4 ms·

the story you are commenting on is a good example it should not be this easy to lose sixteen million dollars

• patejam 9y ago
  I feel like we shouldn't be expressed in dollars, but in percentage of total funds. In this case 16 million is about 1% of the total. This would be a $16 billion case if the US banking system was the target and used this technology.
  • rubidium 9y ago
    That... doesn't make a difference in my mind. Losing 1% of people's money is _very_ unacceptable and worth being laughed at for. Financial institutions are accurate to tiny tiny fractions of percentage points. Not "eh we got 99% of it right".
    • hinkley 9y ago
      Especially when the odds are that it will happen again soon.
• Will_Do 9y ago
  Yes. If a similar scale thing were to happen in the U.S. banking system, 1% would be 160 billion dollars, not 16. I'm amazed that otherwise intelligence people really believe this is a better system than fiat currencies + banks.
  • JohnJamesRambo 9y ago
    *intelligent
  • xrd 9y ago
    Microtransactions.