7 ms·

Another ouch >Messages popping up in public Discord servers of random people grabbing $3K-$20K from the Nomad bridge - all one had to do was copy the first hac

• wnevets 4y ago
  Since "code is law" doesn't that mean it wasn't a robbery? They were just following the law.
  • adrr 4y ago
    It will be interesting to see if they can prosecute people. They are called smart contracts and talked about being the actual contract.
    • vkou 4y ago
      People have been prosecuted for this sort of stuff over the past few years. 'Code is law' is just a reddit meme at this point, that has no basis in reality. 'Smart contracts' are just regular contracts, but with more opportunities for theft.
      • lottin 4y ago
        I'm pretty sure smart contracts aren't contracts. They're pieces of computer code.
  • arlcode 4y ago
    Contracts (smart or not) cannot override the law. I'm not a lawyer but I would be very surprised if courts in most countries would buy this argument. Spelling or grammatical mistakes usually don't invalidate contracts in the real world and robbing a poorly secured vault is still illegal. The thief was obviously trying to get other people's money without their consent.
    • wnevets 4y ago
      If that is true then this decentralized utopia I heard so much about sure does require a lot of centralization.
      • johnebgd 4y ago
        You can’t bring rational thoughts and facts into an emotional conversation.
      • renewiltord 4y ago
        There are advantages to centralization. One may reasonably ask if trad-fi centralization is at the optimal level. This is just one way to spend money to see if the optimal level is below that. Lobbying for regulation is a mechanism to spend money to see if the optimal level is above that.
    • koolba 4y ago
      The only agreed upon contract here is the one on the chain. I’d love for this type of thing to be tested in court. I’d invest in popcorn futures ahead of that trial.
      • arlcode 4y ago
        Contracts are invalidated all the time. If they do that and if they get hold of the individual (or their assets) the court can force compliance in the usual ways. "I can't access it and never will be able to" is not a believable excuse unless you can prove it.
        • lottin 4y ago
          A "smart contract" isn't a contract in any sense of the word, so I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.
      • verdverm 4y ago
        Make sure you do it with a defi flash loan
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • TrapLord_Rhodo 4y ago
    Nope - It's not a robbery. The old mantra of possession is 9/10ths of the law is and always has been false. If i have something i own it. That is the one fundamental truth. Now someone can come and try and take it back from me by force (Person, Court System, Rebels, Corporations) if they can exert more violence on 'me' than i can exert on 'Them'. The problem with crypto is the 'keys' are what crypto is. No nationstate can come and take that away from me. They can kill/imprison/fine me, but then neither of us will have it. You would have to hack/fork the chain for that to happen (Which has happened) or find some social way around it (If i have it on a centralized exchange, if i have a hackable hard drive, found my keys on AWS, etc etc.) Additionally, with things like Monero, and tornado swap good luck trying to find them.
    • SilasX 4y ago
      But it's not as simple as a robbery, like they forced their way in, or gained access to a key that its owner attempted to keep private. If you offer a sheep for 100 lb of apples, and someone accepts and gives you the 100 lb of apples, you owe them a sheep, even if you later think that deal was a bad use of that sheep. If you say "currency is to move and out of my bank/warehouse according to these rules, conducted by this robot", and someone finds a profitable way to transact with that robot according to those rules, you have arguably signed away those profits to that someone, and they are then entitled to keep what the rule-implementing robot gave them. This doesn't mean "code is law" actually works as a defense in court -- there are are all kinds of reason why that promise might be unenforceable -- but you can't casually asset that this is a robbery without examining the specifics of how the transfer happened.
      • rhodorhoades 4y ago
        Even if you can prove ‘robbery’ in the courts, the courts have no ability to follow up on their threats like they would in the normal financial system. That’s my point.
    • gspetr 4y ago
      Pray tell how your threat model would handle this: https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
• rmbyrro 4y ago
  > the first decentralized robbery thanks for the loud laugh
• chatmasta 4y ago
  It looks like somebody had a bridge to sell them.
• some_random 4y ago
  >the first decentralized robbery This is the funniest thing I've read all day
• cellis 4y ago
  It wasn’t a robbery! It was engineers dutifully executing the smart contract according to its terms!
• kwertyoowiyop 4y ago
  DeFi meets DeRob.