News update. The owner of the wallet that paid $5 million in transaction fees might be a ponzi scheme called Good Cycle. This might be the reason why they never tried to contact the mining pool hehehe. Another wallet researcher has said that it might only be a bug, however. Researchers at blockchain analytics platform PeckShield have found out who owns the Ethereum address that, for some reason, paid $5.2 million in fees to send just two transactions last week. They have identified the owner as a small, peer-to-peer crypto exchange in Korea, called Good Cycle, and suggest that it could be operating a Ponzi scheme.
“So the million-dollar txfees may actually be blackmail. The theory: hackers captured partial access to exchange key; they can't withdraw but can send no-effect txs with any gas price. So they threaten to "burn" all funds via tx fees unless compensated,” Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin tweeted about the research.Source https://decrypt.co/32604/heres-who-paid-5-2-million-in-ethereum-fees-last-week
|
|
|
What are AEON use use cases? To adopt the use of AEON will mean innovative thinking and collaboration and partnership. Aeon is one of the few, if any, CryptoNote coins without RingCT and Bulletproofs. If a venerability Or exploit were Found in this code, almost all CN coins would be affected except Aeon. So many coins forked from monero and or just created from copy pasting monero code to say they aren’t a direct fork, can become obsolete from a major exploit in this code. It’s nice being in the sidelines due to this while still maintaining a private blockchain. I would not begin to think or assume that there are vulnerabilities on RingCT on Monero. The Monero developers stand with the best in the cryptospace. The advantage of not activating RingCT in Aeon is for the blockchain to remain smaller and more manageable. This advantage will be witnessed in 5 years, I reckon.
|
|
|
@Germining. Aeon might also be a cryptocoin to your liking hehehe. Also a Monero fork maintained by 2 Monero developers, lead developer smooth and Monero Research lab developer stoffu.
In any case, someone is presently pumping it. We do not know who it is or they are however. I speculate that it might be a miner's pump.
|
|
|
@Harlot. You misunderstood. It is not about a rebellion against bitcoin. It is a rebellion where bitcoin is used as the main source of funding by the dissenters.
Also, there is no type of legal action the American government can do on how to stop person to person bitcoin transactions. It will be a dangerous precedent for free speech.
|
|
|
I'm really not surprised that some exchanges do this in my opinion(along with wash trading). If you sort the exchanges on Coinmarketcap through 24hr volumes, there are a good number of unknown exchanges near the top. https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/Agreed! Stricter regulations on the cryptospace are coming in Canada hehehe. However, would everyone be surprised if some of the exchanges might be a part of a global money laundering ring? It appears anything is possible in the cryptospace. This should be implemented around the globe but seems this regulation is hard to get up since there are so many unlicensed exchange popping up these days. Also, the future of cryptocoin trading might be on gray markets. Small exchanges that do not ask KYC documents from users. I reckon that darknet exchanges in Tor might be the next course in a world of stricter than strict regulations on the cryptospace. @pooya87. However, that might be what some exchanges are, fiat launderers. Also, it will not be surprising for me after following BTCe and Alexander Vinnik closely.
|
|
|
Has anyone heard of something? I speculate that this present pump on Aeon might be a miner's pump.
@smooth, @stoffu. Did Asic chip manufacturers inquire about K12 hehehe? That might be good news hehehehe.
|
|
|
It appears that there might be a beginning of a war of the exchanges hehehe. However, why would this leak easily to bitcoin news media? I reckon that this might only be a show from Changpeng Zhao. In any case, waiting for updates hehe! Changpeng Zhao, CEO of BinanceIn an internal note sent out today and obtained by The Block, Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao (CZ) lashed out at unnamed Chinese competitors, accused them of "trying to attack" the exchange, and told the company's employees that Binance will defend itself.
The note, whose authenticity was confirmed by multiple Binance employees, was written in both English and Chinese. It starts by stating that Binance's Chinese competitors "are desperately trying to attack us, using unprofessional methods."
In the note to staff, Zhao suggested that competing exchanges attack Binance because they mistakenly think the exchange does not have "strong [government] relationships" in China. "They may feel this will hurt us, thinking we don’t have strong gov relationships in China. Both are wrong. We never proactively attack others, but we will absolutely defend ourselves, including defensive offense," the note reads.Source https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/68428/a-leaked-note-from-cz-to-binance-staff-says-the-exchange-will-defend-itself-against-desperate-chinese-competitors
|
|
|
TL;DR: Laundering stolen/grey ETH makes more sense than the blackmail story.
You'd better have an absolute stranglehold over mining if you attempt this or some other pool will scoop it up instead. And if these coins are red hot then no sensible pool will hand it back either. None of it makes sense but money laundering via fees doesn't either. Agreed. It also appears that mining pools can also freeze the fee payment and wait for someone to contact them if this was a mistake. The real sender never said anything, however. The coins have been distributed. A mining pool has called time on the wait for an ether whale to reach out after making a transaction with an unusually high fee worth in the millions of dollars last week.
Bitfly, the company behind the Ethermine pool, announced Monday it had opted to distribute a total of 10,668 ETH (now worth just under $2.4 million) in transaction fee to miners that were active at the time the transaction went through last Thursday.Source https://www.coindesk.com/mining-pool-distributes-fee-mysterious-ethereum-crypto-transaction
|
|
|
@Vishnu.Reang. Also, what states have the highest cases of the coronavirus and the highest projected cases of the virus on November? Blue states or red states?
The democrats also want to defund the police. Minneapolis has begun doing this. What would be its effect on independent voters?
LOL.. They want to disband the police force? There can't be anything more lunatic than this. A country such as the United States won't be able to function without the police force. This is pure insanity. From what I have seen, the pandemic is affecting the blue states more than the red states. Even in the red states, the impact is being felt more on counties where the African-Americans, Hispanics and Amerindians make up substantial portion of the population. A few examples are Hancock County (GA) with 3.5 deaths per 1,000 people and McKinley (NM) with 2 deaths per 1,000. Yes some democrat politicians support defund the police. However, there are some moderate democrat voters who are protecting historic landmarks and denounce the politicians that support the destruction of the extreme left. They might begin to support Trump, I reckon.
|
|
|
What are AEON use use cases? To adopt the use of AEON will mean innovative thinking and collaboration and partnership. AEON use case is same as Monero. If opaque ledger cryptocurrencies will prevail, then AEON will have much higher marketcap and will do perfectly fine. If something bad happen to Monero and AEON have few things different then Monero have and I am sure will have more in the future, then AEON will super moon. That is how I see it. Aeon also has a slimmer blockchain than Monero and it will continue to be slimmer because RingCT code was not activated. This might not appear as an advantage at present, however, it will certainly be different after 5 years hehehe.
|
|
|
I'm really not surprised that some exchanges do this in my opinion(along with wash trading). If you sort the exchanges on Coinmarketcap through 24hr volumes, there are a good number of unknown exchanges near the top. https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/Agreed! Stricter regulations on the cryptospace are coming in Canada hehehe. However, would everyone be surprised if some of the exchanges might be a part of a global money laundering ring? It appears anything is possible in the cryptospace.
|
|
|
The hackers started by using a phishing attack (where they fake a website or an email to try to gain credentials) to gain some kind of access to the exchange, according to the report. It worked, they had part of the permissions to send a transaction. But there was a problem.
The exchange had a multi-signature security setting. This means that multiple keys (like passwords) are required to send the money. So, it seemed like there was nothing they could do.
I also see a problem with this scenario as I seriously doubt that an exchange whose operators are stupid to fail for fake emails phishing attacks is using multi-signatures ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) Also, another problem: Instead they figured they would send a small amount of Ethereum to one of the whitelisted addresses but tack on an excessively large transaction fee. While they weren’t getting any of the money, they were costing the exchange dearly. And that gave them room to demand a ransom. So, rather than simply proving with a series of small 1$ tx than they are in some kind of control they decide to trash 2 million worth of coins, and then...demand a ransom. Man, it's like kidnapping somebody for a reward and burning their family house and assets to the ground and THEN asking for money! Good luck getting money after bankrupting them. Besides, if they would have done small transactions they could have defended themselves if ever caught with some sort of vulnerability reward testing, trashing two million to make a point it's a lost cause from the start. The hackers are assumed to be doing it because they do not have full access to the exchange and they do not have the time. The exchange might fix the security issues quickly.
|
|
|
I speculate that this might be one of the exchanges with the highest volumes for Ethereum if the theory is proven. The hacker would not pay a fee of $5 million if the exchange does not have $500 million of ETH in storage, I reckon. It’s been an expensive week for users of the Ethereum blockchain. In the last two days one user managed to spend $5.2 million in fees to make just two transactions—and one of them was only for $130! And now, a third transaction has taken place by another user, albeit for a fee of just $500,000, which seems small in comparison.
And these absurd transactions are prompting far-fetched theories.
While initially thought to be a bug, it appears an exchange is being blackmailed. Image: Shutterstock. “The 3rd abnormal tx on ethereum with over 2000 ETH fee went [through]. Someone believes it could be a hacker's blackmail to some exchange,” tweeted NEO co-founder Da Hongfei.
“A [wild] guess [is] certain exchange/wallet/ETH services is being “kidnapped” by hacker,” speculated Primitive Crypto founding partner Dovey Wan.
But, according to China-based blockchain analytics company PeckShield, reported by Chainews, these theories aren’t so wild after all. PeckShield’s analysis explains that the million-dollar snafus were probably “gas price ransomware attacks.”
In short, the researchers claim that the hackers have gained access to an exchange’s funds. They are able to send money to certain whitelisted accounts that are marked as reliable in the exchange’s database to—but not to their own. So, they are sending the funds with excessively high transaction fees to sap the exchange’s accounts, and they’re demanding a ransom if it’s going to stop.Read in full https://decrypt.co/32145/hackers-blackmail-exchange-with-5-million-of-ethereum-fees-report
|
|
|
It appears that there might be machines outside of China that are always waiting and ready for a drop in hashrate hehehe. In the wake of the Bitcoin halving, the hash rate of the network dropped dramatically.
Due to an effective 50% decrease in profitability, around 30% of the machines mining BTC went offline from peak to the bottom of the trough, slowing transactions down and causing an increase in transaction fees.
But as blockchain data firm Coin Metrics observed on June 14th, the hash rate has since recovered.
It is unclear if the uptrend that Bitcoin’s hash rate has found itself in since the halving will continue though, with there being news that a large mining farm in China has recently had to shut down due to a large fire.Source https://www.newsbtc.com/2020/06/14/bitcoin-hashrate-halving-chinese-farm-burns/
|
|
|
@Vishnu.Reang. Also, what states have the highest cases of the coronavirus and the highest projected cases of the virus on November? Blue states or red states?
The democrats also want to defund the police. Minneapolis has begun doing this. What would be its effect on independent voters?
|
|
|
It doesn't mean that since the chances of winning is 50:50, the result is going to be equal between players. In 10 tosses of a coin, it could happen that the result is 0 heads and 10 tails.
Therefore, on an infinite timescale with finite bankrolls, one will always prevail over the other. And with absolute certainty.
What's the people's claim, by the way, that this truth is in contrast to?
That was why I reckon that there was a misunderstanding on the theory. An infinite coin toss cannot occur with a finite bankroll. Also, I reckon @deisik misunderstood zero sum also.
|
|
|
The infinite toss theory assumes that you also have infinte bankroll for the very long timescale to occur and for the wins and losses to always become 50-50 That's not the case here It is indeed about a very finite and, moreover, equal bankrolls. So the question is that whether one of the players is going to bust or it will be a "zero-sum game", i.e. no one winning or losing anything (give or take) provided the player's bankrolls are big enough to allow for a very large number of tosses We have two polar opposite outcomes which exclude each other, and I'm utterly curious to find out which one is actually going to play out in real life (as it may have very important and practical implications in other domains). So far it looks more like one of the gamblers will invariably bust eventually I reckon there might be another misunderstanding. It is a zero sum game. A zero sum game is a player's wins is balanced by another player's loses to the winning player. In game theory and economic theory, a zero-sum game is a mathematical representation of a situation in which each participant's gain or loss of utility is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the utility of the other participants.Source https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory
|
|
|
I reckon that there might be a misunderstanding.
The infinite toss theory assumes that you also have infinte bankroll for the very long timescale to occur and for the wins and losses to always become 50-50.
Place a 1% house edge to the infinite bankroll, infinte toss game, what result do you have?
|
|
|
This news was from mainstream media Vice and the emails, Slack messages and other proof that leaked were from Motherboard, another mainstream news website. I reckon stricter than strick regulations are coming to an exchange near you hehehe. Cole Diamond, CEO of CoinsquareCanadian cryptocurrency exchange Coinsquare has been artificially inflating how much currency it is trading, according to leaked emails, Slack messages, and other files obtained by Motherboard.
According to the material, Coinsquare was "wash trading," which means it was automatically buying and selling currency between accounts it controlled. The news provides evidence of a practice that is often suspected in the cryptocurrency world but rarely proven, and can draw attention from regulators.
"Turn it back on," one seemingly angry March 2019 Slack message from Coinsquare CEO Cole Diamond to other employees of the company read, referring to the code that managed internal trades after an employee switched it off, fearing retaliation from regulators.Read in full https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/5dz35q/cryptocurrency-exchange-wash-trading-coinsquare
|
|
|
@Lucius. However, the present situation might be different today since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic. The movement of the American military has changed because the Chinese military has been more aggressive on the South China sea.
Also, the domestic pressure on Trump is high. This might cause him to be more desperate and might declare war, I reckon. There is 4 months before the United States election. Let us wait.
To be honest, no move, no matter how crazy or dangerous, would surprise me when it comes to Trump. But any war at the moment is of no interest to anyone because of the global economic situation. It is easiest to start a war, but it is extremely difficult to finance military ventures. China knows its limits very well, just as the USA knows them - and all you can see is actually a game of cat and mouse. If these two forces got into some serious military conflict, it would be much worse than a pandemic, because that would probably be the beginning of World War 3. If we think logically, decentralization of mining power is something absolutely desirable and in the interest of all of us. But there are reasons why, according to some, almost 3/4 of all miners are in China. Cheap electricity, cheap labor, cheap infrastructure and the blessing of the Communist Party to carry out such operations. If similar or better conditions occur somewhere, some miners will certainly migrate (as is already the case), but it is a process that will take some time. I disagree. If there is a rising superpower similar to China that is beginning to challenge the established superpower, America, the majority of these situations, a war has occured. This is another occurence of Thucydides trap beginning.
|
|
|
|