What is sensible about not noticing that you were being robbed of a significant portion of your assets for years on end?
The Wall Street debacles were nothing like this. Those were market bubbles. While there may be a market bubble popped by this the thing popping it is this theft. Perhaps they meant that the theft occurred all at once. If so it is more believable but still, from what I know about "cold" vs "hot"storage, it doesn't work that way. On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > > My take on the document is that it makes no sense for the following simple >> reason: >> >> If you take a look at the page that says "Financial Assets and >> Liabilities", they list their Bitcoin assets as "2,000" and the Bitcoin >> liabilities as "744,408" all of which they count as "theft" that took place >> over a 5 year period. >> >> That means that over a period of 5 years, they lost 99.7% of their >> Bitcoins and didn't notice it until recently. >> > > What does not make sense about that? People often make stupid mistakes and > lose vast sums of money. See Wall Street 1929, 2008. > > Back in the 1980s, medium sized companies went out of business because > they had large computer systems crash without a backup. > > - - - - - - - - - > > Assuming this document is legitimate, whoever wrote it seems stupid to me. > It says: > > "At this 744,408 BTC are missing due to malleability-related theft which > went unnoticed for several years. The cold storage has been wiped out due > to a leak in the hot wallet. . . . > > We believe in the value of the coin, its potential to change the world, > and its principles of transparency . . ." > > I do not know what "cold storage" or a "hot wallet" means, but evidently > they are cybernetic. They are virtual entities. Clearly, if this is true > they don't work well. They are unreliable. So why does this author believe > in the value of them? What is "transparent" about a software system the > hides the theft of 700,000 units? That would be opaque. This makes no sense > to me. If you put your money in a bank vault and come back a week later to > find the money is gone, why would you continue to believe the vault is a > safe place to put your money? > > - Jed > >
