly outlawed in the US (and most of the world) in the early 1900s— because of their habit of bankrupting the unwary and because of the manipulation they caused on the actual markets.

In a bucket shop participants come to place bets against multiples of the change in price in stocks or commodities, with a house take added to the spread. There are no actual commodities traded at any point, however, and the commodities don't even have to exist (at least not at the quantities traded in the bucket shops). The operator of large long lived bucket shops may engage in moderate hedging to prevent regular volatility from putting them out of business to quickly— but the essential behavior is the same: You're not actually buying or selling the underlying asset and it's possible to end up short (or long) more of the asset than is actually available on the market.  The widespread mistaken belief that bitcoinica hedges 100% is now easily disproved by the lack of an enormous decline in MTGOX's volume— if that wasn't already clear enough from bitcoinica's frequent delays to pay withdraws, trading freezes, or the impossibility of hedging shorts using MTGOX.

Bucket shops are very risky— especially ones as narrow as Bitcoinica: A large bucketshop with many 'assets' for sale could potentially cover the losses should one become wildly successful. A single item bucketshop like Bitcoinica would rapidly bankrupt if there were large price motion against their favor.   So when people think about the risk/reward they often get the wrong ratio because highly successful trades are likely to never be paid— because there is no delivery of underlying assets there is no guarantee of being able to cash out your profitable trades.

Worse— Bucketshop operators have inequitable visibility into their markets and a financial incentive to abuse it:  A well timed but momentary increase/decrease of a few percent will wipe out the balances of people in "leveraged" short/long positions, converting their balance to the houses' balance. Between their ability to opaquely adjust the spreads and their holding of (apparently) a good hundred thousand btc of customer coins triggering these events would not be difficult.

Bucketshops also potentially have a distorting effect on the real market— to the extent that traders don't realize that its just gambling the fact that the buckshop exaggerates the supply of long or short positions is potentially a source of inefficient pricing (This is why on real markets there are rules abolishing or at least limiting uncovered shorts and regulating when short trade can take place).

I think Bitcoinica skirted the fine line of dishonesty about the nature of their business.  As far as I'm aware they did not outright make any dishonest claims,  but their appearance left many people with misunderstandings and they have happily sat quietly while other people told outright untruths in support of them.   Fortunately(?), their failure took a form that could have befallen a real brokerage created by completely inexperienced people— risks that the even the biggest rubes could have foreseen— instead of the specialized risk associated with bucketshops.

I will continue to caution Bitcoin users from participating in bucketshops, just as I would discourage them from participating in classic ponzi schemes, negative expectation gambling, apparent money laundering operations, pool defrauding attacks, and fractional reserve banking — especially in the nascent and unstable Bitcoin economy.

[Soros Shorts]

Although bucketshops in equities were outlawed a long time ago, there are plenty of bucketshops around today in forex trading.

E.g. OANDA

[gmaxwell]

Although bucketshops in equities were outlawed a long time ago, there are plenty of bucketshops around today in forex trading.
E.g. OANDA

There are procedural and regulatory distinctions which separate forex brokers from the business Bitcoinica is engaging in, random link— but even so many people regard forex brokers of even the most reputable type as scams, just google around a bit.   If Bitconica had advertised itself as forex for Bitcoin rather than margin trading I think people would have somewhat more aware of the relevant risks.

[Daily Anarchist]

At the end of the day people valued Bitcoinica's service, whatever the hell it was. If they didn't value it they wouldn't have put their money into it.

Did anybody get defrauded? I am not sure, but I don't recall a bunch of people on the forum claiming they've been defrauded by Bitcoinica. Just the opposite.

If somebody DID get defrauded, who would they run to? Hopefully not the state, considering the entire existence of the state is based on fraud.

This brings up the topic of much needed voluntarily contracted dispute resolution organizations. Hopefully some get built sooner rather than later. I'm sure they will as state institutions continue to decline in legitimacy.

[marcus_of_augustus]

So would it be reasonable for anybody lucky enough to receive refunds from Bitcoinica, via Luke-Jr's recovery of stolen coins operation from those handed out by BitcoinicaHacker, to request that they be suitably mixed first, e.g. http://www.bitcoinfog.com/
 .... since those coins that were once "tainted" are now no longer "tainted" having been returned to their original owners, albeit via many entity's addresses and sundry circuitous routes? Is it legitimate to "untaint" your own previously held coins "tainted" by the baddies?

Enquiring minds are wondering.

[malevolent]

Looking at the amounts of coins people got he didn't want to get rid of most of the money but to make sure more people have tainted coins.

[FreeMoney]

Why does it matter if you give the tainted coins back instead of whichever your client sends? What is Bitcoinica going to be able to do to untaint them anyway?

[Daily Anarchist]

Why is nobody addressing the real elephant in the room? Any time somebody purchases Bitcoins with fiat money they are doing so with tainted money.

Let it go. Move on to something more productive in the world of Bitcoin.

[FreeMoney]

Why is nobody addressing the real elephant in the room? Any time somebody purchases Bitcoins with fiat money they are doing so with tainted money.

Let it go. Move on to something more productive in the world of Bitcoin.

Heh yeah.

Not just when you buy bitcoins either.

And the biggest criminals use the freshest dollars!

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Approximately, how many coins were sent by the hacker? My thinking is that if it was only a handful, then BitcoiniaHacker is just a troll, doing it for the lolz.

~Bruno~

[Justin00]

I was on at the time and went through logs afterwards.
There was about 32 transactions. The first was for 5btc after that the rest seemed to be for 1.x. (Allthough I did only check 10 or so,  but those 10 were all 1.x so i assume the rest where aswell).
Going on those figures I imagine only 40-50BTC were given. Not like it was 18k worth like I have seen people think in other threads..

*edit* I best not say anything..... now that the "police" might/will? be involved..............

[terrytibbs]

Hahaha what a mess, the developers trying to return specific coins using hacky patches.

[TheHarbinger]

Hahaha what a mess, the developers trying to return specific coins using hacky patches.

Hahaha what a mess, scammy forum trolls making comments about something they are totally ignorant of.

[terrytibbs]

Hahaha what a mess, the developers trying to return specific coins using hacky patches.

Hahaha what a mess, scammy forum trolls making comments about something they are totally ignorant of.

Sorry for rustling your jimmies, developer of hacky widely-criticized no-fee patch.

[lulzplzkthx]

Hahaha what a mess, the developers trying to return specific coins using hacky patches.

What is this about?

[bulanula]

Hahaha what a mess, the developers trying to return specific coins using hacky patches.

What is this about?

Trolling

[Gabi]

So would it be reasonable for anybody lucky enough to receive refunds from Bitcoinica, via Luke-Jr's recovery of stolen coins operation from those handed out by BitcoinicaHacker, to request that they be suitably mixed first, e.g. http://www.bitcoinfog.com/
 .... since those coins that were once "tainted" are now no longer "tainted" having been returned to their original owners, albeit via many entity's addresses and sundry circuitous routes? Is it legitimate to "untaint" your own previously held coins "tainted" by the baddies?

Enquiring minds are wondering.

What about we stop with this tainted coin bullshit?

[DeathAndTaxes]

What about we stop with this tainted coin bullshit?

The sad reality is most people are afraid of freedom.  Freedom is scary.  They may talk about freedom, and being free of the man but the first time something happens (they lose coins) they suddenly don't want freedom.  Tainted coin registry is all about control.  The "Oh Noes someone got coins they don't deserve WE need to stop them". Honestly it is just one step above chargebacks.  I mean if a thief steals 18K from 1 person we should block that via tainted coin registry?  What if a scammer steals 18 coins from 1000 people?  Why not just implement chargebacks into the protocol to get rid of the need for a taint registry with millions of coins and thousands of participants.

[/b]The cowards who can't handle the freedom that Bitcoin represents (and the risk that comes with it) are the single greatest threat to Bitcoin.[/b]

Tainted coins devalue all coins even the untainted ones.  I sell wireless pincodes for Bitcoins.  I would imagine the "cash like" nature of pincodes would make it an attractive option for someone looking to unload coins.  What if the thief buys some with tainted coins?  I should take the loss?  I should follow the thread of every irresponsible idiot who lost their coins and block orders involving them in realtime?  What about in the case of "false claims"?  What about cases where the theft is reported AFTER I accept the coins?  Can no-one see that makes businesses less likely to accept Bitcoin.  It makes them even MORE risky.

"Bitcoin: no chargebacks ever*"
* except if you accept coins through no fault of your own which someone else later reports as stolen with no proof due to their own incompetence, in which case you take the full loss for their irresponsibility.

I think the "tainters" are failing to consider one question:
If I can take a full loss using Bitcoin, and if I need to pay for the processing cost of checking for "bad coins", and if I need to subsidize the irresponsible and pass those costs on to my consumers .... why should I use Bitcoin?  Paypal/CC works just fine under those constraints.

Even if I "could" block tainted coins that would incur a cost.  That cost is passed on to legit users.  The responsible subsidizing the irresponsible.  No different than credit cards and chargebacks.  No sir.  The day one of my coins get blocked at an exchange because of a tainted coin registry is the day I am done with Bitcoin and will support (at least monetarily) the development of an alt-coin (double blinding signing) which makes such registries more such lunacy more difficult to implement.

[vuce]

As much as it pains me to admit I think this idea of tainted coins will lead bitcoin to it's death.

[elux]

As much as it pains me to admit I think this idea of tainted coins will lead bitcoin to it's death.

Why would you think that?

Any time somebody purchases Bitcoins with fiat money they are doing so with tainted money.

[Gabi]

Yeah but with fiat there is no way to check all the past transactions. Also with fiat money you don't have a government made up of luke and his friends that launch crusades against tainted coins

What this remind me is exactly that: the government. Retarded ideas to face problems. The real government do that, and the same happens here. These "lords" of bitcoin come here and tell us what to do or "you will face conseguences". Real government all over again.

[vuce]

Yeah but with fiat there is no way to check all the past transactions. Also with fiat money you don't have a government made up of luke and his friends that launch crusades against tainted coins

Most of all you can't look at a serial of 100 dollar bill and say "sorry mate but I won't accept it. I will take it from you however, but you still owe me 100$.".

[Gabi]

It takes so much effort. With bitcoin you just open blockexplorer and copy-paste addresses.

Anyway, i am not saying stealing coins is right. What i'm saying is that this whole "tainted coin" thing and how the things are being handled is EPIC FAIL

[Luke-Jr]

Also with fiat money you don't have a government made up of luke and his friends that launch crusades against tainted coins

I think I need to clarify my position here:

• Coins that have theft in their history ("tainted coins") shouldn't be taken out of circulation
• People who knowingly accepted coins they know came from a computer break-in and fraud ("stolen coins") should return them
• People who knowingly accept stolen coins and insist they are their own are guilty themselves to some degree
• I never demanded people return the coins to Bitcoinica or the address I created for them. I politely asked and made it easy for honest people to do so
• I don't have the authority to prosecute people who don't return stolen coins, or even the original criminal
• Tainted coins should be flagged as such, using arbitrary algorithms, for the purposes of finding the criminal (Edit: I don't mean to imply organizations are obliged to go to effort to do this, but that it is of valid use for investigation)
• MtGox and other service providers are justified in requiring additional verification before making withdrawls, if you have deposited a significant amount of tainted coins
• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases
• Everyone with information on these cases should cooperate with law enforcement's investigation
• Even confidential information on these cases should be shared with law enforcement after they have followed due process for their jurisdiction

[Raoul Duke]

How did Bitcoinica proved that the 18500 BTC transaction came from one of their addresses?
Did they sign a message with the address private key so that everyone can confirm it's really their address?
Blockchain.info links are not proof enough.

[Justin00]

have sent back the 1.6 btc i recieved - http://www.blockchain.info/tx-index/6386814/b071a3d1218e88f976d73ca5a820a6c825201f5bf6aaf1856db1a8b77f8b6360



just curious why people are only mentioning the police and prosecution etc etc now ? Were the police called in for the hack that took apparently took place ? something doesn't quite seem right with a few things....


*edit* I hope I sent back the same coins I recieved.. I'd hate for the police to knock on my door  

*edit 2* btw.. why did someone send 0.10 to some of the accts that recieved coins ?

[hazek]

Wow.  

Also with fiat money you don't have a government made up of luke and his friends that launch crusades against tainted coins

I think I need to clarify my position here:

• Coins that have theft in their history ("tainted coins") shouldn't be taken out of circulation
• People who knowingly accepted coins they know came from a computer break-in and fraud ("stolen coins") should return them

Says who? You? How can they be sure that what you or anyone else say is stolen is actually stolen? When have the rest of us agreed to your "oughts"?

• People who knowingly accept stolen coins and insist they are their own are guilty themselves to some degree

Again how can people be sure what you or anyone else describes is stolen is actually stolen?

• I never demanded people return the coins to Bitcoinica or the address I created for them. I politely asked and made it easy for honest people to do so

In a free society with some mandatroy and consistent rules (i.e. anarchy) that's all you can do.

• I don't have the authority to prosecute people who don't return stolen coins, or even the original criminal

In a free society with some mandatroy and consistent rules (i.e. anarchy) no one does without a prearranged contract with the party found guilty of a theft.

• Tainted coins should be flagged as such, using arbitrary algorithms, for the purposes of finding the criminal

Again, who will make the determination what is a genuine stolen coin and what is not? You?  

• MtGox and other service providers are justified in requiring additional verification before making withdrawls, if you have deposited a significant amount of tainted coins

Says who, you? Was this specified beforehand in the contract these service providers have with their clients?

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

• Everyone with information on these cases should cooperate with law enforcement's investigation

Says who? You? Why should I? Did I sign a contract I would?

• Even confidential information on these cases should be shared with law enforcement after they have followed due process for their jurisdiction

Again says who? You? Why should I? Did I sign a contract I would?




Luke I'm deeply disappointed to see such arrogance and presumption of authority over other free people. Bitcoin doesn't care for the monopolies of violence that are the governments and their laws in the real world and their merely presumed and under threat of violence enforced authority and if we want this to remain a market regulated by strictly us, the market consumers, neither should we.

There are no guarantees in life, especially not when one has true freedom. That's why man invented insurance. If you are afraid of a theft, insure your belongings, if you can't get insurance, improve your security but don't assume you can punish other free people for your lack of preparation for tackling the risk preemptively.

As for the thief, if he is caught prevent him from being part of society until he repays the damages by preventing him from doing any further transactions through his identity. Problem solved.


Just please, I beg you and anyone thinking like you, stop supporting that stupid and destructive tyranny that we have in the real world today of slavery and monopolies on violence.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

have sent back the 1.6 btc i recieved - http://www.blockchain.info/tx-index/6386814/b071a3d1218e88f976d73ca5a820a6c825201f5bf6aaf1856db1a8b77f8b6360

just curious why people are only mentioning the police and prosecution etc etc now ? Were the police called in for the hack that took apparently took place ? something doesn't quite seem right with a few things....

*edit* I hope I sent back the same coins I recieved.. I'd hate for the police to knock on my door  

*edit 2* btw.. why did someone send 0.10 to some of the accts that recieved coins ?

Interesting! If I were a hacker and hacked into any server owned by Rackspace, simply fucking around, I'm sure an investigation consisting of law enforcement would pursue. It would not bode well for the owners of Rackspace to say to themselves, "Oh, well!" then move on. They have no choice but to contact the proper authorities if, for nothing else, to show their users that they'll do anything to protect them.

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/289320,police-investigate-netfleet-hack.aspx

The company is cooperating with the Australian Federal Police and the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) Australia to “undergo an exhaustive investigation in this matter”.

[realnowhereman]

The sad reality is most people are afraid of freedom.  Freedom is scary.  They may talk about freedom, and being free of the man but the first time something happens (they lose coins) they suddenly don't want freedom.  Tainted coin registry is all about control.  The "Oh Noes someone got coins they don't deserve WE need to stop them". Honestly it is just one step above chargebacks.  I mean if a thief steals 18K from 1 person we should block that via tainted coin registry?  What if a scammer steals 18 coins from 1000 people?  Why not just implement chargebacks into the protocol to get rid of the need for a taint registry with millions of coins and thousands of participants.

It seems like you haven't taken your argument about freedom far enough.  Why shouldn't any accepter of coins be free to track tainted coins?  Isn't that their choice?

If Mt.Gox want to look for tainted coins and make it harder for the person who deposits them, they should be free to do that.  Whether it is a good idea remains to be seen; but just as we don't need an authority telling us some coins are bad, we don't need an authority telling us that all coins are good.

To be honest; the bitcoin community seems to be handling these issues as well as is possible.  And look: it's happening in an emergent way without diktat, just as we thought it would.

[ribuck]

Just please, I beg you [Luke] and anyone thinking like you ...

Don't beg, hazek, it just gives power to the person you're begging to.

The only "wrong" that is being done is by the thief, and it is that person who should be pursued.

If someone unintentionally receives, as part of an honest and innocent exchange of value, a transaction descended from stolen coins, that recipient should not be penalised in any way.

To do otherwise would indeed be tyrannical.

[hazek]

The sad reality is most people are afraid of freedom.  Freedom is scary.  They may talk about freedom, and being free of the man but the first time something happens (they lose coins) they suddenly don't want freedom.  Tainted coin registry is all about control.  The "Oh Noes someone got coins they don't deserve WE need to stop them". Honestly it is just one step above chargebacks.  I mean if a thief steals 18K from 1 person we should block that via tainted coin registry?  What if a scammer steals 18 coins from 1000 people?  Why not just implement chargebacks into the protocol to get rid of the need for a taint registry with millions of coins and thousands of participants.

It seems like you haven't taken your argument about freedom far enough.  Why shouldn't any accepter of coins be free to track tainted coins?  Isn't that their choice?

If Mt.Gox want to look for tainted coins and make it harder for the person who deposits them, they should be free to do that.  Whether it is a good idea remains to be seen; but just as we don't need an authority telling us some coins are bad, we don't need an authority telling us that all coins are good.

To be honest; the bitcoin community seems to be handling these issues as well as is possible.  And look: it's happening in an emergent way without diktat, just as we thought it would.

Yes freedom indeed does also mean that anyone can decide to not accept certain bitcoins. But they must do so openly in their contract before a client signs up for their service. Anything else is breach of contract and should be resolved accordingly.

I can tell you this much, if mtgox does not accept those coins, there are plenty of other exchanges who will.

[Luke-Jr]

• People who knowingly accepted coins they know came from a computer break-in and fraud ("stolen coins") should return them

Says who? You? How can they be sure that what you or anyone else say is stolen is actually stolen?

That these coins were stolen is not disputed, at least not by anyone relevant here (the victim, the thief, and the person who accepted the stolen coins).

When have the rest of us agreed to your "oughts"?

Hence "I think I need to clarify my position here:"

• I never demanded people return the coins to Bitcoinica or the address I created for them. I politely asked and made it easy for honest people to do so

In a free society with some mandatroy and consistent rules (i.e. anarchy) that's all you can do.

The one and only purpose of anarchy is to enable the creation of a new State. Extended anarchy is bad, and anarchy for anarchy's sake is pure insanity.

• MtGox and other service providers are justified in requiring additional verification before making withdrawls, if you have deposited a significant amount of tainted coins

Says who, you? Was this specified beforehand in the contract these service providers have with their clients?

Pretty sure it is, yes.

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

Bitcoin doesn't care for the monopolies of violence that are the governments and their laws in the real world and their merely presumed and under threat of violence enforced authority and if we want this to remain a market regulated by strictly us, the market consumers, neither should we.

You are not Bitcoin. Nobody represents Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a technology. People who try to abuse the technology to further their anti-State agendas are just as harmful (maybe even more harmful) to Bitcoin as thieves.

[hazek]

]The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

Well that's pretty much all I needed to see. It's sad to see someone as smart and as capable as you clearly are showing as little or no knowledge about how to think rationally and logically about the world. I'm sorry to burst your bubble but I do not consent to being a slave to any person or their invisible friends.

Bitcoin doesn't care for the monopolies of violence that are the governments and their laws in the real world and their merely presumed and under threat of violence enforced authority and if we want this to remain a market regulated by strictly us, the market consumers, neither should we.

You are not Bitcoin.

Neither are you.

[Justin00]

have sent back the 1.6 btc i recieved - http://www.blockchain.info/tx-index/6386814/b071a3d1218e88f976d73ca5a820a6c825201f5bf6aaf1856db1a8b77f8b6360

just curious why people are only mentioning the police and prosecution etc etc now ? Were the police called in for the hack that took apparently took place ? something doesn't quite seem right with a few things....

*edit* I hope I sent back the same coins I recieved.. I'd hate for the police to knock on my door  

*edit 2* btw.. why did someone send 0.10 to some of the accts that recieved coins ?

Interesting! If I were a hacker and hacked into any server owned by Rackspace, simply fucking around, I'm sure an investigation consisting of law enforcement would pursue. It would not bode well for the owners of Rackspace to say to themselves, "Oh, well!" then move on. They have no choice but to contact the proper authorities if, for nothing else, to show their users that they'll do anything to protect them.

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/289320,police-investigate-netfleet-hack.aspx

The company is cooperating with the Australian Federal Police and the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) Australia to “undergo an exhaustive investigation in this matter”.

Yip I would agree. Perhaps they have been informed and we just dont know about it. I have alot of questions.. but I shall not ask because the matter doesnt concern me. I didn't lose anything.



If anyone wants to reward me for my honesty..feel free... =)  1JubtMLVDy1D169GkHLshf8kiYdqoqLM5b  

[rjk]

The one and only purpose of anarchy is to enable the creation of a new State. Extended anarchy is bad, and anarchy for anarchy's sake is pure insanity.

Very well said. It has even been proven in real-life situations.

[hazek]

The one and only purpose of anarchy is to enable the creation of a new State. Extended anarchy is bad, and anarchy for anarchy's sake is pure insanity.

Very well said. It has even been proven in real-life situations.

What real life situations? Where have we had a society with some private mandatory and consistent rules i.e. an anarchy before??

Btw SR provides a glimpse at what I'm talking about.. so please explain to me how their market place is bad for any of the participants?

[rjk]

The one and only purpose of anarchy is to enable the creation of a new State. Extended anarchy is bad, and anarchy for anarchy's sake is pure insanity.

Very well said. It has even been proven in real-life situations.

What real life situations? Where have we had a society with some private mandatory and consistent rules before i.e. an anarchy??

Mandatory and consistent rules? That doesn't sound like anarchy. Anarchy is the complete riddance of all government, whether centralized or not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_City is one example. How many hippie communes still exist that actually have no government?

[hazek]

I'm sorry but you have been mislead. Anarchy is a society not without rules but witout ruleRs. There certainly are rules in anarchy, it's just that they are private, mandatory, consistent and above all else voluntary(meaning no one is forced to sing a contract to follow those rules and be part of such a society).

Anarchy != chaos.

Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.

[Luke-Jr]

I'm sorry but you have been mislead. Anarchy is a society not without rules but witout ruleRs. There certainly are rules in anarchy, it's just that they are private, mandatory, consistent and above all else voluntary(meaning no one is forced to sing a contract to follow those rules and be part of such a society).

Anarchy != chaos.

Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.

anarchy

• • absence of government
  • a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
• • absence or denial of any authority or established order
  • absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>

[rjk]

Anarchy != chaos.

Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.

Who enforces them?

[Daily Anarchist]

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases
• Everyone with information on these cases should cooperate with law enforcement's investigation
• Even confidential information on these cases should be shared with law enforcement after they have followed due process for their jurisdiction

The government doesn't have the *moral* authority to give candy to a baby let alone prosecute anyone for theft. I would discourage everyone from ever going to the state for help, period.

That being said, the individual that stole the coins can ethically be forced to pay restitution, but I wouldn't look to the government to do it. This is why we need competing defense agencies and dispute resolution organizations. [/list]

[hazek]

I'm sorry but you have been mislead. Anarchy is a society not without rules but witout ruleRs. There certainly are rules in anarchy, it's just that they are private, mandatory, consistent and above all else voluntary(meaning no one is forced to sing a contract to follow those rules and be part of such a society).

Anarchy != chaos.

Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.

anarchy

• • absence of government
  • a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
• • absence or denial of any authority or established order
  • absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>

I was not talking about a word, I was talking about the real world circumstances. Describe a society with some private, mandatory and consistent rules how ever you like. I only used the word anarchy because most people use that word to describe such a society where there is no central authority and no monopoly on violence i.e. a government.

[hazek]

Anarchy != chaos.

Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.

Who enforces them?

Rules are private, so who do you think?

[hazek]

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases
• Everyone with information on these cases should cooperate with law enforcement's investigation
• Even confidential information on these cases should be shared with law enforcement after they have followed due process for their jurisdiction

The government doesn't have the *moral* authority to give candy to a baby let alone prosecute anyone for theft. I would discourage everyone from ever going to the state for help, period.

That being said, the individual that stole the coins can ethically be forced to pay restitution, but I wouldn't look to the government to do it. This is why we need competing defense agencies and dispute resolution organizations.

That's interesting.   So which is it Luke?[/list]

[rjk]

Anarchy != chaos.

Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.

Who enforces them?

Rules are private, so who do you think?

So we can go around killing each other for whatever reason? Nice way to devolve back into the fucking Dark Ages.

[Polvos]

Always the same shit.

1- Start a quite unsecure service
2- Get some BTC in it
3- Start a marketing campaign
4- Get more BTC from customers
5- Change the admin password in your service as a cracker would do
6- Transfer the funds from the cold storage to another of your addresses
7- Put shorts in BTC
7- Claim a bad hack stole all the funds badly
8- Send small transfers with some geeky binary message
9- Spread some coins to charity and donation addresses.
10- Wait in the forums laughing while the purity monks claim for tainting coins
11 - Earn more money because the shorts and the purity monks


We really need the coin melting laundry service

[hazek]

Anarchy != chaos.

Anarchy == society with some private mandatory and consistent rules.

Who enforces them?

Rules are private, so who do you think?

So we can go around killing each other for whatever reason? Nice way to devolve back into the fucking Dark Ages.

People would voluntarily sign up to receive a service that might/will kill them? You know that round thing between your shoulders attached to your neck? Try to use it.

[Luke-Jr]

I don't consent to your "no murder" rule. Now what?

[hazek]

I don't consent to your "no murder" rule. Now what?

That's ok. Me and my friends who do accept this rule have decided to not offer you our services, so if you need food, you wont get it from us, if you need a job, you wont get it from us, if you need a place to live, we wont sell it to you. You can go into the wilderness and live among those who share your views.

Btw we hired this excellent security firm that will use deadly force in case you try to hurt us to get any of the above stuff by using force.

How does that sound?

[Daily Anarchist]

I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but we're already living in a state of complete anarchy. We always have been and we always will be.

The state doesn't create laws. Laws cannot be broken. The state creates threats. And sometimes they act on those threats with violence. What separates the state from legitimate defense organizations is that the state continually violates the non-aggression principle. We know this to be true because the funding for the state comes from theft, i.e. taxes.

The state is nothing more than a gigantic criminal organization. When we say we want to abolish the state, we mean forever.

[Raoul Duke]

I don't consent to your "no murder" rule. Now what?

That's ok. Me and my friends who do accept this rule have decided to not offer you our services, so if you need food, you wont get it from us, if you need a job, you wont get it from us, if you need a place to live, we wont sell it to you. You can go into the wilderness and live among those who share your views.

Btw we hired this excellent security firm that will use deadly force in case you try to hurt us to get any of the above stuff by using force.

How does that sound?

WTF Are you Cristopher Columbus? It seems you just discovered America lol

[hazek]

The state doesn't create laws.

People create laws by singing contracts between each other. That's what contracts are = private law between the signatory parties.

[Luke-Jr]

I don't consent to your "no murder" rule. Now what?

That's ok. Me and my friends who do accept this rule have decided to not offer you our services, so if you need food, you wont get it from us, if you need a job, you wont get it from us, if you need a place to live, we wont sell it to you. You can go into the wilderness and live among those who share your views.

Btw we hired this excellent security firm that will use deadly force in case you try to hurt us to get any of the above stuff by using force.

How does that sound?

Sounds like you just started a State. Well done, you win the anarchy game!

[hazek]

I don't consent to your "no murder" rule. Now what?

That's ok. Me and my friends who do accept this rule have decided to not offer you our services, so if you need food, you wont get it from us, if you need a job, you wont get it from us, if you need a place to live, we wont sell it to you. You can go into the wilderness and live among those who share your views.

Btw we hired this excellent security firm that will use deadly force in case you try to hurt us to get any of the above stuff by using force.

How does that sound?

Sounds like you just started a State. Well done, you win the anarchy game!

A state? There is no body of politics or elections or government laws, there are no lines drawn on a map and there is no involuntary participation and no one has "authority" over anyone else. How does my example in any way resemble a state?

[rjk]

A state? There is no body of politics or elections or government laws, there are no lines drawn on a map and there is no involuntary participation. How does my example in any way resemble a state?

Wanna bet on how long it will stay that way, with all the "contracts" you are signing?

[hazek]

A state? There is no body of politics or elections or government laws, there are no lines drawn on a map and there is no involuntary participation. How does my example in any way resemble a state?

Wanna bet on how long it will stay that way, with all the "contracts" you are signing?

Yes, let's not cut out the cancer because it might grow back..

[rjk]

A state? There is no body of politics or elections or government laws, there are no lines drawn on a map and there is no involuntary participation. How does my example in any way resemble a state?

Wanna bet on how long it will stay that way, with all the "contracts" you are signing?

Yes, let's not cut out the cancer because it might grow back..

In that case, do you care to explain why previous attempts at anarchy have all failed in the long run? Just for my amusement, of course.

[hazek]

A state? There is no body of politics or elections or government laws, there are no lines drawn on a map and there is no involuntary participation. How does my example in any way resemble a state?

Wanna bet on how long it will stay that way, with all the "contracts" you are signing?

Yes, let's not cut out the cancer because it might grow back..

In that case, do you care to explain why previous attempts at anarchy have all failed in the long run? Just for my amusement, of course.

What attempts?

[ElectricMucus]

If he really wanna distribute the coins in the robin hood fashion he'd donate to p2pool.
This way the coins would be evenly and most untraceable distributed and it would make p2pool the largest pool.

Anyone checked the balance of this supposed giveback account, there are like 13coins on there, now that's pathetic.

[rjk]

A state? There is no body of politics or elections or government laws, there are no lines drawn on a map and there is no involuntary participation. How does my example in any way resemble a state?

Wanna bet on how long it will stay that way, with all the "contracts" you are signing?

Yes, let's not cut out the cancer because it might grow back..

In that case, do you care to explain why previous attempts at anarchy have all failed in the long run? Just for my amusement, of course.

What attempts?

Any. Unless you can point to some places with no government, over which no government has influence, and which still exist. I doubt that there are many, and I doubt that any such places that exist can scale up in size.

[Daily Anarchist]

The state doesn't create laws.

People create laws by singing contracts between each other. That's what contracts are = private law between the signatory parties.

I understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that the state has always attempted to make its laws as concrete as the laws of nature. Religious law also attempted this.

I know many in the anarcho-capitalist movement like to talk about private law. And I have as well in the past. But I think we should be calling it something else entirely. The laws of gravity and thermodynamics cannot be broken. Man made laws can be. It seems to me a perversion of the meaning of the word "law" when we talk about what mankind does.

[hazek]

A state? There is no body of politics or elections or government laws, there are no lines drawn on a map and there is no involuntary participation. How does my example in any way resemble a state?

Wanna bet on how long it will stay that way, with all the "contracts" you are signing?

Yes, let's not cut out the cancer because it might grow back..

In that case, do you care to explain why previous attempts at anarchy have all failed in the long run? Just for my amusement, of course.

What attempts?

Any. Unless you can point to some places with no government, over which no government has influence, and which still exist. I doubt that there are many, and I doubt that any such places that exist can scale up in size.

I thought your point was that there have in fact been attempts and that they failed.

Btw we had kings and slavery for most of our history until we didn't. But it's ok, cognitive dissonance wont allow you to see all the possibilities that I see, it's human nature nothing I or you can do.

[hazek]

The state doesn't create laws.

People create laws by singing contracts between each other. That's what contracts are = private law between the signatory parties.

I understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that the state has always attempted to make its laws as concrete as the laws of nature. Religious law also attempted this.

I know many in the anarcho-capitalist movement like to talk about private law. And I have as well in the past. But I think we should be calling it something else entirely. The laws of gravity and thermodynamics cannot be broken. Man made laws can be. It seems to me a perversion of the meaning of the word "law" when we talk about what mankind does.

Private rules fits better, you are right.

[Luke-Jr]

Btw we had kings ... for most of our history until we didn't.

And society is worse now than it was with kings. I support monarchy.

[Daily Anarchist]

Btw we had kings ... for most of our history until we didn't.

And society is worse now than it was with kings. I support monarchy.

Here you go, Luke.

http://anarcho-monarchism.com/

[hazek]

Btw we had kings ... for most of our history until we didn't.

And society is worse now than it was with kings. I support monarchy.

I guess as a consequence of cognitive dissonance you now resorted to trolling because I cannot for the life of me take you seriously anymore.

EDIT: btw I'm done with this pointless discussion, in the end Bitcoin is regulated strictly by market consumers and this issue will get sorted out by itself regardless of what any of us individually believe.

And in case anyone wants to get rid of some so called tainted coins, look at my signature.

[Polvos]

Btw we had kings ... for most of our history until we didn't.

And society is worse now than it was with kings. I support monarchy.

Believe me, you don't support it. Anybody with half brain don't support it. And I know what I'm saying.

[Turbor]

"Bitcoinica caused much harm to the value of Bitcoin. They were targeted and destroyed. As sure as Bitcoinica fell, the value of Bitcoin rose. Profit from devaluation surely destroys a currency." AMEN 

Who said that again? It sounds so familiar...

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

the development of an alt-coin (double blinding signing) which makes such registries more such lunacy more difficult to implement.

Are you suggesting it is possible to combine eCash blinded signature with a decentralized blockchain, somehow? In other words, a fully anonymous p2p currency??
Please, explain a little more if that's the case. Perhaps open a new topic about it...

[marcus_of_augustus]

As much as it pains me to admit I think this idea of tainted coins will lead bitcoin to it's death.

Me too. Someone should file a bug report to the devs.

The solution, of course, is strong anonymity and not the half-baked pseudo-anonymity scheme bitcoin uses at present ... like real cash (who woulda thunk?)

[FreeMoney]

the development of an alt-coin (double blinding signing) which makes such registries more such lunacy more difficult to implement.

Are you suggesting it is possible to combine eCash blinded signature with a decentralized blockchain, somehow? In other words, a fully anonymous p2p currency??
Please, explain a little more if that's the case. Perhaps open a new topic about it...

Yeah, it would be like magic. I mean Bitcoin is like magic sort of, but no double spending and no trail just seems like fairy tales. Obv I'm very interested if someone can explain how this could be possible.

[giszmo]

the development of an alt-coin (double blinding signing) which makes such registries more such lunacy more difficult to implement.

Are you suggesting it is possible to combine eCash blinded signature with a decentralized blockchain, somehow? In other words, a fully anonymous p2p currency??
Please, explain a little more if that's the case. Perhaps open a new topic about it...

Yeah, it would be like magic. I mean Bitcoin is like magic sort of, but no double spending and no trail just seems like fairy tales. Obv I'm very interested if someone can explain how this could be possible.

Either it should be possible or possible to proof to be impossible. Either way this aspect as others said before on this thread is of ultimate importance to the overall success of bitcoin.

As much as I would love to see Bitcoins to be ultimately fungible, if I see somebody tries to buy my goods with 100% stolen coins, I will kick his ass and not accept these coins. If his coins are 1/1000th tainted, i would not start an argument. Still if MtGox officially takes these coins like they were only 999/1000, same would I to my customer.

I'm pretty sure that such measures will never make it into the protocol but likewise I'm sure that we will see clients capable of polling blacklists that at least tell the user a history of some of the coins he's about to receive.

[btccomm]

As much as it pains me to admit I think this idea of tainted coins will lead bitcoin to it's death.

Me too. Someone should file a bug report to the devs.

The solution, of course, is strong anonymity and not the half-baked pseudo-anonymity scheme bitcoin uses at present ... like real cash (who woulda thunk?)

+1

[check_status]

If he really wanna distribute the coins in the robin hood fashion he'd donate to p2pool.
This way the coins would be evenly and most untraceable distributed and it would make p2pool the largest pool.

+18,000

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

For those who believe not in God, lawlessness already exists.

Bitcoins do have value which can be determined just as assuredly as any painting or antique. Stealing something that can be shown to have value makes the thief liable to prosecution and responsible to the party to repay what was stolen, if proven to be the thief.
If I break into a house and steal some jewelry which I later pawn, the police, checking the pawn shops, will collect the stolen property and not provide any compensation to the pawn shop. The pawn shop must get in line to collect if the thief is ever caught. The pawn shop owner isn't charge with any crime related to the theft.

[Luke-Jr]

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

For those who believe not in God, lawlessness already exists.

Rather, for those delusional enough to deny God's existence, they find it easy to also deny the reality of lawful authority.

[Daily Anarchist]

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

For those who believe not in God, lawlessness already exists.

Rather, for those delusional enough to deny God's existence, they find it easy to also deny the reality of lawful authority.

Armed and violent men in costume does not constitute lawful authority. At least not in my book. If you desire a master like that I'm not going to stop you.

[Luke-Jr]

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

For those who believe not in God, lawlessness already exists.

Rather, for those delusional enough to deny God's existence, they find it easy to also deny the reality of lawful authority.

Armed and violent men in costume does not constitute lawful authority. At least not in my book. If you desire a master like that I'm not going to stop you.

Whether or not one desires reality, does not make it any less real. I dislike every State operating today, but they are still States with legitimate authority.

[Daily Anarchist]

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

For those who believe not in God, lawlessness already exists.

Rather, for those delusional enough to deny God's existence, they find it easy to also deny the reality of lawful authority.

Armed and violent men in costume does not constitute lawful authority. At least not in my book. If you desire a master like that I'm not going to stop you.

Whether or not one desires reality, does not make it any less real. I dislike every State operating today, but they are still States with legitimate authority.

None of them have legitimate authority because all of them are funded through theft. You find me a Defense Agency that is voluntarily funded and you may have some legitimate authority.

[ineededausername]

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

For those who believe not in God, lawlessness already exists.

Rather, for those delusional enough to deny God's existence, they find it easy to also deny the reality of lawful authority.

herp derp

Sometimes I think the entire fundie luke jr thing is just trolling since you are very intelligent in other ways, but I suppose indoctrination gets to the best of us. 

Also, if God is the source of all authority, God is the source of all violence, which would make him very evil indeed.  Congratulations on justifying the reign of Hitler while you were at it.

[marcus_of_augustus]

the development of an alt-coin (double blinding signing) which makes such registries more such lunacy more difficult to implement.

Are you suggesting it is possible to combine eCash blinded signature with a decentralized blockchain, somehow? In other words, a fully anonymous p2p currency??
Please, explain a little more if that's the case. Perhaps open a new topic about it...

Yeah, it would be like magic. I mean Bitcoin is like magic sort of, but no double spending and no trail just seems like fairy tales. Obv I'm very interested if someone can explain how this could be possible.

Homomorphic encryption should theoretically be able to do what you are calling a "fairy tales" ... noone said it was easy though.

[kano]

If he really wanna distribute the coins in the robin hood fashion he'd donate to p2pool.
This way the coins would be evenly and most untraceable distributed and it would make p2pool the largest pool.

Anyone checked the balance of this supposed giveback account, there are like 13coins on there, now that's pathetic.

Actually ... I had a look at that address that Luke-jr gave out

And it is a little interesting:
http://blockchain.info/address/1BPKHoL1sAVnfzxnH38RfXYYcHrEcniUKW

The first transaction to that address (at the bottom) I guess is a test transaction:
http://blockchain.info/tx-index/6244057/b72e2ebcf768dc93781faa31c00c99ea202761c405a53e02e46cd5911f9ea233

Which comes from the IP address 69.178.3.55
http://blockchain.info/ip-address/69.178.3.55

And the first 2 transactions listed at blockchain.info from that IP address are from the addresses:

1) 1L2Xi8ZB3jkgpZsvLjWUexUPAujcGVAqqk
and
2) 1P5mbiNiPhcwhENSpfJdZ4VSwW3R95ySQw

now 1) leads directly back to 2) (2 steps back)
http://blockchain.info/address/1L2Xi8ZB3jkgpZsvLjWUexUPAujcGVAqqk

... and you will get a chain of addresses leading exactly back to

3,488 BTC with lots of sizeable transactions along the way over the past 2 days.

However! If you click on
http://blockchain.info/address/1P5mbiNiPhcwhENSpfJdZ4VSwW3R95ySQw

And follow it 1 step forward (instead of back) to this address where most of it's BTC went:
http://blockchain.info/address/18iWntFfrMo6S5P3BBUg6uDhEarFqhnSn

Which is a very interesting address ... since it has process 49,511.8954335 BTC since 12-Mar ...

So I guess that's either a sizeable transaction service ... or ?

[finkleshnorts]

• The government does have the authority to investigate and prosecute these cases

Yeah? Where did they get this authority from? Did we agree to this? Did we give our consent?

The State's authority comes from God, who is the source of all authority and life. God's rights are unlimited, and don't require your consent.

For those who believe not in God, lawlessness already exists.

Rather, for those delusional enough to deny God's existence, they find it easy to also deny the reality of lawful authority.

herp derp

Sometimes I think the entire fundie luke jr thing is just trolling since you are very intelligent in other ways, but I suppose indoctrination gets to the best of us. 

Also, if God is the source of all authority, God is the source of all violence, which would make him very evil indeed.  Congratulations on justifying the reign of Hitler while you were at it.

No! Godwin's law dammit! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

[benjamindees]

No! Godwin's law dammit! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

It's too late.  Luke wins the thread.  He is now your king and lawful ruler... amen.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

the development of an alt-coin (double blinding signing) which makes such registries more such lunacy more difficult to implement.

Are you suggesting it is possible to combine eCash blinded signature with a decentralized blockchain, somehow? In other words, a fully anonymous p2p currency??
Please, explain a little more if that's the case. Perhaps open a new topic about it...

Yeah, it would be like magic. I mean Bitcoin is like magic sort of, but no double spending and no trail just seems like fairy tales. Obv I'm very interested if someone can explain how this could be possible.

I found this: http://wbl.github.com/bitcoinanon.pdf

I read it once, and my conclusion is: I'm too ignorant in cryptography.
I just can't understand what's in that paper. I'll search if it has been discussed here already. By discussed I mean explained in a language mere mortals may understand.

[shockD]

Btw we had kings ... for most of our history until we didn't.

And society is worse now than it was with kings. I support monarchy.

thefuck?

[hazek]

the police, checking the pawn shops, will collect the stolen property and not provide any compensation to the pawn shop.

Is that suppose to mean something to me? Is what the police does somehow indicative of what should be done or more so what I should do? News flash I don't give a rats ass what violent thugs in a blue costume do or think I should do.

[hazek]

but they are still States with legitimate authority.

if by legitimate you mean self asserted and enforced through the threat of violence, then you are right.

[hazek]

No! Godwin's law dammit! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

It's too late.  Luke wins the thread.  He is now your king and lawful ruler... amen.

Everyone BOW to the king or PERISH 4evahhh! 

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

I found this: http://wbl.github.com/bitcoinanon.pdf

I read it once, and my conclusion is: I'm too ignorant in cryptography.
I just can't understand what's in that paper. I'll search if it has been discussed here already. By discussed I mean explained in a language mere mortals may understand.

I opened this topic about this subject: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82947.0

[Hunterbunter]

I don't consent to your "no murder" rule. Now what?

Btw we hired this excellent security firm that will use deadly force in case you try to hurt us to get any of the above stuff by using force.

How does that sound?

That's ok I just paid them more.

[Clipse]

Do not, I repeat, DO NOT send any of these coins to anyone involved with bitcoinica before bitcoinica reveal their endgame strategy.

There is decent speculation that they are planning to make a "run on the bank", if that doesnt happen then it would be the right thing to send them the coins accumulated from the hacker funded wallet.

[arby]

His reasoning is simple, he wants to be famous.

Bragging "hackers" (I use the quotes because he actually broke into an e-mail account) are the worse kind.

The good thing about it, is that they get caught first.

[mb300sd]

Thanks for the build, didnt get any stolen coins, but Ive been looking for a copy of 0.6.2 with coin control, without the security risks of running next-test 24/7.

[molecular]

Screw tracking coins!

I want bitcoin to be money. Without fungibility it is not money.

had to spew this somewhere, probably not the most appropriate thread. Can anyone point me to a fruitful discussion about this?

[malevolent]

Anyone know what happened after the linode hack? Linode was clearly responsible, I wonder if they covered the damages and repaid to Bitcoinica.

[giszmo]

Anyone know what happened after the linode hack? Linode was clearly responsible, I wonder if they covered the damages and repaid to Bitcoinica.

Off topic! Moderators do something!!

... meanwhile let me speculate with you: All hosting I know has regulation saying that you will not have to pay for days that their service is offline if that is above a certain percentage. None of them askes how much the service is worth running per hour and surely none of them cares if you put crypto tokens on it that can be stolen. Most likely if you want to off-load that risk, you would have to find an insurance and if I were an insurance I would certainly not insure bitcoins that lay outside of my influence. insure - steal -claim it wasn't you - profit.

[malevolent]

Off topic! Moderators do something!!

Wasn't sure in which Bitcoinica topic to post.

... meanwhile let me speculate with you: All hosting I know has regulation saying that you will not have to pay for days that their service is offline if that is above a certain percentage. None of them askes how much the service is worth running per hour and surely none of them cares if you put crypto tokens on it that can be stolen. Most likely if you want to off-load that risk, you would have to find an insurance and if I were an insurance I would certainly not insure bitcoins that lay outside of my influence. insure - steal -claim it wasn't you - profit.

Just read their Terms of Service here: http://www.linode.com/tos.cfm
I wonder if they were different prior to the hack? If anyone has a copy we could see if there is still any hope apart from seeing if their current ToS is valid according to law.

[kano]

Anyone know what happened after the linode hack? Linode was clearly responsible, I wonder if they covered the damages and repaid to Bitcoinica.

Off topic! Moderators do something!!

... meanwhile let me speculate with you: All hosting I know has regulation saying that you will not have to pay for days that their service is offline if that is above a certain percentage. None of them askes how much the service is worth running per hour and surely none of them cares if you put crypto tokens on it that can be stolen. Most likely if you want to off-load that risk, you would have to find an insurance and if I were an insurance I would certainly not insure bitcoins that lay outside of my influence. insure - steal -claim it wasn't you - profit.

It was an inside job - so that's different ...

[westkybitcoins]

the development of an alt-coin (double blinding signing) which makes such registries more such lunacy more difficult to implement.

Are you suggesting it is possible to combine eCash blinded signature with a decentralized blockchain, somehow? In other words, a fully anonymous p2p currency??
Please, explain a little more if that's the case. Perhaps open a new topic about it...

Yeah, it would be like magic. I mean Bitcoin is like magic sort of, but no double spending and no trail just seems like fairy tales. Obv I'm very interested if someone can explain how this could be possible.

I found this: http://wbl.github.com/bitcoinanon.pdf

I read it once, and my conclusion is: I'm too ignorant in cryptography.
I just can't understand what's in that paper. I'll search if it has been discussed here already. By discussed I mean explained in a language mere mortals may understand.

Interesting, but it's not good enough.

That paper details a method whereby the sender of coins can easily defraud the recipient(s), and simply shrugs it off because the fraud would eventually be detected.

[R-]

Nearly forgot about this one