Should miners collude to steal funds from wallet confiscated by US government?

[HellDiverUK]

Is it still in their 

Still in their what? 

[Buffer Overflow]

Should miners collude to steal funds from wallet confiscated by US government?

How would miners obtain the ECDSA private key to this address then?

Please explain.

[kik1977]

I also don't see any evidence that .gov actually has exclusive control of the private key(s) that controls the 27,000 bitcoins. Think about it. Every report about this is consistent with them simply knowing the public address of the 27k coins, nothing more. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary either in the news or in blockchain activity.

Excuse me if I disagree with you, but I don't think they simply gained access to the wallet where the 26,000 (or 27,000) bitcoins used to seat. That wallet was created on October 2nd, the same day SR was shut down. And it wouldn't be very smart to hold on the bitcoins in that wallet since they don't know who else got the private key for that. Most likely they created a wallet on their own (probably offline) and then moved all the bitcoins from the wallets they could grab from DPR (as shown by the big transactions pointing to that particular address right after its creation). Looking forward to knowing how did they manage to have access to those wallets in the first place and obtaining the private keys.. DPR himself provided them? The Agents found them somewhere, maybe in the form of paper wallets? Keylogger in his laptop?

[virtualmaster]

Bitcoin should remain what it is now:
a decentralized, neutral and fair currency.
The network shouldn't try to play the judge in the world. People, organizations and governments are playing their own games.
The Bitcoin network should just keep his own rules. Who owns the private key, owns the coins. Simple.

[mimarob]

It only takes one "traitor" to accept the transaction and with a big enough fee someone with a block mining capability will do it.

SInce the fund is >25kBTC a fee of 25 (one block reward) would probably be sufficient.

Blacklisting will not work that well obviously. Not only the feds will have to play by Satoshi's rules, we have too...

In the mean time, enjoy the new twitter for small donations service they have arranged for us, we all have to chip in in these times of hardships and defaults.

https://blockchain.info/address/1F1tAaz5x1HUXrCNLbtMDqcw6o5GNn4xqX?offset=50&filter=0

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

It isn't possible

There is nothing miners can do to send the bitcoins from that address to anywhere else without first getting EVERY single person using a bitcoin wallet to agree to run a modified wallet that allows the spending of bitcoins without a proper signature.  Nobody with bitcoins and half a brain is going to be dumb enough to run such software since it would put their own bitcoins at risk.

Miners don't have some special magical power that allows them to force nodes to accept invalid blocks into the blockchain no matter how many of them collude.

All of you who are talking about whether or not it *should* be done, need to realize that it can't be done.

It IS possible. If 51% of the miners decided to reject blocks that spends coins from that address, then coins from that address won't confirm

You are changing the topic.

The IT that is being discussed is miners "colluding to steal funds from wallet confiscated by US government".

That is NOT possible.

The IT you have put forth:

- snip -
coins from that address won't confirm

Does not involve stealing from the wallet, it simply forces the wallet to continue to hold on to the funds indefinitely.

I doubt most people who voted Yes meant the mining pool ops should steal the coins into their own pockets. Obviously few people would get behind that. The idea would of course be to make the funds immovable, effectively the exact same as stealing the funds and distributing them to every bitcoin holder in proportion to how many they now hold. The money goes permanently out of circulation and everyone's bitcoins become that much more valuable since they are that much more scarce.

Hence it is possible and it IS necessary to explain why it's a horrible idea.

[darkmule]

I doubt most people who voted Yes meant the mining pool ops should steal the coins into their own pockets. Obviously few people would get behind that. The idea would of course be to make the funds immovable, effectively the exact same as stealing the funds and distributing them to every bitcoin holder in proportion to how many they now hold. The money goes permanently out of circulation and everyone's bitcoins become that much more valuable since they are that much more scarce.

Actually, more like everyone's Bitcoins become worthless at the whim of an oligarchy.  As soon as the Gang of Four or whoever decide they don't like you, *poof* your Bitcoins are gone.

Never mind that the whole "stealing from the FBI" idea is just insanely stupid for practical reasons so obvious they need not be outlined.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

By the way, the feds did set up their own bitcoin address and moved the SR funds into there. They were apparently able to do that because they imaged the server and the coins were in hot wallet. They don't seem to have DPR's probably-gigantic cold wallet, and if he hid it well enough they never will.

[darkmule]

By the way, the feds did set up their own bitcoin address and moved the SR funds into there. They were apparently able to do that because they imaged the server and the coins were in hot wallet. They don't seem to have DPR's probably-gigantic cold wallet, and if he hid it well enough they never will.

Guess it depends on how eager DPR is to cut a deal.  Holding onto the proceeds of an illegal criminal enterprise, if they can prove it (which I don't know if they can) is the kind of thing that moves your sentence toward the maximum end of the sentencing range.  Considering that's life without parole in this case, he might have some incentive to deal.

[Buffer Overflow]

By the way, the feds did set up their own bitcoin address and moved the SR funds into there. They were apparently able to do that because they imaged the server and the coins were in hot wallet. They don't seem to have DPR's probably-gigantic cold wallet, and if he hid it well enough they never will.

Guess it depends on how eager DPR is to cut a deal.  Holding onto the proceeds of an illegal criminal enterprise, if they can prove it (which I don't know if they can) is the kind of thing that moves your sentence toward the maximum end of the sentencing range.  Considering that's life without parole in this case, he might have some incentive to deal.

Just think, when he's inside all the other convicts will know he has a secret stash worth millions.

Oh, dear. 

[Zeek_W]

They don't seem to have DPR's probably-gigantic cold wallet, and if he hid it well enough they never will.

Our generations version of the Mystery of D.B. Cooper's hidden stash 

[b!z]

A better question to ask would be: is this even possible?

[darkmule]

A better question to ask would be: is this even possible?

In theory, yes, for reasons explained previously in the thread.  I.e. over half the network rejecting the transaction, and/or hard forking back to before it happened.  In practice, it would be a ridiculous act and 51% of the network just isn't going to do that.

[kelsey]

this thread so much dumb 

[CrazyRabbi]

this thread so much dumb 

Look who the OP is...

No wonder...

[j68r]

Stealing from the most powerful and most criminal entity on the planet.

yeah, that's the ticket, NOT.


~BCX~

How about taking back what was stolen by the most powerful, most criminal entity on the planet?

OK it's a very bad idea taking that btc back, but make no mistake the FBI has stolen that btc, it isn't silk roads or DPR's btc, it isn't "illegal" btc, it isn't even US btc in many cases, it's simply the btc held in user accounts on that server and the FBI need to show it has been either used or obtained illegally. They're at least as bad as those they claim to be taking down in many cases, the rule of law must apply equally, not only apply as they alone see fit, to the victims of their theft.

[bernard75]

this thread so much dumb  

this pretty more sums it up

[j68r]

this thread so much dumb  

this pretty more sums it up

The irony is delicious.

[Mooshire]

Let's say this happens. Bigger than the SR story would be the story that "a few million dollars has been stolen from the government."

Do you think that would help or hurt Bitcoin?

Do you think the average person is going to feel safe buying Bitcoins when not even the FBI could keep their Bitcoins safe?

This is likely the worst idea I've ever seen on these forums, and this place is full of bad ideas.

Agreed.

Came here to say this.

[jubalix]

this sorta says we need a CC where this can not even be a possibility...if that's possible, implication, BTC current system is not the model yet that will win the race. A PPC version over time maybe a lot harder to hack as the coins will be far more distributed than mining.