|
Interesting post. I've never heard of this field of study so I'm not sure what to think of your analysis, but I appreciate that you put in the effort to do it and post your results here.
I also came to a similar conclusion about Gox yesterday (posted in one of the many posts I replied to yesterday), where I said that I don't necessarily believe that they are directly responsible for the hack or that they are trying to steal everyone's money/btc, but I did get the sense that they were trying to hide something. I haven't watched the video you studied in your OP, but through their posts, what they choose to talk about and what they choose not to talk about, I definitely get the sense that they are trying to cover something up. I just don't know what that is.
|
|
|
|
Be careful, whenever someone posts a Mt.Gox thread or BTC Stolen threads, your video card may explode.
I think that is why they're so persistent.
I guess I just really resent these douche nozzles telling me where to post what... I don't see them going into all these stupid threads telling them just to post it somewhere else. I try and start a productive thread, and its Snarky McSnark and Fuckwit the Twin Retard in here. I think this post would best be posted in the "Meta" subforum. |
|
|
|
security problems are going to be the end of bitcoin.
I had almost 400 btc in my wallet on my linux box today. Someone was OBVIOUSLY watching the forums and either hacked me today or already had me hacked.
I had a very public LARGE business deal going and someone STOLE ALL OF THE BTC !!!!!
I was selling 10 XFX 6990's , I had 4 different buyers and I am completely screwed now!!!!!!
this is crazy, I really do not know what to do. i am going to get sued because some hacker scum bag
i was holding 400 btc of other peoples money and I was hacked today.
I have known this for hours but am just going public with it now. I really dont know what to do.
someone hacked my linux box and transfered out all this btc to some other accounts
FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK
i am ruined.
at least if you keep real money in your house and someone tries to break in and steal it you can fight them off
but these hackers are sneaky as fuck i dont know what to do im like totally freaking out right now!
There is nothing you can do. Once the bitcoins were in your possession their security was your responsibility. Just like if people pay you cash for video cards, and you get robbed on your way home, the guys who bought the video cards have nothing to do with you being robbed. You are still responsible for sending the video cards. I feel for you and it really sucks that this happened (assuming your story is true, you never know, because this message board seems to be filled with trollers and dishonest types). But, if it's true, I hope you aren't posting here looking for sympathy and that you aren't going to try to back out of the deal to sell the cards. You should still send them. Hello Thomas,
You are a network Admin at CNY-Media in Hannibal New York.
You should know what a log file looks like, and you should be able to prove this hack with little effort.
The buyers have your name, phone, address, business address, facebook account, etc.
I'd suggest refunds all around.
Good day.
Why would he do refunds, and not simply send them the cards? Or did he not own the cards to begin with? Was he acting as a middle man, purchasing the cards using the bitcoins the people sent him? |
|
|
|
Under the rules of the current world that we live in, administrating any form of financial business requires approval and requires the so-called institution to register with the respective financial authority of the country it is residing in. In well known cases this can be FSA (UK), SEC (USA) or any equivalent financial authority.
Operating an exchange platform would mean that money has to move through it (third party funds) and stored on a medium of exchange (a bank) which would be operating in a country (thus being regulated by a financial authority).
Therefore I dont see how anyone successfully, long term, and stable (from a regulatory point of view) would be able to operate without downtime.
I don't understand the jump you make to say that a regulated exchange would not be able to operate without downtime. Personally I think that well regulated institutions will be necessary for the Bitcoin economy to grow to anything substantial as they will bring the levels of trust that the general public require My bad. I ment to say that it would be impossible to operate an exchange service without downtime, unless that respective exchange service was regulated, thus it would be left to do business as usual. If an exchange service pops up and is not regulated, we can only assume its going to crash. Either technically or regulatory. Just because an exchange is regulated doesn't mean it won't crash. And conversely, an exchange being unregulated is not a guarantee that it will crash. |
|
|
|
|
I had this error the first few times I tried to run the client. I can't remember what I did to fix it. I think I had to uninstall it, delete the app_data\roaming\bitcoin\ folder, reinstall, and the first time I ran the client after that I left it open long enough for it to download the entire block chain.
Somewhere in those steps I took at least one thing I did appeared to have fixed the problem. It also could have been because the bitcoin client took a long time to open, so I double clicked the icon more than once to see if it would open again. I had several bitcoin.exe processes showing up in task manager. I think one of them was locking one of the files in app_data\roaming\, which caused the error.
|
|
|
|
I haven't read any statement by kevin saying why he doesn't return them (he may have written that, I just haven't seen it if he has). If he is not returning them because he wants proof that there was a hack, then I support his decision. Any other reason for not returning them doesn't make sense to me.
Who is he supposed to return them to? A currently completely owned MtGox system? The original "hacked account owner" who has not been identified? Someone else? I know if I held them and wanted to give them back I'd have no clue who the rightful owner is at this time. That seems pretty key to me  I was thinking they'd be returned to Gox, as Gox would need them to reverse all the broken trades. Gox will eventually come to a point where after they've reversed 99% of the broken trades, there will be some missing $ and BTC due to withdrawals (like Kevin's) preventing them from reaching 100% reversal. They might end up having to plug those holes with their own money to just leave a few trades unreversed I guess. |
|
|
|
|
What happens when you receive a fraction of a bitcoin? Does each coin have a guid, ahdn if I receive .5 of coin "A", does my wallet literraly track that I have 1/2 ownership of coin "A"? And this works all the way down to eight decimal places?
|
|
|
|
|
Also, Kevin should just return the bitcoins, if it can be proven that MtGox was hacked. Why have we not heard from the owner of the account that was hacked? Has MtGox mentioned anything about contacting that person? If not that seems super fishy.
But assuming that MtGox were telling the truth, the right thing for Kevin to do would be to return the Bitcoins. He bought something that was stolen from someone else, and sold at a price much lower than its market value. Anyone who thinks he has a right to own those is not thinking.
But the problem is that one cannot simply assume Gox is telling the truth. And if they were in the right they would be pursuing him for the withdrawn bitcoins. The only reason they would not pursue him for it is because they have something to cover up. Whatever they are covering up may or may not be related to the hack&crash. They might have other (unrelated) reasons for not wanting law enforcement's eyes on their operations.
I haven't read any statement by kevin saying why he doesn't return them (he may have written that, I just haven't seen it if he has). If he is not returning them because he wants proof that there was a hack, then I support his decision. Any other reason for not returning them doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
|
|
Although I am new to the community and been only a Bitcoin follower and trader for a week now I have analyzed and studied many articles and papers about Bitcoin. I follow the market closely and I have ready dozens of articles, threads, and comments relating to the Mt. Gox incident. As a web developer and using my logic my personal opinion is that Mt. Gox fucked up big time when we look at their website security and how they are handling this. Although we can't verify if the account with the 500k Bitcoins really existed or not does not matter when you look at the dispute between Mt. Gox and Kevin.
So far Kevin has done nothing wrong, just like anyone would do in this situation and tried to buy as many Bitcoins as possible for .01 cents and than tried to withdraw them as fast as possible before the market and Mt. Gox crashed. If I had 3000 dollars on my Mt. Gox account I would have done the same freaking thing. Some people argue that it's impossible that Kevin was able to place a bid after the hacking started as the website was to laggy or down. This is different for every PC and totally depends on the connection, DNS, location, server, etc. A website may be down or slower for someone than for someone else.
If is telling the truth I believe that he should be allowed to keep the Bitcoins he legally bought even if the account with the 500k Bitcoins was hacked. In a real exchange the same thing would happen. An exchange cant revert hours of trades back just because one account got hacked. No matter how much money there is on it. If Mt. Gox reverts all the traders because of this than I want to see them do the same thing when my account gets hacked and my 10 Bitcoins get sold.
10 BTC getting stolen due to a hack is not the same as someone hacking in and crashing the entire market. I support the reversal of the broken trades. The whole thing was a situation created by a criminal. All the trades that took place after the hack were based on the unnatural prices created by a criminal crashing the market. |
|
|
|
Hi everyone, We are opening up our new Bitcoin Trading Platform on testnet today. You will get $10,000 Monopoly money upon opening an account, and you can use your spare testnet coins to try us out. The trial is expected to last till July 5th. If you are an advanced trader, you will appreciate the features like: - Advanced Order Execution like FOK (Fill-or-Kill), (AON) All-or-Nothing orders, Stoploss
- Margin Trading (Fixed at 50% for now)
- And yes, Short Selling! It was a complex beast to implement due to the identity-blind, credit-averse nature of the Bitcoin network.
Some additional facts about the platform: We are running on a dedicated server with 8 Intel Xeon cores, and have a second server ready for deployment if necessary with a 6 hour SLA. All this is designed to ensure a fluid user experience even on high-volatility days. We have engaged a third-party security audit firm to test the site (This was already done before the Mt Gox hacking incident). This security audit is going to commence on June 27th, and we will make the audit results publicly available before opening up Camp BX for trading on livenet. About me: I know I am not a hero-member on this board, but my background is in operating and optimizing IT platforms for multi-Billion dollar Financial and Telecom companies. I have applied this experience to Camp BX, and also brought along some of my professional contacts to the table. So here we go! http://testnet.CampBX.com/Things to note: 1) Stoploss feature is disabled till liquidity improves. 2) Visual design has some rough edges that we are working on. 3) We are also working on the Documentation, which is kind of sparse as of now. We will build out the FAQ/Documentation section as we receive question via helpdesk or this thread. 4) THERE MAY BE BUGS! If we find any, we will immediately start work on fixing them, but stay away if you really really love your testnet coins. Thank you, Keyur Can you provide details on who did your security audit, and what processes were followed? And 8x Xeon server doesn't really mean that much. The bottleneck for most database apps is in the IO system. Whatchoo got going on w/ that? |
|
|
|
It's pretty obvious that Obama doesn't understand the first thing about the economy. He is making the problems worse. He bailed out the failed, crony capitalists and destroyed jobs at the thousands of small businesses that could have picked up the pieces. He is engaging in massive wealth redistribution in order to prop up investors in McMansions and strip malls. He is continuing the retarded neo-liberal zero-tariff policy of free trade that enables outsourcing. Worse than that, he's allowed the Fed to give away half a trillion dollars to foreign banks on the off chance that it will eventually make it's way back to the US economy in order to stimulate jobs. He doesn't understand why, instead, energy and commodity prices are rising and the US is being drained of capital.
And, frankly, you're a retard too for giving the guy a pass. It's been over two years and he's a total failure. Bigger than Bush, even. And I for one wouldn't even have thought that possible.
I'm not sure if that was directed at me. But if so that was totally irrelevant because I didn't say anything to support any of Obama's actions regarding any of what you just mentioned. I simply explained that the OP and the blogger he quoted had misinterpreted the Obama quote. Nothing more, nothing less. If it wasn't directed at me then ignore this post. I don't believe the banks should have been bailed out. But I also believe the only political figure who would have even entertained the notion of NOT bailing them out would have been Ron Paul. Anyone else, even GOP and Tea Partiers who like to decry bank bailouts, would have bailed them out at the time. |
|
|
|
But you example is too simplistic because you assume the total currency in circulation determines the price of pizza. Not all the BTC in existence are seeking pizzas. Probably only 9-10 BTC at any given time are in the market for pizza. Even if you swapped pizza for land, the richest people might not want any land at all, or might not want land once they have 1 acre to live on, etc. Price is determined by supply and demand.
It is simple, but it's not "too simplistic", because it does not matter whether I call the goods pizzas, cars or houses. It works as a model. Yes, it is too simplistic because of your assumptions about how the value/price of a pizza is determined. See my notes about supply and demand. Or take a basic econ class. The only reason I mentioned property instead is that it's a good that isn't consumable, so that was to make the example even more simple. |
|
|
|
|
You can set the CPU affinity through a command line parameter to the start.exe program. do start.exe /? to see the options, then google if you need more documentation. I used this and created a batch file that puts all the processes to belownormal priority and all assigned to a single CPU core, so it doesn't slow down my system. They still pretty much use 100% of that one core, but I have a quad core so no big deal.
|
|
|
|
The 2.2tb infinity is so you can run drives over 2.2tb...turn it off in bios...set your primary boot device...if it is getting to bios I doubt the MOBO is bad (I had a bad MSI mobo that I had to rma and it did nothing on boot...just black screen).
I could be wrong but it appears to not be loading from your flash drive.
I had already turned it off and resequenced the boot sequence (USB is first now). Still get these screens. I have an MSI board. You can disable 2.2TB Infinity or whatever it's called. You can also disable the splash screen (which I have also done, so I don't see the MSI logo anymore). How many video cards are hooked up? Does your motherboard have onboard video? Try these two things: 1. Boot up with only minimal amount of hardware plugged in. So remove all unnecessary video cards, and use the onboard video if that is available. Remove any USB devices, hubs, etc, except for the USB stick you are booting from. 2. Have you hooked up the proper power cables to all PCIe devices? And hooked up all the power cables to the motherboard? My MSI board has three different cables going from the PSU to the motherboard. 4. If you have a dvd drive, try burning a bootable OS install disk and boot from that drive (with all USB devices unplugged). 4. Try a different boot disk. One that is known to work on another system. On my AMD processor stuff I also disable the spread spectrum, cool and quiet and all power saving options. Never had luck with any of that stuff running on my MSI mobos...I also had to tweak a few voltages here and there. Sometimes during OS install the power saving features can cause quirks like Windows install running slow as molasses. But I think those features are generally good to enable after the OS is installed. Especially if you want to cut down on power usage for a mining system. No sense in having the CPU do more work than necessary. Undervolting and setting the frequency lower would help here as well. |
|
|
|
|
How is it stealing? His one bitcoin is now worth 1.1 pizzas. His net worth is 1 BTC + 2*.99 (pizzas' value) = 2.98. That's more than he had before.
What you are illustrating is that he devalued pizzas by increasing their supply. But you example is too simplistic because you assume the total currency in circulation determines the price of pizza. Not all the BTC in existence are seeking pizzas. Probably only 9-10 BTC at any given time are in the market for pizza. Even if you swapped pizza for land, the richest people might not want any land at all, or might not want land once they have 1 acre to live on, etc. Price is determined by supply and demand.
|
|
|
|
|
Right. It would be so awesome to live in a lawless country where the equivalent of wallet hacks and exchange hacks and all the other crazy stuff in the bitcoin community were pervasive to the entire society.
|
|
|
|
They can't punish you if you don't recite it.
Yet they do... and if not by the government the society will take care of it. You are just fighting against human nature if you take issue with that. I hate that type of "join us or be outcast/against us" mentality too, but that is pretty much how mankind works in groups. Social networks act as gangs, and people like to beat up on those who don't conforum. People of lower intelligence especially seem fond of doing this. |
|
|
|
I disagree with the forcing part. It should be opt in/opt out.
You can opt out by leaving the country. Also, opt in/out would never work because no one would chip in voluntarily, thinking everyone else would cover shared costs. Everything will devolve into a shitstorm, and then madmen and warlords, and despots would rise to power. I'm not saying that there isn't crazy corruption and injustice in the current system however. Just pointing out what i see as a flaw in your statement. |
|
|
|
http://absurdresults.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/obama-stop-the-rise-of-the-machines/
...is there are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers . . . . If you see it when you go to a bank you use the ATM, you don’t go to a bank teller.This reminds me of time when people were against lightbulbs because it would put candle workers out of business. I'm sorry you would prefer unskilled production over skilled technicians building our new tomorrow. However, I cannot empathize with your will to destroy wealth creation by making less efficient businesses in the name of putting more people to work in practically useless jobs. You don't like humanity, you don't like meeting needs, you just like putting numbers on paper. I cannot believe any rational man would nearly advocate the dissolution of technology and wealth in the name of just pure numbers employment. It sickens me. That blogger misinterpretted Obama's statement, and it looks like the posters here are running with that because they've already decided they don't like Obama. Obama isn't saying that the advancement of tech is bad, he's basically just pointing out the dislocation that technological advancement creates. Technology does create unemployment, because jobs that people used to do are made redundant due to efficiencies and automation. In theory this is not a problem because those jobs are offset by new ones (creating the machines and automation, new markets that open up). The problem with this though, is that people don't simply reeducate themselves for the most part, at least not very easily. People who've lost their jobs due to outsourcing and automation only knew how to do what they were doing before. But now their skillsets are not needed. It can take over a decade for a work force to realign with the skills that are in demand. This is a well known economic phenomena, and it's existence is not up for debate. That is what Obama is referring to when he says structural issues – that there are a ton of people who's skills are no longer in demand. That is an "issue" from the standpoint that having unemployed citizens is a public problem. Thank you. I'm sure you will all continue to hate on Obama and call him a retard without any real basis though. |
|
|
|
sounds like the parasites showed up for their cut finally ... oh, well it was fun to be productive while it lasted.
You know you've got too many laws when you need a lawyer to figure them out for you. You know nothing about the law. That's a ridiculous statement. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
