Gox stash recoverable by wallet update?

[DeathAndTaxes]

I totally agree with the reservations here, but my question was if it could be done technicaly, and the answer was No.

Technically it can be done.  It would be a half a dozen lines of code max.  It could probably be done in an hour.   Anyone can fork Bitcoin to make any change.  The trick is can you convince people to use the fork?  To date all existing forks have been non-controversial with near universal support.  

It isn't a technical problem, it is a consensus problem.

Aha, then I misunderstood the first answer. Consensus is also about being afraid to be left out, So if there is a sentiment by most, to restore the coins to a recoverable wallet for everybody’s greater good, then the minority would feel a lot of peer pressure to update their wallet?

Or you end up with two totally incompatible "Bitcoin"s each supported by a group of users but where tx are not compatible between each other.  Both claim they are the real Bitcoin and the resulting confusion kills off the project.   Most people are pragmatic and aren't going to support a fork unless it has near universal support.   The only forks to the network which have succeeded have been pretty mundane non-controversial fixes or enhancements (additional features like P2SH).

[1714939190]

1714939190

[1714939190]

1714939190

[1714939190]

1714939190

[DannyHamilton]

So, the idea doesn't involve taking the coins back from the people who have them now?  It would just perform a "Quantitative Easing", and instantly inflate the supply by 750,000 bitcoins? So the eventual maximum coins minted would be somewhere around 21,750,000?

Yes and no. The basic idea is, if MtGox really just lost the keys to a 750K BTC wallet (which is a rumor), it would be technically possible to create a fork of Bitcoin where the original MtGox wallet is made unspendable by code and at the same time 750K new BTC are created in an address where MtGox has control. No need to inflate the total Bitcoin supply.

Ok, I misunderstood the original question.

I thought it was widely accepted that the bitcoins were taken from MtGox.  If that were true, then they have most likely already circulated throughout the bitcoin economy and are well mixed into many people's wallets. I thought the original question was if these bitcoins could technically be taken back from all the wallets where they now have spread and given to MtGox.

I hadn't yet heard the rumor that MtGox "lost" the private keys to 850,000 worth of bitcoin addresses (Note, that in the press release that I saw this morning from their bankruptcy announcement they claim that in addition to 750,000 of clients bitcoins, MTGox is also missing 100,000 of the company's bitcoins)

[justusranvier]

Yes and no. The basic idea is, if MtGox really just lost the keys to a 750K BTC wallet (which is a rumor), it would be technically possible to create a fork of Bitcoin where the original MtGox wallet is made unspendable by code and at the same time 750K new BTC are created in an address where MtGox has control. No need to inflate the total Bitcoin supply.

It's technically possible to build a calculator that concludes "2+2=5" any time it would be convenient for that to be true. That wouldn't make the calculator any less broken.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Yes and no. The basic idea is, if MtGox really just lost the keys to a 750K BTC wallet (which is a rumor), it would be technically possible to create a fork of Bitcoin where the original MtGox wallet is made unspendable by code and at the same time 750K new BTC are created in an address where MtGox has control. No need to inflate the total Bitcoin supply.

It's technically possible to build a calculator that concludes "2+2=5" any time it would be convenient for that to be true. That wouldn't make the calculator any less broken.

However if you convinced everyone on the planet that 2+2 does equal 5 then the calculator wouldn't be broken all the old incompatible ones would.   That is the point.  Bitcoin works on a consensus, if you want to change it you need the support of a consensus.  This isn't a technical problem, it is a very difficulty social/human barrier (for good reason).

[justusranvier]

However if you convinced everyone on the planet that 2+2 does equal 5 then the calculator wouldn't be broken all the old incompatible ones would.

No, it would just mean that humanity had somehow simuntaneously lost the capability to do arithmetic.

[gamersglory]

Couldn't All of it be put back into the blockchain to be re-mined including the seized BTC. add it back in and go back to a block size of 50 BTC to help BTC rebound    

[smoothie]

I'm sure MTGOX would LOVE to have the blockchain rolled back to a certain point in time so they can retrieve lost/stolen coins.

Not gonna happen in any meaningful way to allow them to dig themselves out of this hole.

If the coins are indeed lost then I thank them for the kind 5-7% donation to my current holdings of bitcoin in terms of value.

[DeathAndTaxes]

However if you convinced everyone on the planet that 2+2 does equal 5 then the calculator wouldn't be broken all the old incompatible ones would.

No, it would just mean that humanity had somehow simuntaneously lost the capability to do arithmetic.

"four" and "five" are simply agreed upon language constructs.  Language can be changed by consensus.

GoxNumbering System
One
Two
Three
Five
Four
Six
Seven
...

[DannyHamilton]

However if you convinced everyone on the planet that 2+2 does equal 5 then the calculator wouldn't be broken all the old incompatible ones would.

No, it would just mean that humanity had somehow simuntaneously lost the capability to do arithmetic.

Not if all of humanity decided to pronounce the shape "5" with the word "four", and the shape "4" with the word "five"  

But I think we are getting a bit off topic here.

[DannyHamilton]

"four" and "five" are simply agreed upon language constructs.  Language can be changed by consensus.

Bah, you're too fast.  Beat me to it.

[Luno]

I'm sure MTGOX would LOVE to have the blockchain rolled back to a certain point in time so they can retrieve lost/stolen coins.

Not gonna happen in any meaningful way to allow them to dig themselves out of this hole.

If the coins are indeed lost then I thank them for the kind 5-7% donation to my current holdings of bitcoin in terms of value.

You assume everything else is equal, not considering bad PR.

My question was to a special lost keys  scenario. If the coins are stolen, they are the property of the thief now and no fork should take them away from him.

[justusranvier]

You guys think you're being clever by talking about semantic representations instead of the underlying concepts, but you're not.

[qwk]

You guys think you're being clever by talking about semantic representations instead of the underlying concepts, but you're not.

You entered this discussion without reading the whole thread before.

[Luno]

Apparently the consensus amongst rumour posters is that the FBI seized the coins on Feb. 7'th, so the case is not about lost keys, but theft. Therefore my question is no longer relevant.

[anti-scam]

Apparently the consensus amongst rumour posters is that the FBI seized the coins on Feb. 7'th, so the case is not about lost keys, but theft. Therefore my question is no longer relevant.

Personally I think that forcible coin seizures is an issue that Bitcoin or some cryptocurrency will have to address eventually but it probably won't find much support here yet. It just seems kind of contradictory to have a decentralized, libertarian, etc. currency that can be easily taken over by Uncle Sam pointing a gun at a few of the largest holders.

[Luno]

Apparently the consensus amongst rumour posters is that the FBI seized the coins on Feb. 7'th, so the case is not about lost keys, but theft. Therefore my question is no longer relevant.

Personally I think that forcible coin seizures is an issue that Bitcoin or some cryptocurrency will have to address eventually but it probably won't find much support here yet. It just seems kind of contradictory to have a decentralized, libertarian, etc. currency that can be easily taken over by Uncle Sam pointing a gun at a few of the largest holders.

Violence has always been the strongest argument.

Maybe a crypto currency that is both physical and virtual at the same time?:

A public ledger file on all physical coins in existence. The coin itself being a hardware key salted uniquely and verifiable publicly?

That would be like "digital gold", authorities would have to search you to confiscate it. There would be no mining incentive and their creation would be centralised. The hardware coin would be handed over as payment and would be checked against the public shared file before each transaction. I wouldn't be of much use on-line... Crappy idea, sorry.

[qwk]

Look what I found casascius suggested some time ago (2011), and, wonder what, he was thinking of a hypothetical MtGox 500K BTC screw-up. Boy, did he misunderestimate MtGox

Imagine this were 500000 BTC and every MtGox user were at risk of a major loss. (which would certainly hit the news and damage the community).

A feature that allowed a miner to vote out a block or a transaction would be valuable. If 50%+ did it, the error would simply vanish. Democracy at work. But it would only work if that 50% voted immediately.

[Luno]

Look what I found casascius suggested some time ago (2011), and, wonder what, he was thinking of a hypothetical MtGox 500K BTC screw-up. Boy, did he misunderestimate MtGox

Imagine this were 500000 BTC and every MtGox user were at risk of a major loss. (which would certainly hit the news and damage the community).

A feature that allowed a miner to vote out a block or a transaction would be valuable. If 50%+ did it, the error would simply vanish. Democracy at work. But it would only work if that 50% voted immediately.

WVote within ten minutes LOL, spot on about Mt.Gox.

[andy10000]

I don't understand why everyone would be so against it. It's not bailing out Gox. It's bailing out the people (that's real people some of whom are committing suicide) that invested in Gox. And it's about creating a unique reputation for Bitcoin compared with fiat that will drive adoption, and reverse this PR.

In a regulated exchange you have to keep reserves, and you have to ensure them, and you have to take industry dictated security precautions with it. But if it goes missing it's never seen again. Bitcoin has the opportunity to be better.

Citibank just lost $400m, which is never coming back. Imagine if Bitcoin could show the world that it could fix those problems. If you're worried about setting a precedent, set some rules. 5% or more of total coins in circulation. Forensically traceable to the owner. The evidence presented to the miners that will vote. The new keys passed into the control of an administrator who's job it is to return the coins, bypassing Gox completely.

At the moment the public perception of bitcoin has been retarded by 2-5 years. Forking the chain could advance it by as much.

If the FBI want's to confiscate money they won't do it through control of the blockchain, they'll use the courts. If some authority tries to unjustly confiscate users coins, they won't get the anonymous votes.

[kjj]

No, "fixing" this problem would kill bitcoin.

If someone can create new coins out of thin air, then bitcoin's supply is no longer limited.  If someone can move coins without proving the private key, then your coins are no longer yours.

Bitcoin's value comes from the usefulness of these properties.  Without them, there is no point.

The good news is that no one can force anyone else to accept changes they dislike.