3 ms·

Perhaps a rogue FBI/etc agent is trying to steal it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/dea-agents-charged-steal

Perhaps a rogue FBI/etc agent is trying to steal it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/dea-agents-charged-stealing-bitcoins-selling-info-silk-road-leaders-n332681 https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/dea-agents-charged-st...

the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
You would be pretty dumb trying to do that.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  Such is the way with many crimes, yet they still happen. If your model of human behavior assumes rationality and intelligence, then you have a huge blind-spot.
  - sshine 4y ago
    > If your model of human behavior assumes rationality and intelligence, then you have a huge blind-spot. Is stealing irrational and/or unintelligent? I'd rather say: If your model of human behavior assumes agreeableness, cooperation and risk-minimization, then you have a huge blind-spot.
    - lazide 4y ago
      Stealing when it’s extremely likely you’ll be caught in short order is irrational and unintelligent. And happens all the time.
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      I concede that it's technically possible there is some circumstance here that could make it rational. But speaking generally,a solidly middle class federal employee, with a comfortable pension ahead of him, stealing crypto from the federal government? That's stupid. If this is what happened (again), he'll almost certainly be caught, or spend the rest of his life on the run. We're not talking about a starving man stealing a loaf of bread. That would be a rational theft.
- bbbbb5 4y ago
  How come? Assuming multiple people have had access to the keys, it's hardly a given that you'd be caught. Just use Tails or similar to transfer the money to a wallet you control, and don't touch it until many years later when you've moved to another country. The $ figure where it starts to make sense for a FBI agent to flee to China or Russia probably isn't all that high. You could even pick from a much longer list of countries if you were patient enough to wait until you gain citizenship, many countries won't extradite their nationals.
- throw_a_grenade 4y ago
  Coincidentally, police have max IQ over which they don't hire. In other words, you need to be at least $X dumb to join the police.
  - sshine 4y ago
    That's not true. It's just that the police does not generally pay well, so if you're smart, you often have more profitable options. So usually the smart people in the police have other reasons to be there than money, and the dumb people may not have better options.
    - Tuna-Fish 4y ago
      As a general statement it is not true. That is, not every police force in the US (or the world) does this. However, it is absolutely true of some police forces. The often cited example is the 2nd circuit appeals court case Robert Jordan vs City of New London, where the police department successfully defended a hard cutoff maximum IQ test score.
      - tptacek 4y ago
        This is a case from 1996, in which a group of towns created a pool of candidates for a bunch of different jobs based on a civil service exam that included the Wonderlic test, and then assigned ranges of scores to different jobs. A survey done shortly after the appeals case, at a police management training course (at the University of Louisville), found that actual police, with experience ranging from 7-33 years, overwhelmingly disagreed with the premise of that scoring system. It seems likely that the New London situation was anomalous.
      - sshine 4y ago
        Thank you for clarifying. That is absolutely mind-boggling.

the_mitsuhiko 4y ago

You would be pretty dumb trying to do that.

LarryMullins 4y ago
Such is the way with many crimes, yet they still happen. If your model of human behavior assumes rationality and intelligence, then you have a huge blind-spot.
- sshine 4y ago
  > If your model of human behavior assumes rationality and intelligence, then you have a huge blind-spot. Is stealing irrational and/or unintelligent? I'd rather say: If your model of human behavior assumes agreeableness, cooperation and risk-minimization, then you have a huge blind-spot.
  - lazide 4y ago
    Stealing when it’s extremely likely you’ll be caught in short order is irrational and unintelligent. And happens all the time.
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    I concede that it's technically possible there is some circumstance here that could make it rational. But speaking generally,a solidly middle class federal employee, with a comfortable pension ahead of him, stealing crypto from the federal government? That's stupid. If this is what happened (again), he'll almost certainly be caught, or spend the rest of his life on the run. We're not talking about a starving man stealing a loaf of bread. That would be a rational theft.
bbbbb5 4y ago
How come? Assuming multiple people have had access to the keys, it's hardly a given that you'd be caught. Just use Tails or similar to transfer the money to a wallet you control, and don't touch it until many years later when you've moved to another country. The $ figure where it starts to make sense for a FBI agent to flee to China or Russia probably isn't all that high. You could even pick from a much longer list of countries if you were patient enough to wait until you gain citizenship, many countries won't extradite their nationals.
throw_a_grenade 4y ago
Coincidentally, police have max IQ over which they don't hire. In other words, you need to be at least $X dumb to join the police.
- sshine 4y ago
  That's not true. It's just that the police does not generally pay well, so if you're smart, you often have more profitable options. So usually the smart people in the police have other reasons to be there than money, and the dumb people may not have better options.
  - Tuna-Fish 4y ago
    As a general statement it is not true. That is, not every police force in the US (or the world) does this. However, it is absolutely true of some police forces. The often cited example is the 2nd circuit appeals court case Robert Jordan vs City of New London, where the police department successfully defended a hard cutoff maximum IQ test score.
    - tptacek 4y ago
      This is a case from 1996, in which a group of towns created a pool of candidates for a bunch of different jobs based on a civil service exam that included the Wonderlic test, and then assigned ranges of scores to different jobs. A survey done shortly after the appeals case, at a police management training course (at the University of Louisville), found that actual police, with experience ranging from 7-33 years, overwhelmingly disagreed with the premise of that scoring system. It seems likely that the New London situation was anomalous.
    - sshine 4y ago
      Thank you for clarifying. That is absolutely mind-boggling.