Exchange accidentally sent 512 bitcoins after coding error

[casascius]

Has someone informed him already that he has the right to remain silent?

Maybe he got a lawyer or called a lawyer-friend. These types tend to shut you up real quick in your own interest.

I have been archiving his posts offline, because if lawyer-friend had any idea you could edit or delete your own postings here, that'd be the first thing any good lawyer-friend would recommend he do.

Also, the more I read about how Oregon law considers willful conversion of someone's property to be larceny or theft, the more I think it would be a fantastic idea to contact the police department local to him and explain to them exactly what's happened.  Particularly about the part about this guy parading that he took these bitcoins and converted them to cash.

You know, if Americans can be prosecuted for traveling abroad to commit sex crimes, we certainly can be prosecuted for committing crimes against foreigners while at home.  Nowhere in our laws is it stipulated that the victim of a crime has to be a citizen present on US soil.

[bitlane]

Good job stealing a registered trademark

You are absolutely right...and for that, I appologize.

All fixed: www.bendavis.name

[buttcoin1]

This guy on Reddit said it best:


"But Bitcoin isn't stocks or real estate titles or patents. It isn't legal tender as far as the US government is concerned, it's just numbers on a computer. As far as they're concerned, it holds no monetary or intellectual value in their eyes.

It would be more akin to saying that my dog took a dump on another person's lawn, and that person decided to keep the shit. That shit could be worth thousands of dollars to me or numerous other poo enthusiasts, but as far as the government is concerned, it's just shit. There's no way in hell that I'd be able to sue for ownership rights to that shit.

I have no sympathy for this guy. As someone else in this thread has said, their code had fucked those guys over before. He knew that there was a possibility that he could send that guy Bitcoins they didn't intend to. It's one of the flaws that comes with dealing in Bitcoin. The 'customer' has no legal obligation to return the Bitcoin. He might be a bit of a douche, but that's about it."

[the joint]

, but the US dollar is recognized as having value because it is legal tender for all goods and services public or private.  <-- WTF

HAHAAH I didn't even see this. You really are clueless.

Yes, debt from goods/services public or private.

I give good or service to you, I have a debt (lets say, -1) from delivering this good or service.
Legal tender is suitable to repay this debt.
You give me (+1) legal tender to fill the debt.

The giving of a good or service constitutes a debt.  Legal tender repays that debt.

And the problem is???

[Stalin-chan]

You really should have done more testing and worked harder on your code. Normally I would say its wrong to take from someone else but the facts here are that,
The website made no mention of the fact that it's code was still effectively not tested. The website is liable for whatever loses it receives due to its own poor code.

This is a question of morality not law, the costumer doesn't want to return the bitcoins.

[RandyFolds]

Has someone informed him already that he has the right to remain silent?

Maybe he got a lawyer or called a lawyer-friend. These types tend to shut you up real quick in your own interest.

I have been archiving his posts offline, because if lawyer-friend had any idea you could edit or delete your own postings here, that'd be the first thing any good lawyer-friend would recommend he do.

Also, the more I read about how Oregon law considers willful conversion of someone's property to be larceny or theft, the more I think it would be a fantastic idea to contact the police department local to him and explain to them exactly what's happened.  Particularly about the part about this guy parading that he took these bitcoins and converted them to cash.

You know, if Americans can be prosecuted for traveling abroad to commit sex crimes, we certainly can be prosecuted for committing crimes against foreigners while at home.  Nowhere in our laws is it stipulated that the victim of a crime has to be a citizen present on US soil.

Man, all these internet lawyers are comical. Do you think that anything said on an internet forum is worth the paper it's written on?

Ben Davis didn't receive those 511 coins, I did. I cashed them out on MtGox as soon as I saw them in my wallet, I called up Tom Williams and Bruce Wagner and we bought a bunch of unregistered handguns, cocaine and underage thai ladyboys, all of which are currently piled around me while I type this. Let me tell you, it's been a hell-of-a-couple-day-orgy.

I am pretty sure your case is solid, what with my confession and all. Call the internet police.

[the joint]

You really should have done more testing and worked harder on your code. Normally I would say its wrong to take from someone else but the the facts here are that,
The website made no mention of the fact that it's code was still effectively not tested. The website is liable for whatever loses it receives due to its own poor code.

This is a question of morality not law, the costumer doesn't want to return the bitcoins.

Yep.  He doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.

[indio007]

, but the US dollar is recognized as having value because it is legal tender for all goods and services public or private.  <-- WTF

HAHAAH I didn't even see this. You really are clueless.

Yes, debt from goods/services public or private.

I give good or service to you, I have a debt (lets say, -1) from delivering this good or service.
Legal tender is suitable to repay this debt.
You give me (+1) legal tender to fill the debt.

The giving of a good or service constitutes a debt.  Legal tender repays that debt.

And the problem is???

WRONG.
The point is you don't know there is  difference between a discharging  a debt and an outright purchase . A debt means there is a delay in payment. There is a promise to pay in there is a debt. However a promise to pay is not payment. A Federal Reserve Note is a promise to pay as  per Title 12 Section 411.

 The technical legal terminology is an executory contract versus an executed contract.

The law treats the 2 acts completely differently.

I just find it funny that the FED says the exact opposite of what you said. You claimed FRN's are legal tender for goods and services. The FED says "no" almost word for word.

Once again I'll remind you , a promise to pay is not payment. No pronouncement of the gov't can make it so either. Furthermore, Federal Statutes recognize Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender but those statutes do not exclude any other promissory note as legal tender do they? The only thing Federal statutes ban is simulating their currency or destroying it.

I could right a lot more about how all this is based on the Custom of the City of London and Foreign bills of exchange but I have other stuff to do.

[the joint]

Duly noted.  I stand corrected.

[indio007]

No worries, the credit/debit money system is confusing and obfuscating by intentional design. The PTB do not want anyone to know the legal mechanics of it. It took nearly 3 years of reading every possible book about money going back to legal texts from the 1600's. What passes as money today represents the ABSENCE of money. Go figure.

[the joint]

No worries, the credit/debit money system is confusing and obfuscating by intentional design. The PTB do not want anyone to know the legal mechanics of it. It took nearly 3 years of reading every possible book about money going back to legal texts from the 1600's. What passes as money today represents the ABSENCE of money. Go figure.

I get that cash equals debt.  When the gov't needs money, they have the Fed print them more.  The increase in national debt is associated with an increase in the money supply/inflation to account for the promise to pay back that debt.  So yeah, the FRNs are printed as an indicator of the promise to pay back the debt.

I was careless, as you said, to interchange the promise to pay with payment itself.

[PNuttButter]

I read here a lot, never posted.  But this I had to comment on.

One thing I noticed.  Not one person here has questioned why the code has failed repeatedly and sent people bitcoins OR intersangos integrity.  Does this happen to anyone else, to any other exchange?  Maybe once, but not over and over, right?  Is Patrick really that bad of a coder?  That raises an eyebrow for me.  I don't know about you guys.

Sure, it is easy to call BenDavis a thief, he is the bad guy, scammer (although I really don't see how anyone can call HIM the scammer here, he is just the prick who wont give back the coins).  Sure, I can get that.  What a dick.  But aren't you supposed to look at BOTH sides of a story, before coming to judgement?  Why has no one questioned what intersango is doing with these repeated errors?

I know nothing about code, nothing about how money is generated or how exchange statistics are reported in the bitcoin exchange world.  But I do have one thing.  Logic.  I have a few simple questions.

1.  Why has the code failed repeatedly?  Why is intersango repeatedly sending bitcoins to people and having to ask for them back?

2.  Does bitcoin traffic (being sent back and forth from customer to exchange) benefit the exchange at all?  I know website traffic helps websites.  Is there any connection with that and a bitcoin exchange?

Has intersango figured out a subtle, quiet, not really noticeable scam to increase BTC traffic on their exchange?  Betting that most people are kind hearted and will send them back?  Making their numbers look better?  I am not sure, just a simpleton asking questions to all you intelligent folk.

3.  Why were the transactions sent 1 BTC at a time?  It was not a bundle of 511 at once.  It was 511, one at a time.  That would also point to increasing traffic on their exchange.  511 transactions in one day?  Then all sent back in one bundle, (well, they hoped at least) to make the books not look the 'same' ? 511 by 1 going out.  Then 511 at once going in.

I do have accounting experience.  And I do know that similar things like this are used to 'cook the books' in the accounting world.  Separate transactions like that make it harder to get caught cooking books.

Why has no one mentioned or thought about anything like this?  Because it is too easy to just call BenDavis a thief?  You all look like you are pretty intelligent people.  Yet, me, the moron here, is the only one to look at intersango and say 'this looks kind of weird to me'.

[mizerydearia]

I was going to use witcoin as an example of a business that doesn't seem to be evil, but then it occurred to me that you might be assuming that business == corporation. As I use the words, a business provides goods or services in a voluntary way that benefits itself and its customers. A corporation depends on the power of the state to protect its profits whilst socializing any losses (i.e. distributing them to others). In theory, and sometimes in practice, a corporation can also be a legitimate business.

Ah, yes, I misinterpreted 'business.'  I shall upgrade my interpreter to a more efficient implementation.

[the joint]

I read here a lot, never posted.  But this I had to comment on.

One thing I noticed.  Not one person here has questioned why the code has failed repeatedly and sent people bitcoins OR intersangos integrity.  Does this happen to anyone else, to any other exchange?  Maybe once, but not over and over, right?  Is Patrick really that bad of a coder?  That raises an eyebrow for me.  I don't know about you guys.

Sure, it is easy to call BenDavis a thief, he is the bad guy, scammer (although I really don't see how anyone can call HIM the scammer here, he is just the prick who wont give back the coins).  Sure, I can get that.  What a dick.  But aren't you supposed to look at BOTH sides of a story, before coming to judgement?  Why has no one questioned what intersango is doing with these repeated errors?

I know nothing about code, nothing about how money is generated or how exchange statistics are reported in the bitcoin exchange world.  But I do have one thing.  Logic.  I have a few simple questions.

1.  Why has the code failed repeatedly?  Why is intersango repeatedly sending bitcoins to people and having to ask for them back?

2.  Does bitcoin traffic (being sent back and forth from customer to exchange) benefit the exchange at all?  I know website traffic helps websites.  Is there any connection with that and a bitcoin exchange?

Has intersango figured out a subtle, quiet, not really noticeable scam to increase BTC traffic on their exchange?  Betting that most people are kind hearted and will send them back?  Making their numbers look better?  I am not sure, just a simpleton asking questions to all you intelligent folk.

3.  Why were the transactions sent 1 BTC at a time?  It was not a bundle of 511 at once.  It was 511, one at a time.  That would also point to increasing traffic on their exchange.  511 transactions in one day?  Then all sent back in one bundle, (well, they hoped at least) to make the books not look the 'same' ? 511 by 1 going out.  Then 511 at once going in.

I do have accounting experience.  And I do know that similar things like this are used to 'cook the books' in the accounting world.  Separate transactions like that make it harder to get caught cooking books.

Why has no one mentioned or thought about anything like this?  Because it is too easy to just call BenDavis a thief?  You all look like you are pretty intelligent people.  Yet, me, the moron here, is the only one to look at intersango and say 'this looks kind of weird to me'.

Actually, I did this, sort of.

I asked whether or not anyone checked to see if Intersango and BenDavis were the same guy.

[PNuttButter]

Actually, I did this, sort of.

I asked whether or not anyone checked to see if Intersango and BenDavis were the same guy.

That is also a very good point. 

It is kind of funny.  For people who think as HARD as a lot of these folks seem to think and do as much internet research as these people do, you and I are the only ones to possibly consider intersango as the criminal here.  Not the innocent party who received coins and got caught up in the mix.

I kind of feel bad for the guy who now has to deal with all this, when he did nothing to ask for it.

[mizerydearia]

One thing I noticed.  Not one person here has questioned why the code has failed repeatedly and sent people bitcoins OR intersangos integrity.  Does this happen to anyone else, to any other exchange?  Maybe once, but not over and over, right?  Is Patrick really that bad of a coder?  That raises an eyebrow for me.  I don't know about you guys.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40934.msg498999#msg498999

This code was thoroughly tested using testnet.
The issue was with the server configuration, the database user did not have the proper permissions and the code failed in an unexpected way.
I have now changed to relevant code such that any failure of any kind will stop the script cold.

If you wish to learn more specific details, there's #bitcoinconsultancy on Freenode IRC network.  The rest of your post is interesting to shed some light on as well.  It'll be interesting for phantomcircuit to provide more details about his experience.

[PNuttButter]

One thing I noticed.  Not one person here has questioned why the code has failed repeatedly and sent people bitcoins OR intersangos integrity.  Does this happen to anyone else, to any other exchange?  Maybe once, but not over and over, right?  Is Patrick really that bad of a coder?  That raises an eyebrow for me.  I don't know about you guys.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40934.msg498999#msg498999

This code was thoroughly tested using testnet.
The issue was with the server configuration, the database user did not have the proper permissions and the code failed in an unexpected way.
I have now changed to relevant code such that any failure of any kind will stop the script cold.

If you wish to learn more specific details, there's #bitcoinconsultancy on Freenode IRC network.

And we are just supposed to believe everything that intersango says, without questioning it?  That is pretty one sided, if you ask me.  How do you know he is not lying?  Why are you doing so much research for one side, and not other?

And you guys want to talk about a bitcoin justice system?  I sure hope people like you are not in any way associated with that.   You are completely, unfair.  You have to listen to BOTH sides of a story.  Not just one, to be fair.

[mizerydearia]

btw, I edited my post just above with an additional two sentences.  Feel free to read it. :3

And we are just supposed to believe everything that intersango says, without questioning it?  That is pretty one sided, if you ask me.  How do you know he is not lying?  Why are you doing so much research for one side, and not other?

And you guys want to talk about a bitcoin justice system?  I sure hope people like you are not in any way associated with that.   You are completely, unfair.  You have to listen to BOTH sides of a story.  Not just one, to be fair.

That is interesting to point out, and I agree my investigation has been one sided most likely due to bias.  My apologies.  I do agree more publicated information from phantomcircuit will be helpful.   Because of my bias, I encourage someone else to take initiative to gather more informations as necessary.

[Stalin-chan]

Whoever coded this exhange did so poorly, I don't care if he tested his code every which way to mars.
Don't release your code onto REAL production systems until you get all the major bugs out, multiplying the coins you withdrew by 512 is a serious major bug.
Imagine if an ATM gave you 1,000 dollars when you ask for 1; That wouldn't happen. If you are going to run an exchange there is a serious level of coding ability required so I won't feel pity if you aren't up to it.

[mizerydearia]

Whoever coded this exhange did so poorly, I don't care if he tested his code every which way to mars.
Don't release your code onto REAL production systems until you get all the major bugs out, multiplying the coins you withdrew by 512 is a serious major bug.
Imagine if an ATM gave you 1,000 dollars when you ask for 1; That wouldn't happen. If you are going to run an exchange there is a serious level of coding ability required so I won't feel pity if you aren't up to it.

I agree.  serious business only