Yes einstein, I notice the date and the exchange.

Hacking is a serious issue and an exchange that will not look at resolving a hack because it was more than a year ago should have less credibility than one that will, not more. Anyone who hacks coins should spend many years knowing at any moment they might suddenly notice a fin circling them in the water.

As for the specifics of this case I mention it because one of the trails involves very few transactions and led to a wallet that had been used only a few hours before I posted.

Anc people like to say that bitcoin does not provide anonymity to someone who wants it. It either does or it doesn't.

Exactly. The dev has made the coin i.e. 99% of the work.

If the coin has genuine value in the market, and it does seem that way, it will catch on.

Most people are okay with spamming shitcoins but have a healthy distaste for pumping better coins.

On a serious note, a question about anonymity.


It is easy for a novice like myself to follow the trail to a wallet that was active just a few hours ago.

Is there no way to connect those stolen funds to an id on an exchange or other service?

Looks like anc devs got a spanking.

People are slow to learn or quick to forget. The Russkies are doing exactly what the Chinese did. In a few days or so news from russia will tank the bitcoin market, russian exchanges will mysteriously end up with a huge increase in physical control of bitcoin.

Actually looks like govts conspiring to distribute bitcoin among the 3 major poles.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=7168919

At this point there are two paths between which any coin can choose.

The path of promising features is an endless circlejerk. One promises x feature. Another improves it so people jump. etc.

The path of promoting some developing value or some growing political force is the path that has proven successful so far but people often misinterpret the reasons for a coins popularity and miss this.

Bitcoin is popular for political reasons, not because of the features offered by ecurrency. There were digital currencies long before bitcoin but they had no traction until after the economic meltdown became visible post 2007 2008.

If you want to sabotage a coin promote it for its features. Or worse, promote it for a feature that is guaranteed to have huge holes like zerocoin.

If you want a coin to succeed attach it to a developing value system that history suggests will succeed.

If isis, the islamic state, issued a coin today, and they will issue one eventually, it would reach a billion usd capitalization before any of the other btc followers.

There is no coin that is positioned to do that right now except anc but it has to shift from morons chasing features to sensible folk promoting something real.

Right now btc is #1.
Soon isis coin, whatever they call it, will be #2.
And anc what? Chasing retardation? Why?

Only because this coin shifted from self moderated to open forum I am going to buy some.

It has a very low market cap and is the first coin I have noticed that goes in the right direction, toward free speech.

Fud keeps dev teams honest and the other coins that try to silence fud by self moderating should be boycotted.

If you start a new one and post the link everyone will follow. Or is it better the dev does it so the original post with links can be updated?