0
0

reform bitcoin, recover funds from hackers (self.Bitcoin)

remarkeble が 投稿

As Bitfinex users, we have 60 million reasons to reform bitcoin to allow recovery of stolen funds, when the case is as clear as this. There's no use yelling at Bitfinex, they don't have the money to pay us. We should band together for our interests as well as for a better bitcoin. Stolen property does not belong to the stealer, this is the ageless principle. I will share my own idea below and I hope to hear other ideas too.

全 45 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]CobraSC101redditor for 28 days [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Not a goddamn chance.

Nice try, though. And appropriate timing to advance your agenda!

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

you could be a hacker to be this committed to protecting thieves

[–]Dnars [スコア非表示]  (26子コメント)

Wouldn't there be a problem with the fact that anyone can generate an address anyway.

I sympathize with your loss, but nothing will stop crypto being stolen if its not protected properly in the first place.

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (25子コメント)

the blacklisting will stop the thieve's wallet from spending more funds. A reversal can be done by the mining software by destroying coins in the blacklisted wallet and creating new coins in the source wallet.

[–]arcrad [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Please stop trying to kill bitcoin. You will get your coins back and they will be worthless.

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

it will be worth a lot more, because the criminals will become scared.

[–]big_fig [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

This wouldn't scare anyone, as they still will have lost nothing but a little of their time.

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

the people that do this, they probably spent years targeting the money that's spread around, right now one or two groups "succeed" one or two times per year

[–]big_fig [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

And there are plenty that don't succeed, yet people still do it, which is why turning this guys attempt into a failed attempt won't scare him.

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

it will be a big difference if the chance for a big theft drops to zero.

[–]big_fig [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It will be a big difference because bitcoin will go away if they do that, it will crumble.

[–]arcrad [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yeah scared because bitcoin will become worthless.

[–]akkounterr [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It wouldn't scare me if I was the one who was trying to steal the coins, I'd just look at it as another part of the challenge. Imo, blacklisting anything on the bitcoin network is a terrible idea.

[–]Dnars [スコア非表示]  (14子コメント)

I don't think this is the problem of Bitcoin. As soon as you start talking about "bitcoin security foundation", that is a central authority, opposite what Bitcoin/Blockchain is all about.

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

it's not any more central than the handful of developers who create and approve bitcoin code.

[–]Dnars [スコア非表示]  (12子コメント)

No it's not, the handful of developers do not decide which exchange is good (secure) exchange and which is not. There is no logic in the code to say:

if exchange_name == "a"
  allow to use BTC
else 
   exit

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

it's not about exchange, it's about locking obviously ill gotten funds.

[–]kinderfineredditor for 1 month [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Not how bitcoin works. Go use paypal!

[–]jmw74 [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

Define "obvious"

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

Bitcoin Compensation Initiative holds open hearing for a year, no one with a sane mind thinks the money belong to the attacker, and show it in their public comments and voting. The miners agree BCI is sane and continue to honor their requests.

[–]jmw74 [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

Bitcoin defines "belongs" as "whoever has the private key".

This is well known and well understood. If you don't want what currently "belongs" to you to "belong" to someone else, then don't let them get the private key.

I realize this can be difficult but at least the rules are simple and don't involve human judgment. I, and many in the bitcoin community, prefer to keep it that way.

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

whether you claim this is what the community prefers, this rule doesn't make any sense. This means no intermediary is ever responsible for any of the user's bitcoin, no trust or commerce is possible with the scheme you describe. The fact is bitcoin is treated as property by U.S. government, the silkroad guys had their bitcoins taken away and auctioned as confiscated property. A technical convenience does not define title to property, there are societal norms that are contrary to what you claimed.

[–]dogecrypton [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

this is a mess. just dont fork btc dude

[–]jmw74 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

These ideas have been talked about already, you should search bitcointalk.

There's all kinds of unintended consequences of any scheme to either claw back, or burn, stolen funds.

[–]remarkeble[S] [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

if there aren't well known, easily understood consequences, the issue probably just hasn't been pursued aggressively enough.

[–]jmw74 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I guess you know what you need to do, then.