Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 05:15:30 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: someone fucked up and lost ALOT of money  (Read 26987 times)
klaus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 06:14:08 AM
 #41

@BTCurious

send to you.

thanks for your help again.

- can you please edit your post, so that my btc adress is no longer open? everything is fine now. no need for the details.

bitmessage:BM-2D9c1oAbkVo96zDhTZ2jV6RXzQ9VG3A6f1​
threema:HXUAMT96
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481346930
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346930

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346930
Reply with quote  #2

1481346930
Report to moderator
BTCurious
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714


^SEM img of Si wafer edge, scanned 2012-3-12.


View Profile
October 29, 2011, 06:16:17 AM
 #42

I see the transaction. Thanks a lot!

Links are edited out of my post.
Good luck with your BTC!

Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 08:19:42 AM
 #43

And this is the guy whom 90% of Bitcoin users trust their money to...  Roll Eyes

MagicalTux fucks up... AGAIN!  Grin

What will happen when they lose the income of 10 years?  Undecided

Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 08:40:36 AM
 #44

And this is the guy whom 90% of Bitcoin users trust their money to...  Roll Eyes

MagicalTux fucks up... AGAIN!  Grin

What will happen when they lose the income of 10 years?  Undecided

at the moment he stands 100% behind the bitcoin.

since the 17.000 Bitomat.pl story i trust mtgox deeply.
nobody asked him to pay the 17k. but he did. because he ownes and earns a lot of btc. and he is obviously looking long term.

so i dont see him running away with my mtgox balance.

It seems he's more close to LOSE the mtgox balance than run away with it.
And for some strange reason people also trusted "Tom Williams" and look what happened... doesn't matter if he was really hacked or if he scammed and run away with the money, people lost their bitcoin in the end.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 10:46:23 AM
 #45

The win-win will disappear when the fuck up is so big that it turns into a lose-lose...
What if instead of 2k coins the dude(or code) that sent these coins to no address was moving the 500k coins we all saw MtGox move when the hack happened? Would their reaction be "hey, it's just the bitcoin revenue of 250 weeks, no problem" if that was the case?

Thinking about this stuff gives me the chills.

worldinacoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658



View Profile WWW
October 29, 2011, 10:59:43 AM
 #46

Hoping for new exchanges that can dilute the share of bitcoins so that we have many smaller players rather than a dominant player, that would be best for bitcoin.
klaus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 11:15:59 AM
 #47

@worldinacoin

yes of course. but i dont see somthing like that. tradehill dont come over 5%


i think what will happen is -

bitcoin someone leaving the niche, than the big onlinebrokers start offering bitcointrading next to their stocks/gold etc. than mtgox is the small plattform, tradehill maybie survive far away and the other exchanges decease.

bitmessage:BM-2D9c1oAbkVo96zDhTZ2jV6RXzQ9VG3A6f1​
threema:HXUAMT96
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 11:25:33 AM
 #48

i deleted my post because i cant help you.

you trust a free service a lot of coins, then wondering what happend.

but you dont trust a hard working man fighting agains powerfull enemys (banks) and taking high fees from us for that.

well do what you do, i do what i do.

Wrong answer. I trust myself, and even so I must account for those times when I get high...
I haven't lost anything in mybitcoin and I don't plan on losing anything in any exchange. But others did and will.

Also, I'm not trying to get you to lose your faith on the hard working man charging you high fees. You are free to do whatever you wish, just don't be surprised when you lose Bitcoin in some service.

sturle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1418

http://bitmynt.no


View Profile WWW
October 29, 2011, 11:38:58 AM
 #49

It seems he's more close to LOSE the mtgox balance than run away with it.
Now you are silly.  He lost 2% of his annual BTC revenue.  That's 1% of his total revenue, only that MtGox can not exchange BTC into fiat currency (i.e. trade) themselves.  That would be against regulations in Japan.  Since the stuff which can be bought for BTC is still quite limited, MtGox lost very little of practical value to them.  The users lost nothing.

Who would you rather trust for exchanging bitcoins?  Bitomat (all lost, saved by MtGox)?  Bitcoin7 (most lost, can get some back by revealing all possible details about your self and submitting naked photo)?  Tradehill (endorses spam, reveals your trades to the one who referred you)?

Most of MtGox' coins are in an offline securely stored wallet, as was demonstrated after the crack.  It can't be lost by a simple programming error.

Sjå http://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner.  Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010.
I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell.  See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.pl
I support the roadmap.  If a majority of miners ever try to forcefully take control of Bitcoin through a hard fork without 100% consensus, I will immediately split out and dump all my forkcoins, and buy more real Bitcoin.
genjix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
October 29, 2011, 12:19:26 PM
 #50

Who would you rather trust for exchanging bitcoins?  Bitomat (all lost, saved by MtGox)?  Bitcoin7 (most lost, can get some back by revealing all possible details about your self and submitting naked photo)?  Tradehill (endorses spam, reveals your trades to the one who referred you)?

Or Intersango, never been hacked, run by bitcoin developers, been running since March 2011 and contributes back to the community. If you truly want to support the bitcoin world, then support us. We create projects through our group (Bitcoin Consultancy) which we use to fund further development on bitcoin and projects around it.

We were the ones that discovered the CSRF exploit in MtGox and other exchanges. TBH MtGox has a very poor track record when it comes to security, and they don't seem to have learnt from their lessons. We were the ones who had to respond to the media (by contacting them) when they crashed causing reporters to say bitcoin had been hacked and MtGox ignored all calls for a statement from them.

joepie, Diablo and some other people here lost money which MtGox has never paid back as a result of the CSRF exploit. They were also dishonest on multiple occasions, outright lying or covering things up. Even now they are blaming this on the bitcoin network not accepting transactions with inputs more than 255 (if you read the chatlog I pasted on page 2) which is wrong considering that a) there is no limit and b) the max number of inputs in any of their transactions was 4.

We're the only long running exchange that hasn't been compromised (formerly Britcoin) and are based in London with a development team. Our group (Bitcoin Consultancy) is also actively involved in developing other areas of bitcoin, operates other services and is working with merchants. And we charge no fees.

Our about us: https://intersango.com/about-us.php

Security: https://intersango.com/security.php

Fees: https://intersango.com/fees.php

Our development's group website: http://bitcoinconsultancy.com/

We were the ones just at SWIFT's (the messaging network used for international bank transfers) SIBOS conference on the future of banking discussing how bitcoin could be used to improve international transfers.

So we're pretty much heavily invested in bitcoin for the long term. The purpose of our group is to hire people to work full-time on furthering bitcoin. We release many of our project's source code for the community. We're also helping organise the European Bitcoin Conference.

If you appreciate our work, and wish for bitcoin to grow, then use our exchange. In return it allows us to grow our development team to push forwards and create more community projects we can contribute. It's my hope to turn this into a talent base to allow the brightest minds to prosper and develop cool technology- like Google or Apple but for specifically for bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.


rotrott
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 47



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 12:32:40 PM
 #51

Will someone please answer me a stupid question (I'm sorry as I'm not really proficient in the protocol)?  As I understand it mtgox sent a transaction with an obviously invalid protocol message.  Shouldn't messages like this be rejected by the network?  It seems like a large hole to have open, especially if bitcoin becomes very popular and more people start writing (possibly flawed) code to use it.

Or it sounds like the mainline client does validation of the protocol message.  Perhaps this could be broken out into a library that everyone could use to validate the protocol message before it was sent?
genjix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
October 29, 2011, 12:34:31 PM
 #52

Or it sounds like the mainline client does validation of the protocol message.  Perhaps this could be broken out into a library that everyone could use to validate the protocol message before it was sent?

No, it's not a flaw. You can read the chatlog I pasted on page 2 for more information why.
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 12:36:54 PM
 #53

For adepts of decentralization you guys trust MtGox too much, even after all the times they fucked up... Just don't come crying when you lose your Bitcoin/USD/EUR. Until now they had the money to cover their(and others) losses, but what will happen when the fuck up is so big that they don't have the money?
And take out your donkey goggles, they are doing their job right, just letting you see what's in front of your eyes...

But whatever, people are free to lose their money any way they want. I'm out!

rotrott
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 47



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 01:02:35 PM
 #54

Or it sounds like the mainline client does validation of the protocol message.  Perhaps this could be broken out into a library that everyone could use to validate the protocol message before it was sent?

No, it's not a flaw. You can read the chatlog I pasted on page 2 for more information why.

I read most of the post as it was very long.

For the most part I agree with you (I hate bloat as much as the next guy).  However, most of the examples you quoted were for things like web servers, HTML, (perhaps I'm missing one).  All of these protocols have no consequences for the entire body of people using these protocols.  If a web server in china screws up, it doesn't affect me at all.  If someone screws up with bitcoin and sends 2 million coins into the darkness, that affects us all.  That can only happen so many times before bitcoin is no longer worth anything to anyone in its current form.  It would be nice to be able to run a message through a validator to get some indication of _major_ screw ups.  This would not have to be part of your script language.
k
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452


View Profile
October 29, 2011, 01:14:35 PM
 #55

Wasn't the idea of destroying bitcoins by spending to a provably non-redeemable address floated somewhere around here before? It was part of one proposed mechanism of migrating value to a new blockchain I think.
It seems to me that scripts such as this (sharp and pointy as they may be) should be allowed.


@julz this might have been related to what you are thinking about above:

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/924/can-a-bitcoin-be-destroyed
BTCurious
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714


^SEM img of Si wafer edge, scanned 2012-3-12.


View Profile
October 29, 2011, 01:26:27 PM
 #56

For the most part I agree with you (I hate bloat as much as the next guy).
As I understand it mtgox sent a transaction with an obviously invalid protocol message.
It's not about bloat, actually. The point is, it was not an invalid protocol message. This was perfectly allowed by the protocol. There is no reason to disallow things that look strange but are valid by the protocol, just because it looks "obviously wrong" to us.


If someone screws up with bitcoin and sends 2 million coins into the darkness, that affects us all.  That can only happen so many times before bitcoin is no longer worth anything to anyone in its current form.
Yes, it does affect us all. In fact, it makes the bitcoin you are holding worth more, not less.

worldinacoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658



View Profile WWW
October 29, 2011, 01:30:49 PM
 #57

@worldinacoin

yes of course. but i dont see somthing like that. tradehill dont come over 5%


i think what will happen is -

bitcoin someone leaving the niche, than the big onlinebrokers start offering bitcointrading next to their stocks/gold etc. than mtgox is the small plattform, tradehill maybie survive far away and the other exchanges decease.

It takes time, the pioneer exchanges will normally have a head start, but the latter ones can be more innovative and catch up later on.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
October 29, 2011, 01:32:00 PM
 #58

I read most of the post as it was very long.

For the most part I agree with you (I hate bloat as much as the next guy).  However, most of the examples you quoted were for things like web servers, HTML, (perhaps I'm missing one).  All of these protocols have no consequences for the entire body of people using these protocols.  If a web server in china screws up, it doesn't affect me at all.  If someone screws up with bitcoin and sends 2 million coins into the darkness, that affects us all.  That can only happen so many times before bitcoin is no longer worth anything to anyone in its current form.  It would be nice to be able to run a message through a validator to get some indication of _major_ screw ups.  This would not have to be part of your script language.

What validator?  The exchange was writing their own custom code.  The client wouldn't allow you to make this transaction.  When you are working with raw code that is the risks you take.  

If you are indicating a miner should validate all scripts that quickly becomes very difficult.  The scripting language is very complex and there are many (some not yet even implemented) permutations of possible scripts.  What happens when miners start rejecting scripts that are valid but they think aren't valid and your transactions can't find their way into the blocks.  Lastly someone may decide they want to destroy currency and retain a public record of this.  
rotrott
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 47



View Profile
October 29, 2011, 01:37:49 PM
 #59

I guess I agree with you guys now, although it doesn't feel right hoping for people to screw up so my coins can be worth more...

There is no validator.  I'm saying it would be nice if there was one for people writing their own software.  It might keep them from making mistakes.  "WARNING:  You're sending coins to a zero address.  Are you sure this is what you intended to do?"  I guess they could write their own though...
memvola
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896


View Profile
October 29, 2011, 01:40:12 PM
 #60

It would be nice to be able to run a message through a validator to get some indication of _major_ screw ups.  This would not have to be part of your script language.

I don't think it's plausible to expect we could prevent screw-ups by blacklisting scripts. What are the chances that the same mistake will be made ever again? Next time it will be some other unforeseen error. And if you use heuristics for filtering, then what if there is a bug in the filter itself? I'm mostly impartial though, just not convinced about the usefulness of adding this particular mistake to the protocol specification. (I guess others wrote the very same reply.)
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!