|
I think because the one user was an account set up to move everyone else's bitcoins to it, and they tried to drain all of Mt. Gox's bitcoin wallet from there. The user probably doesn't exist.
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
Considering all the recent cases where people's usage of passwords turned out to be less than optimal (and sometimes just negligent), allow me to recommend a free, user friendly, secure password manager: passpack.com.
It can create random passwords for you at many lengths, so you can have very secure passwords, and most important - a different one for each service you use, for each encrypted wallet file you create, for exchanges and whatever...
I am not related to passpack in any way, I just wanted to take this opportunity and help in case a few of you feel overwhelmed by the need to manage many secure passwords at once.
If anyone else has a different tool they prefer please share it as well.
Lets take security up a notch, for everyone's sake...
Open Source Password Safe has the same features and more. |
|
|
|
I agree that everyone should read this.
So, assuming the one 'user' with 500k BTC was MagicalTux, or someone close to him:
1) Gox launches with swiss cheese for security
2) Gox ignores all warning about being vulnerable, and continues to tell users they're safe
3) Gox gets hacked
4) Magical Tux's BTC gets sold for pennies
5) Magical Tux wants to roll back the transactions to get his bitcoin back
Am I missing something?
Magical Tux probably doesn't have 500k BTC. Perhaps everyone on the site combined would add up to 500k BTC. I think every bitcoin on the site got liquidated. So he is backing it out. The problem is whether the coins got transferred out before he caught the transaction. |
|
|
|
I told you so...
Speak up, I can't hear you. |
|
|
|
|
Where is the option for "My opinion counts for less than two shits because Mt. Gox is going to do what they want without asking me first"?
|
|
|
|
I'm almost certain MtGox did not exist during the days of the 20,000BTC pizza, so the funds could not have been transferred then.
They didn't. It was only BitcoinMarket back then. |
|
|
|
|
You aren't gonna get enough money from Mt Gox after you pay a laywer $300/Hr to make it worth your time to sue.
Anyway, there is no reason to get people in a panic about not being able to withdraw. There is no evidence that will happen.
|
|
|
|
3) The moment we pass the new verification stage, are we allowed to look at our account, or are there more delays at that stage?
I don't think this matters, because they could say anything for your account balance. The real test will be when everyone withdraws at once. If they survive that, then they are still solvent and liquid. |
|
|
|
And your point is?
What difference does it make whether the account belongs to MtGox or Elmer Fudd..
Because if it is Elmer Fudd, then Bugs Bunny will be getting the bitcoins vewy vewy soon. |
|
|
|
Mt Gox. is back up on the charts, http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/their site is still down... should be to long till its back up, big question now is what % of the people will go to trade hill The question is, will Trade Hill find non-Godaddy hosting? That's a mighty fine wallet address you have there. |
|
|
|
|
There is nothing inherently wrong with fractional reserve as long as the banks are up front about it. If you don't trust fractional reserve accounts, you can bank with an institution that doesn't lend money out and you pay a storage fee. Or you could designate a certain percent of you demand deposit account as fractional and get interest for that portion, and pay a storage fee for the non-fractional.
The immoral thing is when central banks counterfeit money to back up the fractional reserve banks. That is essentially stealing from everyone holding the money to bail out the banks.
Gold itself can be fractionally reserved without a central bank. It is just that a bank run will crash the system without it. (Which is good IMHO, because it makes the banks very cautious about lending, i.e. no subprime)
|
|
|
|
Yes its already noon in Japan, they probably were slacking and didn't finish the work..
More likely they seriously underestimated the work required to do all the things they wanted to change. I'm guessing another 24 hours before it comes up. |
|
|
|
Where is the option for "Myself"?
oh, right. I should have thought of a voting option for the libertarians. NEVER forget about the Librarians on this site. That's Cardinal Sin #1. We have a lot of Librarians on this site? hm... |
|
|
|
Where is the option for "Myself"?
oh, right. I should have thought of a voting option for the libertarians. Funny stuff right there.  |
|
|
|
|
Where is the option for "Myself"?
|
|
|
|
|
Give your market prediction a try.
|
|
|
|
11.58
TRUST ME
Never trust a man that says "Trust me" |
|
|
|
Looks like Delphi! how could you tell?  no, it's the only thing i've learned in school. never felt the need to switch to something cooler. Delphi is my fave. I have V10 now. Unfortunately our company switched to C# two years ago. Although C# is actually a more powerful language, its syntax isn't as nice as Delphi. |
|
|
|
That is because everyone knows that ASICs are the inevitable end game. Whoever has those wins.
Even a ASICs design will have a hard time vs a few million gamers worldwide who consider their graphics cards free and GPU shrinks that happen every 18-24 months on average. Any ASIC design brought out today will have to compete with the radeon 7xxx series and not current hardware. The problem is that an ASIC can be custom designed to go orders of magnitude faster than a GPU for a specific task. As just a very rough estimate, one SHA256 engine with bitcoin hash difficulty detection would take something like 1 million transistors. The latest ASIC technology allows 2 billion transistors. So that would allow 2,000 of these engines per chip. If you layed them out by hand, you could probably get them up to 4 GHz. Assuming one hash per clock, this ends up being 8 TH/S per chip. In other words, this one chip could outperform the entire current BitCoin network. And once the multi-million up front tooling costs are covered, you can make each chip for $50 each. So for another $10,000 you could make a system with 200 chips that would be able to dominate the entire network at 200 times its current capacity. It would pay for itself in about 20 days, because you would get every bitcoin made in that period. If the exchange rates hold, you could multiply your earnings and buy thousands more chips for a low incremental cost to maintain your dominance. I don't see how GPUs could begin to compete with this. it all sounds so good except that one or a group of people have to come up with millions of dollars to do this. And i have a feeling 2 million is just enough to go bankrupt trying without producing a single thing. sure.. if you get lucky and manage to rope in a few experts in the area you have a greater chance of success.. and if they donate their time for basically a shot at making bitcoins... and if several stars align just so... maybe someone will make a package that can do this. i am not an expert in the field. i am known to be wrong and probably am. this is just a gut feeling that if people guess that it will take 1 million dollars to do the job.. i normally multiply that in my head by a factor of 5 to really make it happen. edited to add: 10:31 TD so it's $1000 per gigahash? 10:32 ArtForz well, if support components, PCBs, cases, ... grow on trees, yes ---- but he wins on the power side of things for sure. According to rumors I have seen around the forums in the last few weeks, there is a group called LargeCoin that has managed to secure a couple of mil and the ASIC engineers to do just that. If I were one of the original bitcoiners that just made 5 million in the last week, this project is exactly what I would be doing with half of the proceeds. ArtForz used structured ASICs which are just one step above FPGAs. They won't have nearly the performance of a full custom ASIC. |
|
|
|
i thought it would be fun to write a calculator for this. i know people have been trying to do it with excel spreadsheets, but honestly they suck and usually don't work with openoffice. here's my calculator's result for mining in germany and within the US. it's funny. this example shows buying a 6950 at 200€ .  [edit] "in the minus" sounds very german. oh dear. i hate myself. and changed the picture. because 200 eur is not 200 usd. Looks like Delphi! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
