Dev.SN ♥ developers
Sections
Dev.SN
from the we-promise-we-won't-have-BTC-news-every-day dept.
juggs writes:
"In yet another (un)surprising twist in the ongoing MtGox bitcoin exchange collapse saga, the BBC reports that MtGox has managed to find 200,000 Bitcoins tucked away in a wallet that had been lying unused and assumed empty since 2011.
From the brief FA:
The firm said it found the bitcoins worth around $116m USD (£70m GBP) in an old digital wallet from 2011. That brings the total number of bitcoins the firm lost down to 650,000 from 850,000.
This revelation, as court disclosure hearings are currently in progress, seems to be conveniently timed. Perhaps Mark Karpeles (CEO MtGox) and his legal team think this is a good move, maybe to cast an illusion of incompetence rather than malice in the run up to the no doubt long running court battles ahead in many jurisdictions.
Can even the most incompetent CEO lose track of $116m USD of assets for 3 years or so (~23.529% of the originally claimed lost assets)? I suppose the courts will decide ultimately.
In other Bitcoin related news, Bitcoin Core 0.9.0 was released 19th March 2014: Bitcoin v0.9.0 release
This update apparently closes many transaction malleability loopholes that MtGox alleges are how it was denuded of its assets. Not that it would have helped MtGox in any way, they apparently chose to not update their implementation despite the malleability issues already being publicly aired and functional workarounds being publicized within the Bitcoin community.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by sl4shd0rk on Friday March 21 2014, @09:53AM
They sift through a lot of crap every day and it's bound to increase. Firehose is busted in this version of Slashcode so the crowd-sourced filtering isn't going to happen until someone gets the initiative to make it happen. Until then, rest assured mistakes in editing are simply that. Mistakes. Applying the same level of irritability with Slashdot editors here on SN is not logical.
(Score: 2, Funny) by ticho on Friday March 21 2014, @10:34AM
I agree with the irritability, but we really should hold them to higher standards and quality proofreading.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Friday March 21 2014, @10:54AM
We're not irritated at the editor, just poking fun at a mistake. And the editor in question fixed it, so we're not even doing that any more.
There's a world of difference between that and (with some evidence) accusing at least one editor of that other site of getting paid off by particular bloggers to raise their Google search rankings and page views by using links from the then-reputable site to their own blogs.
Every task is easy if somebody else is doing it.
(Score: 1) by Fnord666 on Friday March 21 2014, @07:31PM
Do they really? Are that many people actually submitting stories to SN?