bter hacked and lost 50m nxt

[madalieninvader]

I don't care if they roll it back or not. It just made more widely known the problem that there is, with difficulty, the possibility of a rollback.

I hope our crypto innovators will make rollbacks an impossibility, or near impossibility in the future. Like the way I can't use brute computing force to get your private keys to an address without the help of a quantuum computer from 40 years in the future.

[1714563024]

1714563024

[1714563024]

1714563024

[1714563024]

1714563024

[1714563024]

1714563024

[powganima]

btc itself is going into the toilet.  It just broke 500 and no signs of slowing. 

[Nautica]

Now we will see if NXT is decentralized or not


rollback = centralized

This ^.

I think it is so funny how coins like Vericoin and now NXT tout themselves as a "DECENTRALIZED" currency. But when a large hack occurs ... "oops can we just roll back the chain this one time?"

lol

That actually confirms the decentralised nature of it. Nobody in particular can choose to roll back, that has to be reached through a democratic decision built through a decentralised consensus. It's the very definition of decentralisation. What you are talking about is Laissez-Faire politics, where you just don't care about stopping the thief.

[Este Nuno]

Now we will see if NXT is decentralized or not


rollback = centralized

This ^.

I think it is so funny how coins like Vericoin and now NXT tout themselves as a "DECENTRALIZED" currency. But when a large hack occurs ... "oops can we just roll back the chain this one time?"

lol

I don't necessarily support rollbacks. But as we've gone over many times in this thread, a group of miners/forgers deciding on what chain to continue on is clearly decentralised. Just because you don't like an idea doesn't mean you can just apply an erroneous label to it.

[madalieninvader]

btc itself is going into the toilet.  It just broke 500 and no signs of slowing. 

Could be just more merchant adoption, as merchants often insta sell for USD. I think in the long term this is good for bitcoin.

[Este Nuno]

btc itself is going into the toilet.  It just broke 500 and no signs of slowing. 

Headlines:

NXT Theft causes Bitcoin crash!

Threat of NXT rollback causes widespread loss of confidence in Bitcoin!

[mr_random]

Now we will see if NXT is decentralized or not


rollback = centralized

This ^.

I think it is so funny how coins like Vericoin and now NXT tout themselves as a "DECENTRALIZED" currency. But when a large hack occurs ... "oops can we just roll back the chain this one time?"

lol

If you do your research you'll see the Vericoin rollback was simply decided by the Vericoin devs by themselves. Whereas NXT allowed the outcome to be decided via voting with your NXT (seems decentralised to me). And overwhelming the votes are in favour of no rollback, which is being respected.

[poncho32]

im trying to get my bitcoins off right now, as im a bit worried, so anyone else having issues withdrawing there coins?

Has your bitcoin withdrawal worked yet?

[EvilDave]

Now we will see if NXT is decentralized or not


rollback = centralized

This ^.

I think it is so funny how coins like Vericoin and now NXT tout themselves as a "DECENTRALIZED" currency. But when a large hack occurs ... "oops can we just roll back the chain this one time?"

lol

Except that you're not listening.....NXT is not going to do a rollback on this, the power to make the decision lies with the community. not the devs.
The timeframe for a partial rollback is going to be over soon, so we can then move on to chasing the thief in the old-fashioned way.....

[EvilDave]

I don't care if they roll it back or not. It just made more widely known the problem that there is, with difficulty, the possibility of a rollback.

I hope our crypto innovators will make rollbacks an impossibility, or near impossibility in the future. Like the way I can't use brute computing force to get your private keys to an address without the help of a quantuum computer from 40 years in the future.

When Transparent Forging is implemented within NXT, the timeframe for a rollback will be only 10 blocks/minutes.
Right now, its 720blocks/12 hours, so even that window is now effectively closed.

[devphp]

When Transparent Forging is implemented within NXT, the timeframe for a rollback will be only 10 blocks/minutes.
Right now, its 720blocks/12 hours, so even that window is now effectively closed.

Well, not yet, it will close at block 210605, which would be 720 blocks after the hack.

[Amph]

btc itself is going into the toilet.  It just broke 500 and no signs of slowing. 

like it's a new thing lol

nothing new really, we have seen that many time

[jokumat]

That actually confirms the decentralised nature of it. Nobody in particular can choose to roll back, that has to be reached through a democratic decision built through a decentralised consensus. It's the very definition of decentralisation. What you are talking about is Laissez-Faire politics, where you just don't care about stopping the thief.

I don't necessarily support rollbacks. But as we've gone over many times in this thread, a group of miners/forgers deciding on what chain to continue on is clearly decentralised. Just because you don't like an idea doesn't mean you can just apply an erroneous label to it.

well in your understanding 
centralized=decision of one person or maybe a few of persons
decentralized= decision of many people, majority wins

in my understanding
decentralized= individual decision of each and every person about their own property within the limit of given rules (code)
centralized= anybody (be it one person or many persons) can make arbitrary decisions about anybody elses's property

the whole purpose of Bitcoin or any other decent crypto as a technical solution is to guarantee that nobody can make arbitrary decisions about anybody else's property. This is why I am ready to call them decentralized solutions. Everybody has to follow the same rules. Majority of hashing power is used as a best way to prevent attacks, best incentive to stick to the code.  But in your undestanding one specific majority can make arbitrary decisions. 

whatever the result of the vote, I have serious misgivings about cryptocurrencies - just an existence of such a vote is bad

[Chris001]

Now we will see if NXT is decentralized or not


rollback = centralized

This ^.

I think it is so funny how coins like Vericoin and now NXT tout themselves as a "DECENTRALIZED" currency. But when a large hack occurs ... "oops can we just roll back the chain this one time?"

lol

+ 1000

You can say it is decentralized as many as you can type a post, it does't change the fact

Rollback = centralized

There's really no other way to describe it. I'm amazed at what people around here will label "decentralized"

"but they voted, so it's not centralized" GTFO LOL SMH   

[Chris001]

That actually confirms the decentralised nature of it. Nobody in particular can choose to roll back, that has to be reached through a democratic decision built through a decentralised consensus. It's the very definition of decentralisation. What you are talking about is Laissez-Faire politics, where you just don't care about stopping the thief.

I don't necessarily support rollbacks. But as we've gone over many times in this thread, a group of miners/forgers deciding on what chain to continue on is clearly decentralised. Just because you don't like an idea doesn't mean you can just apply an erroneous label to it.

well in your understanding 
centralized=decision of one person or maybe a few of persons
decentralized= decision of many people, majority wins

in my understanding
decentralized= individual decision of each and every person about their own property within the limit of given rules (code)
centralized= anybody (be it one person or many persons) can make arbitrary decisions about anybody elses's property

the whole purpose of Bitcoin or any other decent crypto as a technical solution is to guarantee that nobody can make arbitrary decisions about anybody else's property. This is why I am ready to call them decentralized solutions. Everybody has to follow the same rules. Majority of hashing power is used as a best way to prevent attacks, best incentive to stick to the code.  But in your undestanding one specific majority can make arbitrary decisions. 

whatever the result of the vote, I have serious misgivings about cryptocurrencies - just an existence of such a vote is bad

This is a very great explanation, he did a much better job explaining why I've wanted to punch my computer reading these "decentralized" posts for the last few hours.

Great post. So do you now understand everyone?

[cryptopaths]

If I have learned anything in the world of crypto. It's just when you think nothing can get worse just when you think everythings at an all time low Mark Karpeles will walk his fat fucking ass into the room and spill a boiling hot frappucino all over your computer. Mark my words thinks are about to get worse.

[madalieninvader]

That actually confirms the decentralised nature of it. Nobody in particular can choose to roll back, that has to be reached through a democratic decision built through a decentralised consensus. It's the very definition of decentralisation. What you are talking about is Laissez-Faire politics, where you just don't care about stopping the thief.

I don't necessarily support rollbacks. But as we've gone over many times in this thread, a group of miners/forgers deciding on what chain to continue on is clearly decentralised. Just because you don't like an idea doesn't mean you can just apply an erroneous label to it.

well in your understanding 
centralized=decision of one person or maybe a few of persons
decentralized= decision of many people, majority wins

in my understanding
decentralized= individual decision of each and every person about their own property within the limit of given rules (code)
centralized= anybody (be it one person or many persons) can make arbitrary decisions about anybody elses's property

the whole purpose of Bitcoin or any other decent crypto as a technical solution is to guarantee that nobody can make arbitrary decisions about anybody else's property. This is why I am ready to call them decentralized solutions. Everybody has to follow the same rules. Majority of hashing power is used as a best way to prevent attacks, best incentive to stick to the code.  But in your undestanding one specific majority can make arbitrary decisions. 

whatever the result of the vote, I have serious misgivings about cryptocurrencies - just an existence of such a vote is bad

This is what I've been trying to say but didn't know how. I'm not technological and economic ninja but I don't think this is insurmountable problem.

[cryptopaths]

50million bter "lost" nxt = 5% of nxt and $1.75m

800k btc (it is most likely more then that) that mt gox "lost" = about 7% of btc and $600m

If btc never rolled back how can nxt justify rolling back? If nxt do roll back they'll be looked at as a joke and a lot of people will lose confidence in it.

My advice to you is buy nxt when the price is tanking right now and I predict you'll make some decent profit.

[Este Nuno]

That actually confirms the decentralised nature of it. Nobody in particular can choose to roll back, that has to be reached through a democratic decision built through a decentralised consensus. It's the very definition of decentralisation. What you are talking about is Laissez-Faire politics, where you just don't care about stopping the thief.

I don't necessarily support rollbacks. But as we've gone over many times in this thread, a group of miners/forgers deciding on what chain to continue on is clearly decentralised. Just because you don't like an idea doesn't mean you can just apply an erroneous label to it.

well in your understanding 
centralized=decision of one person or maybe a few of persons
decentralized= decision of many people, majority wins

in my understanding
decentralized= individual decision of each and every person about their own property within the limit of given rules (code)
centralized= anybody (be it one person or many persons) can make arbitrary decisions about anybody elses's property

the whole purpose of Bitcoin or any other decent crypto as a technical solution is to guarantee that nobody can make arbitrary decisions about anybody else's property. This is why I am ready to call them decentralized solutions. Everybody has to follow the same rules. Majority of hashing power is used as a best way to prevent attacks, best incentive to stick to the code.  But in your undestanding one specific majority can make arbitrary decisions. 

whatever the result of the vote, I have serious misgivings about cryptocurrencies - just an existence of such a vote is bad

But you're wrong about what the purpose of Bitcoin is. It is designed so that it can change when a majority of people agree.

What your talking about is a completely different thing. And judging by the amount of people who agree with you perhaps someone should invent something similar. But it's not Bitcoin. And it's not any of the current cryptocurrencies, that is for sure.

You should have serious misgivings. I think a lot of people don't fully understand what is capable of happening. Imagine miners accepting changes  that benefit them at the cost of others. Now that might affect the price, but it's still possible.

[Coinr88]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralization