7 ms·

Kudos to Coinbase- I tried sending a small amount to the account after seeing Elon Musk's tweet, and Coinbase prevented the transaction from occurring.

celticninja 6y ago
Why would you do that?
- benjohnson 6y ago
  curiosity value > fractional bitcoin value
  - celticninja 6y ago
    It's also validates the scam for other users. When they see BTC being sent they are more likely to think it is genuine. I can see sending dust to track the coins but other than that it's a damn foolish idea.
    - MattGaiser 6y ago
      You can't stop stupid.
    - epanchin 6y ago
      I imagine there’s only a small overlap between users that know how to track transactions, and those that would fall for this.
      - SkyBelow 6y ago
        I'm actually kind of interested in exactly what sort of overlap that would be.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- davidlee1435 6y ago
  Curiosity, mostly. This was very soon after the tweet was posted, and it was less than a dollar.
Wingman4l7 6y ago
I'm betting Gemini also blacklisted that BTC address, especially considering that they were in the first wave of fake tweets. Now I'm wondering how much BTC the attacker effectively left on the table by reusing the same wallet address, especially considering that lots of people who deal in crypto use just a handful of exchanges to send it.
1-6 6y ago
They're well aware of this scam.
aazaa 6y ago
In time you may come to view this as a bug, not a feature.
- buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
  This is exactly what I was thinking. This has made me lose a lot of faith in crypto, not that I had a ton of faith to begin with. But I keep hearing people talk about blacklisting addresses and blocking transactions. That's scary stuff. How can people ever feel comfortable storing large amounts of money in crypto if the big players can simply block their address and make it near impossible to liquidize their money? I feel like this incident is showing Bitcoin's (at least what Bitcoin has grown to become) true colors.
  - eythian 6y ago
    That is not what's going on here. This is a company protecting its users from a scam. If you don't want that protection, it's quite feasible to not use that company and use one that doesn't do that, or manage your own wallet, or whatever.
    - thatoneuser 6y ago
      Obviously but that's not the point gp making. The tendency, as shown by many on this very forum, is to use these services. If BTC in theory is totally free and impervious to govt/banks, but in practice is highly controlled, then it's basically just traditional banking with more steps and vulnerability.
  - epanchin 6y ago
    If you’re a fan of crypto for its independence and decentralisation, you aren’t going to be storing your coins on coinbase. You will store them on your own hardware. Moving coins between wallets is simple, it would not be possible to simply block an address to prevent cashing out.
igammarays 6y ago
What was that about decentralized systems being immune to censorship again?
- tossAfterUsing 6y ago
  Coinbase is not decentralized.

celticninja 6y ago

Why would you do that?

benjohnson 6y ago
curiosity value > fractional bitcoin value
- celticninja 6y ago
  It's also validates the scam for other users. When they see BTC being sent they are more likely to think it is genuine. I can see sending dust to track the coins but other than that it's a damn foolish idea.
  - MattGaiser 6y ago
    You can't stop stupid.
  - epanchin 6y ago
    I imagine there’s only a small overlap between users that know how to track transactions, and those that would fall for this.
    - SkyBelow 6y ago
      I'm actually kind of interested in exactly what sort of overlap that would be.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
davidlee1435 6y ago
Curiosity, mostly. This was very soon after the tweet was posted, and it was less than a dollar.

Wingman4l7 6y ago

I'm betting Gemini also blacklisted that BTC address, especially considering that they were in the first wave of fake tweets. Now I'm wondering how much BTC the attacker effectively left on the table by reusing the same wallet address, especially considering that lots of people who deal in crypto use just a handful of exchanges to send it.

1-6 6y ago

They're well aware of this scam.

aazaa 6y ago

In time you may come to view this as a bug, not a feature.

buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
This is exactly what I was thinking. This has made me lose a lot of faith in crypto, not that I had a ton of faith to begin with. But I keep hearing people talk about blacklisting addresses and blocking transactions. That's scary stuff. How can people ever feel comfortable storing large amounts of money in crypto if the big players can simply block their address and make it near impossible to liquidize their money? I feel like this incident is showing Bitcoin's (at least what Bitcoin has grown to become) true colors.
- eythian 6y ago
  That is not what's going on here. This is a company protecting its users from a scam. If you don't want that protection, it's quite feasible to not use that company and use one that doesn't do that, or manage your own wallet, or whatever.
  - thatoneuser 6y ago
    Obviously but that's not the point gp making. The tendency, as shown by many on this very forum, is to use these services. If BTC in theory is totally free and impervious to govt/banks, but in practice is highly controlled, then it's basically just traditional banking with more steps and vulnerability.
- epanchin 6y ago
  If you’re a fan of crypto for its independence and decentralisation, you aren’t going to be storing your coins on coinbase. You will store them on your own hardware. Moving coins between wallets is simple, it would not be possible to simply block an address to prevent cashing out.

igammarays 6y ago

What was that about decentralized systems being immune to censorship again?

tossAfterUsing 6y ago
Coinbase is not decentralized.