Oh, but forgot to add: thanks for an awesome client BTW :-)

roy

To all intents and purposes it couldn't happen, if all software is functioning correctly, any more than all the atoms in someone's underwear could just simultaneously decide to move three feet to the left.  Quantum mechanically you could argue that it's possible but unlikely, but that's just sophism (or more accurately fine comedic writing).

But, of course, software can have bugs.  Could there be a flaw in the random number generation which makes a collision plausible?  Sure, there could be.

Still, I don't believe it, given the evidence in the blockchain.

The address that paid me has made a lot of 0.001 BTC transactions.

Is it known whether the coins are tainted (are there any public ways to check?)

I did wonder whether someone with tainted coins (whether a criminal or just someone who innocently received them) is deliberately spreading taint around in an attempt to make the notion of tainted coins unworkable.

The address has also made a quite a few SatoshiDice transactions - can't quite see the connection except that tainting SD's coins is quite a good way of spreading taint very widely.

Thoughts?

roy

A couple of issues with the transaction details display:

The recipient address shown in the transaction details screen is always the first output of the transacrtion (rather than the actual output of the transaction that is to my wallet).  This just caused me a *lot* of confusion :-)

Also there are issues with truncation/linewrapping which make the transaction ID useless (on my phone at least) and the addresses useless in portrait mode, but obviously that's just a UI issue and I imagine known about already.

Both issues seen in 3.13

roy

This is the mystery transaction that pays 0.001 BTC to 1A6tsBCowg98pTCfjdxkQj7L2kka9JmoQT

https://blockchain.info/tx/6e06ffd314ce06a371fdedbe7aa7dbb27c3bab2b05f91a88b3f19a80adbbb26d

The thing that puzzles me is that the only way someone could have got that address is by trawling the blockchain for the original transaction that funded that address.  Why would anyone do that?

A few days ago I received 0.001 BTC to the wallet on my Android phone.  The odd thing is, that wallet has not been used, since being set up, apart from a single 1 BTC transaction from one of my other wallets.  No addresses from the Android wallet have ever been advertised.

Why would someone do this?  Is this common?  To my knowledge it's never happened to me on my main wallets...

roy

Who is the arbiter of 'correct'?  The person who placed an order while my chips were in their cart - do they get to keep my chips?

The site is down for now.  No word on what will happen to order places during the two short periods it was up.

Some of us might want to use different shipping and billing addreses.  (I gave you my home address as billing address - but will probably request shipping to my work address, to avoid wasted days of a missed delivery and having to collect from the depot.)

But that check will probably match in many cases, which will cut down on the work.

roy

I don't understand what you mean by that... The risk (to me) is that burnin might send my chips (which I've already paid you for) in a board to someone else...

roy

[EDITED SLIGHTLY]

Except, due to the cart problems I worry that people may have ordered boards with other people's chips by accident...

But even ignoring the cart problems, the chips are valuable and have already been paid for.  One way or another, I don't think boards containing those chips should be sent to someone just because they are willing to pay for the boards and assembly - surely they need to prove they own the chips, too?

Perhaps some kind of public list would help, which we can cross-check against - although I can't quite see how that would work...

roy

[EDITED: Minor editorial changes only]

The 401 is because burnin has stuck in a basic auth to disable the site until he fixes it.  Based on his previous comment, he's gone to sleep, and we shoudldn't expect it to be fixed tonight...

Of course, it's always possible he's an insomniac

@burnin: To follow up on my own post yet again, you absolutely have to do that anyway, for all orders past and future...  (Of course, maybe your website does request such verification - and I just didn't get that far.)

At least in SebastianJu's group buy, purchase was allowed by PM or public post.  So in many cases the forum nick and chip payment address are both public anyway... Therefore you will need to get people to prove their identity when ordering to prevent them stealing other people's chips...  Either by signing something with their bitcoin address, or by PMing you from their forum account

roy

To answer my own question: I think any existing orders that you keep - you should insist on a signed confirmation that the order is valid - that must be signed by every chip payment address in the order....

roy

But how do you know which orders are correct?  What if someone claims their order is correct when it actually includes someone else's chips?

roy

Burnin, I think you're going to have to find a way to allow us to check that our forum nicks and/or payment addresses aren't associated with someone else's order....  Otherwise I don't know how you're going to clear this up....

I should add - I did try to delete my boards from my cart as soon as the other 18 appeared - but I don't think I was in time....  who knows...

Just tried ordering.... two boards... then 18 more board appeared in my cart.  Then cart was empty - so someone else has ordered my boards...(?)

This is the first time I visited the site since it went live, so it's not due to caching at my end....  I'd entered my bitcoin address and forum username - I'm guessing they've now been put against someone elses order - I hope that doesn't mean you're going to send them my chips (!?)

I concur with others - you need to reset and cancel all orders

roy

So, to take the case of a Mt Gox withdrawal (or deposit), if you withdraw or deposit in either your own country's currency, or in Japanese Yen, then although the transfer might still go through an intermediate bank, if it does then that bank will probably be either in your own country or in Japan.

If you do the transfer in a third country's currency (such as someone in a country other than the US or Japan doing a transfer to/from Gox in USD) then the transfer will probably go via one of more banks in the third country.

One might argue that involves an increase in jurisdictional risk (the transfer is now subject to three jurisdictions rather than two).  Whether in reality it increases the risk of the transfer is less clear.

roy

Yes, but I think Eurodollar deposits are generally largely backed by the deposit taker in turn holding dollars at a US bank, no?  (Of course, in many cases the US bank will actually be the US branch of the same bank.)

Foreign banks don't have direct access to the Federal Reserve System, and hiding wads of dollar bills under the mattress in a bank vault is so 19th century. 

In any case, from what I've read international wire transfers are normally settled via correspondent banks in the country which issues the currency.  I'm sure there are exceptions, but you should generally assume that a USD transfer will go via one or two US banks unless you have information to the contrary.