|
not all payments are due to personalized requests.
the best solution would be a field that can be filled with any data encrypted by the receiver's address public key.
|
|
|
|
If the seller uses a single address for all receipts, how they know that they got your payment?
why doesnt the bitcoin protocol include a reference number? I can see why you don't want the size of transactions to get out of hand because they are distributed, but a simple reference field similar to SEPA would be nice. The receiving bitcoin address IS the reference number. as you can see above, it is not. that's like saying the SEPA account number is the reference number, because the receiver could open an account for each payment. people obviously would like to publish their address for more than one payment but still be able to identify payments aside from the payed amount. edit: the (important) difference is that a reference number can be freely assigned by the sender, not be generated by the receiver. |
|
|
|
If the seller uses a single address for all receipts, how they know that they got your payment?
why doesnt the bitcoin protocol include a reference number? I can see why you don't want the size of transactions to get out of hand because they are distributed, but a simple reference field similar to SEPA would be nice. |
|
|
|
|
when is this scammer going to get banned?
|
|
|
|
Again, there are many accounts that are abandoned, and probably have high amount of BTC, if ANY of those accounts get hacked, it is lots of crashing power.
I see. there are 6mBTC overall, and there are several 500kBTC accounts each containing 1/12th of all BTCs at mtgox? the biggest miner known to this board has 370kBTC, and he is definitely not stupid enough to deposit it at an exchange, with any kind of password. this is just a madeup BS story to cover up what really happened, which is probably a write-access SQL injection. mtgox had several SQLinj vulnerabilities. |
|
|
|
And many accounts of that era are abandoned and thus never got salted after MagicalTux bought MtGox and introduced salting. Thus if any of those accounts had absurd amounts of BTC (for our standards), something that is quite likely, they also happen to be the easiest accounts to break in using the leaked database.
MtGox claims it was ONE account. 500k is an absurd amount not only for our standards, but for early miners, too. |
|
|
|
But look around in the forums, in very old posts, you will eventually see that in the age that MtGox was founded, people did handled some thousand of BTCs around.
I never said noone has 500kBTC. I said noone has 500 kBTC at mtgox, let alone with a weak password. mtgox wasnt around at that time either, so it cant be an abondonded account from back then. that someone got write access to MtGox' database as some claim and just created the 500k out of nothing is much more likely. |
|
|
|
As a bitcoin member that has dealt with you before, I want to say that over time you have built up my trust.
to stop lying would be a good start to rebuild trust. there was no one single 500kBTC account with a weak password. that is so far out of the reasonable that it is safe to say he is lying until he provides proof. |
|
|
|
considering all the info, the 500k BTC probably never existed but where created by SQL injection.
so there is no main beneficiary.
Never existed in what sense? in the sense that someone added 500kBTC to an account in MtGox's database by SQL injection, with no corresponding bitcoins in MtGox's wallet. mtgox only makes bitcoin transaction on withdrawals, so even non-existing BTCs can cause a market crash. There are blocks carrying 400 k transaction around - although it is just mtgox backing up its wallets AFAIK,
right. if there was one single account holding 500kBTC, wouldnt their wallet backing up all of the deposited BTCs less some operating change be bigger than 400k? |
|
|
|
|
considering all the info, the 500k BTC probably never existed but where created by SQL injection.
so there is no main beneficiary.
the story that one account with a weak password held 500kBTC was laughable from the beginning. MtGox still lying.
|
|
|
|
Will it? If they don't create more coin than exists— they actually have the assets they are loaning out— then there is no fraction-reserve.
most likely yes. the coins are probably not lent by the exchange but taken from other user's deposits - without subtracting them from their statements. so it is a bet that not all people withdraw their coins at the same time, which they cant fulfil without liquidating the margin accounts. fractional reserves. |
|
|
|
you just cant make this stuff up  next we learn that MtGox is an ex-Sony employee working on IT security? |
|
|
|
It's hilarious that all these hyper-libertarians are running their asses off to get the government involved in private enterprise. Just call Atlas with his private army.
I guess Kevin owns their paychecks now so they jumped ship. |
|
|
|
Also, perhaps you should add an entry for the unknown Hacker, i bet there would be people on his side as well (and the financial auditor that was careless with his machine's security too)
most people seem to think the hacker was either Kevin or MtGox...done. even the auditor I got covered, his existence is about as likely as Jesus'. |
|
|
|
Why only my son is an option there, people can't side with me anymore?  that would be a good time to clarify that whole trinity doctrine. |
|
|
|
Where is the option for "Myself"?
oh, right. I should have thought of a voting option for the libertarians. |
|
|
|
|
is it Kevin "look, I didn't even steal all the coins even though I could have" Bay, or is it MagicalTux "too bad, one account with a weak password had 500kBTC of spare change" MtGox?
|
|
|
|
Can I play the hack card and sell 500k bitcoins for $0.01 each?
of course. what single account doesnt have 500k, just pick one with a weak password from the list. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
