3 ms·
>> you would think people in his position would know what private keys are and how to secure Bitcoin funds they pretend to "seize" How exactly would you have h
by mNovak 4y ago
>> you would think people in his position would know what private keys are and how to secure Bitcoin funds they pretend to "seize"
How exactly would you have handled this differently? They were well aware the account could be recovered via mnemonic, but they couldn't move the funds because they didn't have the PIN.
- giancarlostoro 4y agoSounds like they did not truly secure the crypto then. Shouldn't call it seizing if you don't have it digitally in your own secure wallet.
- bfung 4y agoWait until the prosecutors learn about gas fees. XD
- sidewndr46 4y agoBut what will they say at the press conference then?
- mianos 4y agoThey should say they have identified the account. I cant see them having anything else.
- netheril96 4y agoDon’t call it seizing then.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- bryanrasmussen 4y agoobviously if they call it seizing and are willing to make the case in court that they had it seized, then the 'stealing' of it is a separate crime that probably has even worse penalties given that the argument would be it was stolen from government secured storage. Which I guess would make for an interesting case. If they don't charge for another theft then it would be obvious that they don't believe enough in that they had it 'seized' and that what happened was a 'theft'. on edit: I guess I need to go find it on archive.org to figure out if that has happened or not though.