4 ms·

This article is riddled with factual errors, outright deception, and logical fallacies. It makes a variety of attempts to scare the reader (what if "Bitcoin get

by ihsw 13y ago

This article is riddled with factual errors, outright deception, and logical fallacies. It makes a variety of attempts to scare the reader (what if "Bitcoin gets hacked"? utter nonsense). They even make a claim that Bitcoin's anonymity may appeal to users, but it's been stressed repeatedly and constantly that the BTC transaction network is far from anonymous. Here is an excellent 3 minute video summary on Bitcoin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdVVECKKSXo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdVVECKKSXo Far more informative and far less spin. It's even from Bloomberg -- the same news organization that's affording blog hosting to article's author.

etchalon 13y ago
As far as I can tell, nothing in the article is factually inaccurate. Why is it nonsense that Bitcoin _might_ get hacked? It's entirely possible, though perhaps improbable.
- ihsw 13y ago
  The article writer describes "the system" getting hacked, but links to malware searching for wallet files. It's deceptive at best, and blatant lying at worst.
  - throwaway19047 13y ago
    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. This author doesn't know what he's talking about. Another example: He shows how the SEC can regulate the major bitcoin-cash exchanges, but the author never notices that there is a plenty large enough economy just inside the bitcoin network. The SEC can't regulate you if you use an anonymous Internet connection, and never exchange for real-world cash.
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      > The SEC can't regulate you if you use an anonymous Internet connection, and never exchange for real-world cash. The SEC can regulate you if you do that and still fall within their jurisdiction. You may be meaning to argue that the SEC would have difficulty identifying and prosecuting illegal activity within their regulatory jurisdiction if you do that, but that's a very different argument than "cannot regulate".
    - etchalon 13y ago
      This and other comments seems to assume "can regulate" means "can enforce 100% of the time".
- eksith 13y ago
  How does one "hack" Bitcoin? Not snark; I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this mentioned quite a number of times. Do you mean your computer could be compromised? If so, then is that any different than a house going up in flames with money under mattress? Article mentions "Unlike gold or silver, Bitcoins have no intrinsic uses" which is true, but then fiat money has value not because the paper/fabric/plastic blended note and ink add up to what's printed on the face. In that regard Bitcoin has value on faith as well.
  - mkr-hn 13y ago
    All it takes is someone finding a bug in a popular client that gives control over transactions. A bitcoin stealing worm seems inevitable.
    - eksith 13y ago
      Then it's still the same as a trojan surreptitiously stealing bank account info and siphoning off the funds. I think we have to face the fact that digital currency (fiat terms) and Bitcoin are essentially the same except for the means of generation. "Money" is printed when physically present, but once stored in the bank, that's converted to bits and the physical notes (depending on wear) are destroyed. Also the fact that there's no equivalent for FDIC et al. for Bitcoin losses.
  - ihsw 13y ago
    Surprisingly (or not), there is a Bitcoin wiki[1] that is actively maintained. Here is a short list of weaknesses: * Wallet Vulnerable To Theft: malware searching and downloading wallets * No authentication for IP transfers: you can send transactions to IP addresses, this is vulnerable to MITM attacks and someone can re-route transactions to a different IP address * Energy Consumption: electricity has a variable and external cost, which can be manipulated * Illegal content in the block chain: arbitrary data can be included transactions, including binary data (eg: child pornography) * Breaking the cryptography: Bitcoin uses SHA-256 and ECDSA, this isn't vulnerable now but it could be in the future * Double-spending[2] * Coin destruction: if your wallet file is deleted, your coins are gone forever Obviously wallet theft is the biggest issue, especially with using third-party wallet services and running insecure operating systems (ie: old versions of OSes). There are a variety of reliable learning resources for managing your wallet files securely. [1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses [2] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Double-spending#51.25_attack https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Double-spending#51.25_attack
- tlrobinson 13y ago
  The author likely has no idea what Bitcoin getting "hacked" means. He linked to a piece about malware that can steal individual user's Bitcoin wallets, not some actual or potential systemic flaw.

by ihsw 13y ago

etchalon 13y ago

As far as I can tell, nothing in the article is factually inaccurate. Why is it nonsense that Bitcoin _might_ get hacked? It's entirely possible, though perhaps improbable.

ihsw 13y ago
The article writer describes "the system" getting hacked, but links to malware searching for wallet files. It's deceptive at best, and blatant lying at worst.
- throwaway19047 13y ago
  Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. This author doesn't know what he's talking about. Another example: He shows how the SEC can regulate the major bitcoin-cash exchanges, but the author never notices that there is a plenty large enough economy just inside the bitcoin network. The SEC can't regulate you if you use an anonymous Internet connection, and never exchange for real-world cash.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > The SEC can't regulate you if you use an anonymous Internet connection, and never exchange for real-world cash. The SEC can regulate you if you do that and still fall within their jurisdiction. You may be meaning to argue that the SEC would have difficulty identifying and prosecuting illegal activity within their regulatory jurisdiction if you do that, but that's a very different argument than "cannot regulate".
  - etchalon 13y ago
    This and other comments seems to assume "can regulate" means "can enforce 100% of the time".
eksith 13y ago
How does one "hack" Bitcoin? Not snark; I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this mentioned quite a number of times. Do you mean your computer could be compromised? If so, then is that any different than a house going up in flames with money under mattress? Article mentions "Unlike gold or silver, Bitcoins have no intrinsic uses" which is true, but then fiat money has value not because the paper/fabric/plastic blended note and ink add up to what's printed on the face. In that regard Bitcoin has value on faith as well.
- mkr-hn 13y ago
  All it takes is someone finding a bug in a popular client that gives control over transactions. A bitcoin stealing worm seems inevitable.
  - eksith 13y ago
    Then it's still the same as a trojan surreptitiously stealing bank account info and siphoning off the funds. I think we have to face the fact that digital currency (fiat terms) and Bitcoin are essentially the same except for the means of generation. "Money" is printed when physically present, but once stored in the bank, that's converted to bits and the physical notes (depending on wear) are destroyed. Also the fact that there's no equivalent for FDIC et al. for Bitcoin losses.
- ihsw 13y ago
  Surprisingly (or not), there is a Bitcoin wiki[1] that is actively maintained. Here is a short list of weaknesses: * Wallet Vulnerable To Theft: malware searching and downloading wallets * No authentication for IP transfers: you can send transactions to IP addresses, this is vulnerable to MITM attacks and someone can re-route transactions to a different IP address * Energy Consumption: electricity has a variable and external cost, which can be manipulated * Illegal content in the block chain: arbitrary data can be included transactions, including binary data (eg: child pornography) * Breaking the cryptography: Bitcoin uses SHA-256 and ECDSA, this isn't vulnerable now but it could be in the future * Double-spending[2] * Coin destruction: if your wallet file is deleted, your coins are gone forever Obviously wallet theft is the biggest issue, especially with using third-party wallet services and running insecure operating systems (ie: old versions of OSes). There are a variety of reliable learning resources for managing your wallet files securely. [1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses [2] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Double-spending#51.25_attack https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Double-spending#51.25_attack
tlrobinson 13y ago
The author likely has no idea what Bitcoin getting "hacked" means. He linked to a piece about malware that can steal individual user's Bitcoin wallets, not some actual or potential systemic flaw.