[0Th]Ozcoin Pooled Mining |DGM 1%|Stratum+VarDiff port 80|NEW CN mining|

[bal3wolf]

Why didnt you use offline wallet for 900 of the 1000 coins?

he was putting them on the site to pays us needed all them to pay everyone the back pay.

[1714201882]

1714201882

[1714201882]

1714201882

[1714201882]

1714201882

[eleuthria]

Why didnt you use offline wallet for 900 of the 1000 coins?

Pools that offer true PPS are forced to run with larger hot wallets, unless you expect a pool operator to sit there refreshing a page 24 hours a day to constantly be at the ready to refill the wallet.  Proportional/PPLNS/DGM/etc pools can run with smaller hot wallets because payouts are capped at what the pool makes in the period.


I'm very sorry to hear what has happened to Ozcoin in the last few days.  For those moving to other pools, please give consideration to pools like Slush, BitMinter, or Eligius.  Those pools have been around as long or longer than Ozcoin, and have built up a strong history.  There are also many other pools available if you don't want to join a large pool.  Please do not add to the network imbalance by adding more speed to BTC Guild.

[kano]

@all that don't understand

All addresses that receive coins from this address will ALWAYS be tainted with the "stolen" red ink. If the mixing service is prepared to take that risk that's ok, but in the future the services that use bitcoin WILL check the origin of EVERY satochi out there and trace it back to it's origin.

For example I'm writing bitcoin bank system right now, it will trace all stolen coins. If you as a user in my bank receive coins that originate from a stolen address, MY BANK WILL BLOCK YOUR SAVINGS until you send in the information about who owns that address.

END OF THIS DISCUSSION

So ... is that one step from the original address, or 2 steps, or 10 steps, or 100 steps?
(It has already been moved out of the original address and who knows how many steps since then - go look it up )

Does everyone who receives ANY BTC coins from now on have to find the list of supposed 'evil addresses' and check that none of their coins originated in any way 100 transactions back from those 'evil addresses' before they accept payment? That's not even possible.
Are you then going to flag anyone who can give you that information as no longer in the 'evil address' sub chain?
Must everyone know the name of the source of every bitcoin they receive and also pass on that private and confidential information to you coz you want it?

I'll be sure to remember your name as a bitcoin bank to avoid - knee-jerk reactions are usually bad.

[kano]

Why didnt you use offline wallet for 900 of the 1000 coins?

It was the payment run that was redirected, so the amount redirected was the amount that was being paid to miners ... thus it's got absolutely nothing to do with offline wallets.

[rupy]

@all that don't understand

All addresses that receive coins from this address will ALWAYS be tainted with the "stolen" red ink. If the mixing service is prepared to take that risk that's ok, but in the future the services that use bitcoin WILL check the origin of EVERY satochi out there and trace it back to it's origin.

For example I'm writing bitcoin bank system right now, it will trace all stolen coins. If you as a user in my bank receive coins that originate from a stolen address, MY BANK WILL BLOCK YOUR SAVINGS until you send in the information about who owns that address.

END OF THIS DISCUSSION

So ... is that one step from the original address, or 2 steps, or 10 steps, or 100 steps?
(It has already been moved out of the original address and who knows how many steps since then - go look it up )

Does everyone who receives ANY BTC coins from now on have to find the list of supposed 'evil addresses' and check that none of their coins originated in any way 100 transactions back from those 'evil addresses' before they accept payment? That's not even possible.
Are you then going to flag anyone who can give you that information as no longer in the 'evil address' sub chain?
Must everyone know the name of the source of every bitcoin they receive and also pass on that private and confidential information to you coz you want it?

I'll be sure to remember your name as a bitcoin bank to avoid - knee-jerk reactions are usually bad.

If I ever buy bitcoins you can be 100% sure I will backtrace the origin ALL THE WAY TO THE BLOCK with MY OWN LIST OF STOLEN ADDRESSES. If I buy them from say Mt.Gox and I discover that they where stolen at some point back in time, even retroactively, I will inform the police in japan and pursue legal action.

I created a thread for this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=180823.msg1887820#msg1887820

[Soros Shorts]

If I ever buy bitcoins you can be 100% sure I will backtrace the origin ALL THE WAY TO THE BLOCK with MY OWN LIST OF STOLEN ADDRESSES. If I buy them from say Mt.Gox and I discover that they where stolen at some point back in time, even retroactively, I will inform the police in japan and pursue legal action.

I created a thread for this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=180823.msg1887820#msg1887820

What will you do if someone donated tainted coins to 1Eu6P1eRSewoqf8GZcYoBtMtXG1865Umjh?

[rupy]

EDIT: I WILL RESTORE THEM TO THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF COURSE!

Hahaha, I would probably use them to fund the project now known as "stolen coins"!

Even more ironic would be if the coins that Graet tried to pay us with had tainted coins!

If this idea of tracing stolen coins does not provide a way to disencourage stealing, it will still be really interesting to see how coins move.

[Soros Shorts]

That was a serious question. How would you distinguish taint from blame if people implemented your scheme? For starters, the standard client does not allow you to isolate coins.

[rupy]

Yes I realize that, but really it's a non problem, as people don't give money away. If they did I would have to use a wallet tool to separate the bad coins.

Actually now that you mention it I DID get a donation, will use that as my first test address. That would be fun if they where stolen. The probability is high!

The adoption of making sure your coins are "clean" will be completely natural once the value of BTC goes above 1000$, if it does.

It will be a very sad time for many greedy wallstreet investors! But a very happy time for honest, hard working miners!

[bal3wolf]

Yes I realize that, but really it's a non problem, as people don't give money away. If they did I would have to use a wallet tool to separate the bad coins.

Actually now that you mention it I DID get a donation, will use that as my first test address. That would be fun if they where stolen. The probability is high!

Well what if say a pool was paying out in stolen coins from the start those coins would be all over the place now and would be nearly impossable to track it would seem.

[rupy]

A pool makes coins by solving blocks. With PPS (which we now BTW have proven to be a not so intelligent practice) you have the possibility that stolen coins are sent out. Most pools use mined blocks to pay their miners though.

What you have to realize here is that nothing is perfect, but the traceability of stolen coins is actually a good thing for BTC. Governements AND people will adopt it quicker, value will be more stable.

Also tracking is not an issue, it's called hashing.

[bal3wolf]

A pool makes coins by solving blocks. With PPS (which we now BTW have proven to be a not so intelligent practice) you have the possibility that stolen coins are sent out. Most pools use mined blocks to pay their miners though.

What you have to realize here is that nothing is perfect, but the traceability of stolen coins is actually a good thing for BTC. Governements AND people will adopt it quicker, value will be more stable.

Also tracking is not an issue, it's called hashing.

Maybe i shoulda worded it differt what i ment is say a pool pays its miners with stolen coins and keeps the clean ones would seem that would be hard to track down every coin sence they would be all over the place.

[fently]

Blocking tainted coins makes no sense, because when those coins are combined with others, you have to make one of the following assumptions, neither of which are practical:

Assumption 1: Taint gets diluted across transactions
For instance, you have a transaction with 1 BTC input from tainted coin and 99 BTC input from non-tainted coin. Then there are 5 outputs of 20 BTC each from that address. Which one of these outputs has the tainted 1 BTC input? Or should we just distribute that 1 BTC input evenly over all the outputs? We can't know, so it's impossible to make a fair judgement about the outputs.

Assumption 2 (conflicts with assumption 1): Taint is viral
For the above case, we could just argue that all outputs that include a tainted input should also be considered tainted. Following this ideal, all circulating BTC eventually becomes tainted. Obviously this is untenable.

The blacklist idea is just plain ridiculous beyond reason. It is similar to deciding not to accept dollars that were used in the drug trade. Obviously you're not going to engage in financial transactions with the criminals, but you can't help accepting at least some of their money at some point down the line, after it has gone through several intermediaries.

It can't be done.

I think we need only one focus at this point: Graet has suffered a huge loss. I mean, it's enormous! How would you feel at this point? I don't think I would be able to withstand it. Let's do what we can to support him. Seriously. That's all there is to do at this point. For my part, I'll do all that I can to support the guy. And remember, they stole his BTC, not his integrity! And that integrity is worth me lending/donating a few BTC to help bankroll him for the time being if he chooses to accept the offer. I encourage you to offer your support as well (specifics are probably best done directly rather than publicly).

[rupy]

Blocking was just an example, you are missing the point.

Let's do what we can to support him. Seriously.

Yes, that's what I'm doing. Maybe you can share with me how you helped him, so we can all judge which effort is most efficient?

[fently]

Blocking was just an example, you are missing the point.

Let's do what we can to support him. Seriously.

Yes, that's what I'm doing. Maybe you can share with me how you helped him, so we can all judge which effort is most efficient?

I suppose I could have worded my disapproval of the blocking idea more gently. I just feel it is a distraction. I'm not interested in making my contributions public. I don't have anything huge to offer. If I did, then Graet wouldn't need help from others. I'm glad you also want to help.

[twmz]

Do you really think Mt.Gox would hide the new address, if they know (which they do) that the old contained stolen coins?

AFAIK there is NO WAY to "mix" your coins. It's all in the blockchain.

https://blockchain.info/wallet/send-shared

[rupy]

Again. You are missing the point!

Also: The fee for shared transactions is currently 0.5% fee. LOL

[rupy]

Does everyone who receives ANY BTC coins from now on have to find the list of supposed 'evil addresses' and check that none of their coins originated in any way 100 transactions back from those 'evil addresses' before they accept payment? That's not even possible.

Yes, this is the future, after you receive payment:

You will report the sender to the police and restore the coins to the victims address, thus cleaning part of the coins.

[twmz]

Again. You are missing the point!

Also: The fee for shared transactions is currently 0.5% fee. LOL

I didn't miss the point.  You claim to be able to track any attempt by the thief to spend these.  This service will easily allow the thief to transfer the coins to an address you won't know about.  Yes, you can still track the coins, but they will have been transfered to some unsuspecting person who is also using this service.  You will no longer be following the thief, and the thief will be free to spend his stolen coins as he sees fit.

0.5% is far less than the fee usually incurred when trying to unload stolen property...

[rupy]

The point is nobody will use that service because:

1) It's completely insecure.
2) People want to receive what they pay for, not a visit from the police.

0.5% is far less than the fee usually incurred when trying to unload stolen property...

For that to work you need non criminals to use the system, which they NEVER will... because 2)