2021-01-21 BBG - Bitcoin Plunge Has Newbies Scrambling to Google Double-Spend

[acquafredda]

Bitcoin plunged more than 10% Thursday, sparking a hunt for reasons the notoriously volatile asset was selling off. One that captured attention questioned the very viability of the token itself -- though it turned out not to be cause for concern.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-21/bitcoin-plunge-has-newbies-scrambling-to-google-double-spend

Please tell me it is all fake!  This is hilarious! I mean, come on, this is 2021! Noobs please go and use Ethereum, EOS, Tezos, Polkadot, whatever you like.
Leave us bitcoin, for god's sake! It is not for you 

[cr1776]

Bitcoin plunged more than 10% Thursday, sparking a hunt for reasons the notoriously volatile asset was selling off. One that captured attention questioned the very viability of the token itself -- though it turned out not to be cause for concern.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-21/bitcoin-plunge-has-newbies-scrambling-to-google-double-spend

Please tell me it is all fake!   This is hilarious! I mean, come on, this is 2021! Noobs please go and use Ethereum, EOS, Tezos, Polkadot, whatever you like.
Leave us bitcoin, for god's sake! It is not for you  

I am just blown away how someone not knowing how bitcoin works with regard to double spends and re-orgs can start stupid stuff like that can be ever taken seriously again.  BitMEX Research saying "It appears as if a small double spend of around..."[*1] One of the stupidest groups claiming to be experts, says something like that?  My heavens they don't even know what a double spend is. That isn't a double spend and yet their tweet says it is.

And they have the nerve to say "Filtering out the hype with evidence-based reports on the cryptocurrency ecosystem ".  LOL. Ludicrous.

And then they claim they didn't say:
"There was a stale Bitcoin block today, at height 666,833. SlushPool has beaten F2Pool in a race.

It appears as if a small double spend of around 0.00062063 BTC ($21) was detected"
and that someone else was to blame:



[*1]
https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1351856488252399618

[odolvlobo]

I propose that we refer to this event as the Double-Spend Panic of 2021. Like all the others, it will fade into obscurity.

[Globb0]

You cant have it both ways.

Everyone is always boasting how they will double spend on the kidknappers if they ever come for their bitcoin.


Put a low fee then send it back to yourself later. How is it fud?

[figmentofmyass]

I am just blown away how someone not knowing how bitcoin works with regard to double spends and re-orgs can start stupid stuff like that can be ever taken seriously again.  BitMEX Research saying "It appears as if a small double spend of around..."[*1] One of the stupidest groups claiming to be experts, says something like that?  My heavens they don't even know what a double spend is. That isn't a double spend and yet their tweet says it is.

andreas antonopoulos did have this to say in their defense: https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/1352285439621664768

For those screaming at @BitMEXResearch:

Wrong target. BitMEX offers a useful service that monitors for re-orgs. They are the messenger who said the right thing. Re-direct your ire at @Cointelegraph  who "reported" sensationalist drivel and those who amplified it.

i suppose people use the term "double spend" in two different ways. one is at the protocol level and would mean the same coins could be spent/confirmed twice---obviously not the case here. the other is from the perspective of a transaction recipient who is sent inputs that are re-spent and confirmed in a conflicting transaction.

[cr1776]

I am just blown away how someone not knowing how bitcoin works with regard to double spends and re-orgs can start stupid stuff like that can be ever taken seriously again.  BitMEX Research saying "It appears as if a small double spend of around..."[*1] One of the stupidest groups claiming to be experts, says something like that?  My heavens they don't even know what a double spend is. That isn't a double spend and yet their tweet says it is.

andreas antonopoulos did have this to say in their defense: https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/1352285439621664768

For those screaming at @BitMEXResearch:

Wrong target. BitMEX offers a useful service that monitors for re-orgs. They are the messenger who said the right thing. Re-direct your ire at @Cointelegraph  who "reported" sensationalist drivel and those who amplified it.

i suppose people use the term "double spend" in two different ways. one is at the protocol level and would mean the same coins could be spent/confirmed twice---obviously not the case here. the other is from the perspective of a transaction recipient who is sent inputs that are re-spent and confirmed in a conflicting transaction.

Hi,
I did see that, but andreas antonopoulos is just wrong in this case.  Double spend has a well defined meaning, so BitMEXResearch saying there was a double spend is wrong too.  If double spend means the second one above then every RBF is a double spend and their never was a "double spend" problem to solve.  This would likewise mean that every reorg would also involve "double spends" just that most of these so-called double spends would be spend to the same address.

It was just stupid on BitMEXResearch's part to use the term double spend in the way they did when it was a perfectly normal event which happens all the time in the mempool and can happen like this until there are sufficient confirmations. 😀. They are supposedly experts and should be precise in what they are saying to avoid this kind of nonsense FUD.

I agree that some people have used "double spend" incorrectly when they want to say "attempted double spend" or "attempt to replace one low fee transaction with another by spending the same bitcoins again in a higher fee transaction."  To me using double spend for a successful RBF transaction is stupid and irresponsible.

In short, their phrasing was bad and people who reported "there was a double spend" were even worse.

[acquafredda]

cr1776, this whole story raises so many issues about the sheer amount of ignorance that we face when talking about technical stuff. It also shows how it is easy for the keyboard monkeys to propagate unnecessary FUD over the internet.
If they would have played Chinese whispers' game, we would have had no FUD, trust me 

[figmentofmyass]

Double spend has a well defined meaning, so BitMEXResearch saying there was a double spend is wrong too.  If double spend means the second one above then every RBF is a double spend and their never was a "double spend" problem to solve.

in this case there was a block reorganization, so a confirmed transaction (1 confirmation) was dropped from the blockchain and a conflicting transaction was mined instead. that doesn't apply to every RBF transaction.

I agree that some people have used "double spend" incorrectly when they want to say "attempted double spend" or "attempt to replace one low fee transaction with another by spending the same bitcoins again in a higher fee transaction."

i generally agree but i don't wanna get into an argument about semantics.

fundamentally, a 1-block reorganization is very normal---so if everyone is putting all their trust in 1 confirmation, then we have a problem. this specific transaction may not have been malicious, but that doesn't mean these threats are not real:

Blockchain reorganization attack

Also called alternative history attack. This attack has a chance to work even if the merchant waits for some confirmations, but requires relatively high hashrate and risk of significant expense in wasted electricity to the attacking miner.

The attacker submits to the merchant/network a transaction which pays the merchant, while privately mining an alternative blockchain fork in which a fraudulent double-spending transaction is included instead. After waiting for n confirmations, the merchant sends the product. If the attacker happened to find more than n blocks at this point, he releases his fork and regains his coins; otherwise, he can try to continue extending his fork with the hope of being able to catch up with the network.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Irreversible_Transactions#Blockchain_reorganization_attack

maybe peoples' confidence in 1 confirmation should be shaken a little more...

[acquafredda]

Since I was a noob in 2011 the 6-confirmations rule was probably the only thing that I learned for good from the start. I will keep repeating that if noobs do not spend 5 minutes of their precious lives understanding the very basics of the bitcoin protocol, we are doomed to see these events happening over and over again. And, sorry, but I could not care less.

[buwaytress]

I'll redirect my ire towards BitPay that automatically treats my Bitcoin txs with RBF enabled as a double spend attempt, and, therefore, invalid my order. Yes, something they started doing in 2019 and I've to disable RBF when using them, but every now and then I forget. Then the painful process of getting my refund (in euros too, from the merchant).

[cr1776]

Double spend has a well defined meaning, so BitMEXResearch saying there was a double spend is wrong too.  If double spend means the second one above then every RBF is a double spend and their never was a "double spend" problem to solve.

in this case there was a block reorganization, so a confirmed transaction (1 confirmation) was dropped from the blockchain and a conflicting transaction was mined instead. that doesn't apply to every RBF transaction.

...

Agreed of course, but every reorg drops every transaction from the losing block which then may be, or may not be, included in the winning block or subsequent blocks.  Likewise every RBF transaction that works replaces another transaction, just ones that could have been in the mempool or in a block like this one.   The confluence of both here then being called "a successful double spend" is the issue when by its very nature the block chain prevents double spending.

Anyway, I agree with what you are saying.  And 1 confirmation is always somewhat risky.  Ditto zero confirmations.

[bryant.coleman]

So it was Cointelegraph, which spread the fake news? If that was the case, then I am not surprised. They have a habit of dishing out fake news. But their fake news and clickbait articles were largely ignored by the community, as they had such a terrible reputation. So what changed now? Why so many people took them seriously this time around? Anyway, such corrections are good for the cryptocurrency market. It will make sure that the noobs sell their BTC and make their exit. We don't need them here.

[aysg76]

So it was Cointelegraph, which spread the fake news? If that was the case, then I am not surprised. They have a habit of dishing out fake news. But their fake news and clickbait articles were largely ignored by the community, as they had such a terrible reputation. So what changed now? Why so many people took them seriously this time around? Anyway, such corrections are good for the cryptocurrency market. It will make sure that the noobs sell their BTC and make their exit. We don't need them here.

Naming correction something absurd and then trying to defame the bitcoin. Child's play .
Noobs buying in FOMO and then panicking unnecessarily must make the exit as soon as possible.

[cr1776]

So it was Cointelegraph, which spread the fake news? If that was the case, then I am not surprised. They have a habit of dishing out fake news. But their fake news and clickbait articles were largely ignored by the community, as they had such a terrible reputation. So what changed now? Why so many people took them seriously this time around? Anyway, such corrections are good for the cryptocurrency market. It will make sure that the noobs sell their BTC and make their exit. We don't need them here.

It was CT who did some, but BitMEXResearch didn't do anyone any favors when they said:
"It appears as if a small double spend of around 0.00062063 BTC ($21) was detected"
( https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1351856488252399618 )

Calling it a double spend was irresponsible because it was an RBF and there was no double spend recorded in the block chain.  It was really a non-event and by them stating there was "a small double spend" was just idiotic.  Sure, they clarified things later, but they need to be accurate to be taken seriously.

If they had said "It appears as if a small RBF of around 0.00062063 BTC ($21) was detected between the two forks" it would've been smarter and more responsible. 

My thought on it is if they are as experienced as they claim, they should know to be precise.

:-)

[Karartma1]

Nothing new over the horizon when these pricks have to follow their agendas; when bitcoin goes down then pump the fud, when it goes up pump the we are all rich articles.
I'm sick of this shit, really.

[wbich]

Bitcoin plunged more than 10% Thursday, sparking a hunt for reasons the notoriously volatile asset was selling off. One that captured attention questioned the very viability of the token itself -- though it turned out not to be cause for concern.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-21/bitcoin-plunge-has-newbies-scrambling-to-google-double-spend

Please tell me it is all fake!  This is hilarious! I mean, come on, this is 2021! Noobs please go and use Ethereum, EOS, Tezos, Polkadot, whatever you like.
Leave us bitcoin, for god's sake! It is not for you 

Why isn't bitcoin for me? I think it's a cool thing and I'm just about to get into it...

[acquafredda]

Bitcoin plunged more than 10% Thursday, sparking a hunt for reasons the notoriously volatile asset was selling off. One that captured attention questioned the very viability of the token itself -- though it turned out not to be cause for concern.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-21/bitcoin-plunge-has-newbies-scrambling-to-google-double-spend

Please tell me it is all fake!  This is hilarious! I mean, come on, this is 2021! Noobs please go and use Ethereum, EOS, Tezos, Polkadot, whatever you like.
Leave us bitcoin, for god's sake! It is not for you 

Why isn't bitcoin for me? I think it's a cool thing and I'm just about to get into it...

There are different kinds of noobs, those who will remain noobs desperately forever and those who will grow their knowledge. I am happy if you consider yourself going in that direction as I have nothing against it. But, you see, noobs by definition tend to remain beginners, especially in the bitcoin world.

[wbich]

Bitcoin plunged more than 10% Thursday, sparking a hunt for reasons the notoriously volatile asset was selling off. One that captured attention questioned the very viability of the token itself -- though it turned out not to be cause for concern.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-21/bitcoin-plunge-has-newbies-scrambling-to-google-double-spend

Please tell me it is all fake!  This is hilarious! I mean, come on, this is 2021! Noobs please go and use Ethereum, EOS, Tezos, Polkadot, whatever you like.
Leave us bitcoin, for god's sake! It is not for you 

I think I have it all figured out, thanks for the answer! maybe you could help me get the hang of it here, where should I start learning?

[cr1776]

Bitcoin plunged more than 10% Thursday, sparking a hunt for reasons the notoriously volatile asset was selling off. One that captured attention questioned the very viability of the token itself -- though it turned out not to be cause for concern.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-21/bitcoin-plunge-has-newbies-scrambling-to-google-double-spend

Please tell me it is all fake!   This is hilarious! I mean, come on, this is 2021! Noobs please go and use Ethereum, EOS, Tezos, Polkadot, whatever you like.
Leave us bitcoin, for god's sake! It is not for you  

I think I have it all figured out, thanks for the answer! maybe you could help me get the hang of it here, where should I start learning?

Just start reading.  

Of course, much depends on your focus:  are you looking for developer information, user information, news, discussions, trading info (in my opinion, a bad idea, better to just buy and wait) or something else?  

And whatever you do, if you have a private key, never share it with anyone.  Likewise, there will be people wanting to get people involved in what are likely Ponzi schemes - if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

[wbich]

Bitcoin plunged more than 10% Thursday, sparking a hunt for reasons the notoriously volatile asset was selling off. One that captured attention questioned the very viability of the token itself -- though it turned out not to be cause for concern.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-21/bitcoin-plunge-has-newbies-scrambling-to-google-double-spend

Please tell me it is all fake!   This is hilarious! I mean, come on, this is 2021! Noobs please go and use Ethereum, EOS, Tezos, Polkadot, whatever you like.
Leave us bitcoin, for god's sake! It is not for you  

I think I have it all figured out, thanks for the answer! maybe you could help me get the hang of it here, where should I start learning?

Just start reading.  

Of course, much depends on your focus:  are you looking for developer information, user information, news, discussions, trading info (in my opinion, a bad idea, better to just buy and wait) or something else?  

And whatever you do, if you have a private key, never share it with anyone.  Likewise, there will be people wanting to get people involved in what are likely Ponzi schemes - if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Thank you for the tips! 
As my grandmother used to say "free cheese only in a mousetrap". Although she has hardly ever been an investor or visited this forum

[acquafredda]

Bitcoin plunged more than 10% Thursday, sparking a hunt for reasons the notoriously volatile asset was selling off. One that captured attention questioned the very viability of the token itself -- though it turned out not to be cause for concern.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-21/bitcoin-plunge-has-newbies-scrambling-to-google-double-spend

Please tell me it is all fake!   This is hilarious! I mean, come on, this is 2021! Noobs please go and use Ethereum, EOS, Tezos, Polkadot, whatever you like.
Leave us bitcoin, for god's sake! It is not for you  

I think I have it all figured out, thanks for the answer! maybe you could help me get the hang of it here, where should I start learning?

Just start reading.  

Of course, much depends on your focus:  are you looking for developer information, user information, news, discussions, trading info (in my opinion, a bad idea, better to just buy and wait) or something else?  

And whatever you do, if you have a private key, never share it with anyone.  Likewise, there will be people wanting to get people involved in what are likely Ponzi schemes - if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Thank you for the tips! 
As my grandmother used to say "free cheese only in a mousetrap". Although she has hardly ever been an investor or visited this forum

And if you have a lot of spare time to start researching on all things bitcoin you may refer to this useful collection of guides made available right here on the forum by the great LoyceV
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4928968.0
The guides related to bitcoin, even when a bit outdated, are still great!