Most active commenters
  • KetoManx64(11)
  • chaps(7)
  • (4)
  • immibis(4)
  • bhawks(4)
  • johnisgood(4)
  • Aurornis(3)
  • nightpool(3)
  • arcanemachiner(3)
  • bdangubic(3)

←back to thread

685 points jclarkcom | 120 comments | | HN request time: 1.277s | source | bottom
1. chaps ◴[] No.45948347[source]
Once did some programming/networking work for a company that did the networking of a office sharing building that Coinbase was running out of. Early in my work there I noticed that the company had its admin passwords written on a whiteboard -- visible from the hallway because they had glass for walls. So I sent them an email to ask that they remove it (I billed them for it).

Their fix was to put a piece of paper over the passwords.

What a time.

replies(4): >>45948409 #>>45948413 #>>45950978 #>>45970370 #
2. Aurornis ◴[] No.45948409[source]
> So I sent them an email to ask that they remove it (I billed them for it)

Sending unsolicited bills for unrequested services is a great way to make sure nobody takes your email seriously

replies(2): >>45948454 #>>45948734 #
3. 650REDHAIR ◴[] No.45948413[source]
This doesn’t surprise me at all.

Bitcoin, and really fintech as a whole, are beyond reckless.

replies(5): >>45948422 #>>45948453 #>>45948644 #>>45952637 #>>45953031 #
4. monero-xmr ◴[] No.45948422[source]
Ah yes, I remember all the times they hacked bitcoin
replies(5): >>45948425 #>>45948428 #>>45948530 #>>45948750 #>>45948924 #
5. ◴[] No.45948425{3}[source]
replies(1): >>45948473 #
6. jamespo ◴[] No.45948428{3}[source]
lol monero in username
7. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45948453[source]
Bitcoin is a crypto-currency/blockchain. Coinbase is a corporation that allows users to buy/trade crypto-currencies.

With Bitcoin you do not get government bailouts like what happened with the beyond reckless banks in 2008.

replies(4): >>45948733 #>>45948881 #>>45948941 #>>45950620 #
8. nightpool ◴[] No.45948454[source]
GP is saying that they were already one of Coinbase's vendors (they did the networking/IT setup for Coinbase's office). Whether you'd tolerate that kind of behavior from a vendor is one thing, but for an existing vendor relationship I think adding a few billable hours for "I found this issue in your network and documented and reported it for you" to an existing contract is not particularly unreasonable.
replies(4): >>45948735 #>>45948762 #>>45948885 #>>45950701 #
9. ◴[] No.45948473{4}[source]
10. 8organicbits ◴[] No.45948530{3}[source]
There's a great index of hacks here https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/?theme=hack

It's breathtaking how frequent these are.

replies(1): >>45948614 #
11. happyopossum ◴[] No.45948614{4}[source]
That’s like saying the $USD was hacked when a bank gets breached.
replies(4): >>45948752 #>>45948979 #>>45949277 #>>45950670 #
12. danielhlockard ◴[] No.45948644[source]
You say that but I work in fintech (granted, one of the larger more corporate ones, after an acquisition) and we are heavily regulated, and audited.
replies(6): >>45949539 #>>45950218 #>>45950272 #>>45950314 #>>45950489 #>>45952371 #
13. arcanemachiner ◴[] No.45948733{3}[source]
> With Bitcoin you do not get government bailouts like what happened during the beyond reckless banks in 2008

It is not beyond imagination that the most popular Bitcoin blockchain (and thus, the label of being the "real" Bitcoin) could change at some point in the future.

"Bitcoin" is not immune from the implications of political fuckery.

replies(2): >>45948755 #>>45948906 #
14. bongodongobob ◴[] No.45948734[source]
They are lucky they just got a bill and not a terminated contract. Consulting companies I have worked for would have dropped them immediately because we don't want clients with that kind of risk. Massive red flag that signals management is non-existent, incompetent, or checked out. That is egregious negligence.
replies(2): >>45948741 #>>45948864 #
15. ◴[] No.45948735{3}[source]
16. ◴[] No.45948741{3}[source]
17. arcanemachiner ◴[] No.45948750{3}[source]
It's been a while, but it has happened:

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2010-5139

18. braingravy ◴[] No.45948752{5}[source]
Are banks breached at the same rate as bitcoin brokers? I think that was op’s point.
19. adastra22 ◴[] No.45948755{4}[source]
By what mechanism? The whole point of bitcoin is that you can’t force a consensus change. This is enforced by the algorithm and the laws of thermodynamics.
replies(2): >>45949090 #>>45956278 #
20. aorloff ◴[] No.45948762{3}[source]
More likely, this is a spectacular version of CYA. By billing the hours, there is a paper trail so that when the inevitable breach occurs, you can point to having done the appropriate thing.
21. dahinds ◴[] No.45948881{3}[source]
"With Bitcoin you do not get government bailouts" -- yeah maybe not yet? Is it beyond belief that a government with leadership deeply invested in crypto currencies might take action if something super disruptive happens?
replies(1): >>45948937 #
22. Vvector ◴[] No.45948885{3}[source]
s/cloudflare/coinbase/
replies(2): >>45949635 #>>45955118 #
23. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45948906{4}[source]
Bitcoin has forked a few times it's creation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bitcoin_forks The determining factor for which fork is successfully is bases on the Bitcoin node runners and miners choosing which fork they devote their resources to.

Governments around the world are 100% attempting different plans to destabilize or destroy Bitcoin because it harms their interests and ability to print money from thin air. But at the end of the day it's a distributed ledger, so even if they do find a way to manipulate or damage or takeover the network the Bitcoin users can just fork it from before they did their damage and continue from there. That is the ultimate power of a decentralized blockchain, nobody has ultimate power and everyone votes with their resources.

replies(2): >>45949022 #>>45950663 #
24. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45948937{4}[source]
Possible. But Bitcoin is hard capped at 21 million coins. The government can peint more paper money to bail a company out if it makes stupid decisions, but they cannot print more Bitcoin. This will devalue the paper currency even more and also increase the value of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is called a hedge against inflation for a reason.
replies(4): >>45949012 #>>45949015 #>>45950718 #>>45951419 #
25. immibis ◴[] No.45948941{3}[source]
There was a government* bailout in Ethereum, however. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_DAO

The government of Ethereum is not the US government.

replies(1): >>45948971 #
26. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45948971{4}[source]
I don't see a reference to a government bailout in the article you listed. The chain was forked by the community to the state before the hack and most users switched over this supporting this fork and calling it Etherium going forward.
replies(1): >>45952189 #
27. 8organicbits ◴[] No.45948979{5}[source]
That's a silly assumption to make. I'm clearly talking about the poor security offered by cryptocurrency, in practice, as evidenced by the frequent hacks impacting cryptocurrency companies.
28. robocat ◴[] No.45949012{5}[source]
At present BTC is usually denominated in USD. Until I start to see BTC used as the cross-rate I'm sceptical. Presuming it occurs, it would occur relatively quickly?
replies(1): >>45949420 #
29. kibwen ◴[] No.45949015{5}[source]
> But Bitcoin is hard capped at 21 million coins

Bitcoin is not an immutable law of nature. If the coin minting cap is reached, all that needs to happen is for miners to start running a fork with a higher cap. Tada, more coins conjured out of the ether, just like all the previous ones. If you want enforced scarcity, you need to be tied to something physically scarce.

replies(3): >>45949357 #>>45949359 #>>45949382 #
30. nradov ◴[] No.45949022{5}[source]
Power comes from the barrel of a gun.
replies(1): >>45949387 #
31. arcanemachiner ◴[] No.45949090{5}[source]
If, for whatever reason, all the mining power switches to the other chain, it will become the de facto "Bitcoin".

I don't know what the specific mechanism would be, but I would bet that it relates to the billions of dollars backing the current ecosystem, and the interests of the people behind them. If the right event or crisis comes along, then people could be compelled to switch over to something else.

I'm sure there's someone out there still mining blocks on that chain with the exploit from 2010, but that's not where the mining power is. If the right series of events occurs, the miners will switch.

replies(2): >>45949771 #>>45952254 #
32. CPLX ◴[] No.45949277{5}[source]
No. It's like saying that cash is risky when a bunch of cash gets stolen or lost.
replies(1): >>45952823 #
33. rcxdude ◴[] No.45949357{6}[source]
It would require the market to move as well to consider those new coins worth anything, though. Miners do not have enough control of the chain to make such changes on their own.
34. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45949359{6}[source]
The miners can totally start mining a fork, in fact they can start doing so today, but it doesn't matter because nobody will use their fork and then they will have lost out on their hundreds of millions of dollars of investments into mining equipment.

The node operators play just as critical of a role in Bitcoin as the miners.

replies(3): >>45949378 #>>45950527 #>>45950653 #
35. rcxdude ◴[] No.45949378{7}[source]
It's not the node operators either, it's the people who transact on the chain that determine the value of the coins. The miners can disrupt the ability of the chain to transact to some degree, but they can't make people think their fork is worthwhile (why anyone still thinks BTC has much long-term value is beyond me, but...).
replies(1): >>45949394 #
36. Sargos ◴[] No.45949382{6}[source]
all that needs to happen is for countries to destroy their nuclear weapons

all that needs to happen is for governments to stop burning fossil fuels

all that needs to happen is for researchers to publish boring papers replicating others results

all that needs to happen is for fishermen to stop overfishing

Coordination problems seem easy but never really are. The chance of all the miners just suddenly agreeing to do something all at once is pretty low to impossible.

replies(1): >>45953140 #
37. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45949387{6}[source]
Yes. That is why the Second Amendment is so important. It reminds those in the government not to overstep their bounds.
replies(2): >>45949705 #>>45950727 #
38. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45949394{8}[source]
Yes! Thank for that correction.
39. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45949420{6}[source]
Square just pushed out the ability to pay in Bitcoin to millions of retailers this last week: https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2025/11/11/bitco...

We're right on the corner of that very day that you're talking about.

replies(1): >>45951273 #
40. mmooss ◴[] No.45949539{3}[source]
Wall Street is heavily regulated and audited, and still is 'beyond reckless', causing global financial calamities multiple times.
41. sheepscreek ◴[] No.45949635{4}[source]
One day while driving, I received a call from a technical recruiter at Stripe. I told them about how much I admired their developer first approach, the Atlas program for startups, etc. Later that day, I looked up the recruiter on LinkedIn and realized they worked at Square, not Stripe!
replies(1): >>45950209 #
42. onraglanroad ◴[] No.45949705{7}[source]
[flagged]
replies(1): >>45950121 #
43. wat10000 ◴[] No.45949771{6}[source]
If literally 100% of miners switched, leaving zero on the original chain, then people will have no choice since it won’t do any more transactions.

But if, say, a mere 99% of miners switch, it’s far from a given that people would follow. Having more mining capacity makes the chain more secure, but it’s not that big of a deal.

replies(1): >>45958256 #
44. scubbo ◴[] No.45950137{9}[source]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkCBhKs4faI
replies(1): >>45950161 #
45. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45950161{10}[source]
> This video contains content from BBC Studio, who has blocked it in your country due to copyright.

Hahahaha

replies(1): >>45950500 #
46. pests ◴[] No.45950209{5}[source]
I do this all the time with Shopify / Spotify. The number of times non-tech friends have had to ask what Shopify is when discussing music and I slip up :/
replies(1): >>45954901 #
47. protocolture ◴[] No.45950218{3}[source]
>You say that but I work in fintech (granted, one of the larger more corporate ones, after an acquisition) and we are heavily regulated, and audited.

I have seen some toe curling shit in fintech.

replies(1): >>45952322 #
48. 650REDHAIR ◴[] No.45950272{3}[source]
How big was it when you joined?
49. bdangubic ◴[] No.45950314{3}[source]
funniest thing I read this year on HN - well played mate, well played!!!
replies(1): >>45953440 #
50. devin ◴[] No.45950489{3}[source]
You're almost there. Think to yourself now: what was it that happened in the past that necessitated the need for a large regulatory apparatus, auditors, etc.?
51. scubbo ◴[] No.45950500{11}[source]
So you are not, in fact, in England?
52. mindcandy ◴[] No.45950527{7}[source]
> in fact they can start doing so today

In fact they already have. There are 10s of thousands of forks of Bitcoin. Only a handful ever got significant attention. And, the original is still much larger than all of the forks combined.

replies(2): >>45951595 #>>45953040 #
53. dclowd9901 ◴[] No.45950620{3}[source]
I would be willing to bet the current administration would in fact do whatever they could to undermine the dollar's value, including propping up a digital currency when it should fail.
54. shadowgovt ◴[] No.45950653{7}[source]
"I tell ya, everything will be perfect again if everyone would just migrate to BCv6."
55. shadowgovt ◴[] No.45950663{5}[source]
If anything, the real risk of BTC isn't governments destroying it.

It's that everything you do on the blockchain is there forever, so if a government needs you in jail for using it, they can show you were involved in a financial crime and the blockchain proves it... And if you are unwilling to give up your public wallet they can keep you in jail indefinitely until you do.

Bitcoin is pseudonymous, not anonymous. Every activity on the network is encoded into a perpetual auditable dataset, by design.

replies(1): >>45952812 #
56. shadowgovt ◴[] No.45950670{5}[source]
When a bank gets breached, there are mechanisms to make the victims whole, up to and including "Just print money; it's a fiat currency."

No such mechanisms in Bitcoin, so hacks have longer-term impact.

57. Aurornis ◴[] No.45950701{3}[source]
> but for an existing vendor relationship I think adding a few billable hours for "I found this issue in your network and documented and reported it for you" to an existing contract is not particularly unreasonable.

Billing for random things outside of the agreed upon scope of work is actually unreasonable. It’s something covered in every contracting agreement I’ve ever been a part of.

Maybe they could point to some contract that maybe would have covered it, but when your contractors start billing you for sending quick emails about unrelated things you didn’t ask them to look into, it’s not a good sign. When contractors bill for quick emails they don’t bill for the 3.7 minutes it took to write, they round up to some bigger number like an hour.

Anecdotally, every time I’ve encountered contractors who started billing per individual communication that they initiated (not something requested) or started finding new things to bill us for that we didn’t ask, it was a sign that we were a target being milked for billable hours. Some contractors have a lightbulb moment when they think nobody is scrutinizing their billing and think they discovered an almost infinite money glitch by initiating new things that they can bill for. None of the good contractors I’ve worked with over the years would even think to bill for an individual short email.

replies(2): >>45950843 #>>45954087 #
58. majormajor ◴[] No.45950718{5}[source]
You say "devalue the paper currency even more" but if bitcoin holders need to be bailed in any given country aren't we talking about a scenario where bitcoin is the thing that's lost a bunch of value? Some sort of "it turns out shady bitcoin holders or companies were artificially pumping up the value in a sneaky way and then someone connected the dots" situation?

First thing that comes to mind off the top of my head as a US-Govt option here would be something like: bail out US people/companies of bitcoin holdings in USD in conjunction with banning bitcoin in the US going forward. So that would be quite the string of events at that point for non-US bitcoin holders: first a crash that caused all these US bitcoin holders to go screaming to the government for help. Then the overnight removal of a huge chunk of the bitcoin market, coupled with either a firesale to comply with the ban or US gov seizure of a bunch of the coins, which will push the price lower for anyone who hasn't sold yet since their buyer pool is now much lower.

replies(1): >>45950864 #
59. majormajor ◴[] No.45950727{7}[source]
Got some specific recent oversteps that were prevented by armed citizens in mind? Or are you just talking about ancient history or on-paper theory?

The government in the US has far bigger guns than the citizenry these days.

The only thing that will ever prevent a government from abusing its populace is the willingness of actors of the state - police and soldiers - to say no to abusive orders. Independent thinking coupled with believing in the people more than the executive is the only thing that will ever keep us safe. Guns are not defensive tools. The state can shoot you before you shoot them if they decide they don't like what you're doing.

Put guns in the hands of the people you're policing and you just make it that much easier for the police/soldiers/govt sympathizers to make it us-against-them and side with the totalitarians.

replies(1): >>45953030 #
60. Tostino ◴[] No.45950843{4}[source]
I hope some people post up outside your office. You probably have some secrets just laying around with that attitude. Could be quite profitable.

"Let's defend Coinbase, that small little startup!"

Maybe just stop being a boot licker? It seems pathetic from the outside.

61. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45950864{6}[source]
I wouldn't be surprised if the US government doesn't attempt something just like this in the next 3-5 years. There are a lot of people fleeing the very inflationary US dollar for BTC. I think at this point it would be too late though. There are too many countries, individuals and corporations around the world that own BTC for it to be successful. There was a long term holder that dumped 24,000BTC onto the market in August and the price dropped down about 5% for maybe half a day before recovering, and it's not going to be long until other countries follow El Salvador's lead and invite Bitcoin owners to live there tax free. If the USA bans Bitcoin there will be a massive brain drain of very intelligent people who will just move to those countries.
replies(1): >>45951655 #
62. bhawks ◴[] No.45950978[source]
That is a great ancedote.

Not saying it is untrue, but it is definitely true that Coinbase has never lost customer funds while operating in an environment with 0 safety nets and being one of the most lucrative targets.

This leak over customer data suggests that they should treat that with as much obsession as they do with their private keys.

replies(2): >>45951247 #>>45954021 #
63. arcticbull ◴[] No.45951247[source]
That's not actually true, back in the day Coinbase used Bitfinex. They were using them when Bitfinex got all that BTC stolen. Technically everyone, including Coinbase, lost assets in that hack. They were large and scary enough at the time to force Bitfinex to keep them whole instead of applying the 36% haircut, but I'd argue that amounts to recovery rather than failure to lose in the first place. [1, 2]

[1] https://www.kalzumeus.com/2019/10/28/tether-and-bitfinex

[2] https://x.com/nathanielpopper/status/933130228175552513

replies(1): >>45951757 #
64. arcticbull ◴[] No.45951273{7}[source]
That's yet another example of denominated in USD, and converted to BTC at the last second. Obviously, because of the insane volatility.
65. fmbb ◴[] No.45951419{5}[source]
The government can bail Bitcoin owners out by buying a lot of Bitcoin and holding it, or even burning the wallets.
66. ab5tract ◴[] No.45951595{8}[source]
Right, but a counter point is the etherium fork. Only a handful of people stayed on the “classic” chain after that first DAO turned out to have a massive extraction bug in it.
67. CPLX ◴[] No.45951655{7}[source]
> If the USA bans Bitcoin there will be a massive brain drain of very intelligent people who will just move to those countries.

Is that really possible? Can we do this today?

replies(1): >>45952454 #
68. bhawks ◴[] No.45951757{3}[source]
That's a pretty big stretch of definitions. Whatever operations Coinbase had with Bitfinex were either to support market making activity or as a service for Coinbase's institutional customers to directly access bitfinex via their platform.

As I said, they have never lost customer funds in their custody.

replies(1): >>45951875 #
69. arcticbull ◴[] No.45951875{4}[source]
> Whatever operations Coinbase had with Bitfinex were either to support market making activity or as a service for Coinbase's institutional customers to directly access bitfinex via their platform.

How do you know?

replies(1): >>45954620 #
70. immibis ◴[] No.45952189{5}[source]
The chain was forked, ultimately, by Vitalik Buterin - the president of Ethereum - and his cabinet. Calling a thing by different words doesn't make it a different thing.
replies(2): >>45952648 #>>45954108 #
71. csomar ◴[] No.45952254{6}[source]
> If, for whatever reason, all the mining power switches to the other chain, it will become the de facto "Bitcoin".

The miners do not control the network. The people transacting on the network control the network and decides who is rich and who is not; and whether the miners get paid or not.

72. klaushougesen1 ◴[] No.45952322{4}[source]
timetravelling the ledger anyone ? :)
replies(1): >>45952546 #
73. ItsBob ◴[] No.45952371{3}[source]
FWIW, I work for a major financial organization in the UK as a software architect and I've brought it up more than once over the years in various roles: not a single bank in the UK supports Yubikeys or custom Authenticator apps.

Not one (I last checked about a month ago!)

Security, while pretty good, is still lacking imo!

replies(1): >>45952865 #
74. pavlov ◴[] No.45952454{8}[source]
It sounds rather wonderful, all the very intelligent crypto people voluntarily deporting themselves to El Salvador.

Everybody who ever created a meme coin should also be put on the same plane, voluntary or not.

replies(1): >>45953137 #
75. withinboredom ◴[] No.45952546{5}[source]
I once had a banking app that reported the wrong transaction amounts (downloading the statements resulted in a different balance than what was shown in my account -- this isn't the US, so it should show the correct amount). When I reported the bug, they changed the values on my statements instead of fixing the app -- so now, it didn't reflect my receipts.

It was a fun time. They eventually fixed it in the app to show my true balance and fixed my statements back to what it was. But holy shit, the fact that an engineer would think that would be the proper fix is wild... this is pre-llms, otherwise, I'd think they'd been vibe-coding.

replies(1): >>45952790 #
76. spacecadet ◴[] No.45952637[source]
Its sad they call it cryptocurrency when its just dumb ass finance but with play money that idiots ascribe real value to and the old saying holds true... the rich get richer and the poor are born without assholes. I'll die happy having never participated.
77. hvb2 ◴[] No.45952648{6}[source]
Your dictionary would disagree?

By that logic every company is a government?

replies(1): >>45959358 #
78. johnisgood ◴[] No.45952790{6}[source]
Pre-LLM or vibe-coding, it is the same shit ultimately I'd say: shitty developers doing software development. :D
replies(1): >>45953359 #
79. johnisgood ◴[] No.45952812{6}[source]
That sucks, because what if that wallet is completely destroyed? :S
80. johnisgood ◴[] No.45952823{6}[source]
Which it does. :D
81. cjrp ◴[] No.45952865{4}[source]
Ironically until fairly recently Nationwide required the little keypad authenticator thing, and everyone hated it!
replies(2): >>45952927 #>>45953557 #
82. ItsBob ◴[] No.45952927{5}[source]
I had one of those umpteen years ago with RBS. I hated it at the time too :)

However, I use a Yubikey as often as I can nowadays and authenticator apps too where possible.

I'd like the option to use one but I can't :(

replies(1): >>45953104 #
83. stinkbeetle ◴[] No.45953030{8}[source]
> Got some specific recent oversteps that were prevented by armed citizens in mind?

I guess arresting ten thousand people a year for grevious hurting of the feefees with assault tweets is a recently prevented overstep that the citizens of some other countries have not been able to prevent.

84. meindnoch ◴[] No.45953031[source]
In traditional fintech, you can at least sue your money back.
85. windward ◴[] No.45953040{8}[source]
The original died in 2010. It was replaced with a very significant, large fork.
86. cjrp ◴[] No.45953104{6}[source]
I wonder if the higher-end banks, e.g. Coutts, let you use one.
87. mjhay ◴[] No.45953137{9}[source]
Oh no, not the “very intelligent” crypto people!
88. mapt ◴[] No.45953140{7}[source]
A million times this.

The point of a hypothetical suggestion is to direct a specific course of action. I am simultaneously amazed at how complex the 'hypothetical' construct is, and also how many people aren't able to reason around them... since this is basically what our big brains are for.

If you assume everybody involved just stops responding to their current incentives, you can solve any coordination problem, in a manner of speaking. But it's useless as a battle plan. Operationalizing a change demands that you pick a party you're talking to, and with full view of their capabilities and limitations, modify their current course of action in the smallest possible way that accomplishes a change.

89. ChrisMarshallNY ◴[] No.45953359{7}[source]
I tend to avoid auto-cashiers. It's mostly because I find they don't save any time, and just exist to fire cashiers.

One place that they basically force you to use it, is my local drug store (big chain, that I won't call out by name).

Their auto-cashier absolutely sucks. It's almost impossible to avoid having an issue that requires you waiting around for the poor schulb to come over and fix.

They recently set up touchscreens, at the prescription counter.

I have not once had success with the touchscreen. It can never find me, or my wife. They always have to just take my information manually.

I suspect that the backend (the algorithm and main engine) is good. I think almost all the problems are with shoddy frontend stuff. For example, I think the touchscreen issue is capitalization, and the old system cut off our surnames, so I actually have to type in about half my name, in all caps, to have it find my prescription.

I feel personally offended, when I encounter stuff like that.

replies(2): >>45953963 #>>45960279 #
90. aiisjustanif ◴[] No.45953440{4}[source]
They could work for the Plaid or Stripe which are pretty known for taking proactive security very serious.

https://security.plaid.com/

https://docs.stripe.com/security

replies(1): >>45953529 #
91. bdangubic ◴[] No.45953529{5}[source]
I am 1,000,000% sure that many fintech companies are taking security very, very seriously (I am Stripe customer myself). But I don't think that has anything to do with statement "we are heavily regulated, and audited" - that is too funny.
replies(1): >>45955243 #
92. Ntrails ◴[] No.45953557{5}[source]
I thought they still did for website flow at least. Bizarrely we seem to think that phone apps are infinitely secure and don't need the extra step because biometrics?
replies(1): >>45953812 #
93. victorbjorklund ◴[] No.45953812{6}[source]
Isn’t it because the assumption is that a mobile device is personal in 99,99999% of cases while it’s common (less now than 15 years ago) with shared computers in libraries, schools, etc.
94. johnisgood ◴[] No.45953963{8}[source]
I have never used these auto-cashiers or whatever they are called. It might be due to anxiety, which is weird because social encounters should be more anxiety-inducing. I just feel like I would mess something up.

Oh, and here real cashiers usually scam you by scanning the items twice and so forth (not sure if intentionally or not), it happened a couple of times to my parents (not considered elderly yet) in the past few months I would say.

In any case, I feel your pain.

95. chaps ◴[] No.45954021[source]
Your post reads like something a lawyer would write to convey something that while (maybe) technically true, misses the point by a hundred miles.
replies(1): >>45954693 #
96. chaps ◴[] No.45954087{4}[source]
They initially hired me to do "network security" work. Another similar email-then-bill situation is me responding to them telling them why I won't, under any circumstances, figure out who wrote a Glassdoor review.

A lot of it is about setting boundaries with the client. If I have a conversation with you a handful of times to remove password from a whiteboard and you don't do it, that's a big deal and would professionally impact me if something bad happened. Cause like, your client's clients includes Coinbase. Like another person commented -- I really should have just dropped them as a client because the professional risk was too high.

replies(1): >>45954274 #
97. KetoManx64 ◴[] No.45954108{6}[source]
One goverment you have to pay taxes to in order to stay out of jail and don't get to make any real choices about how much money it prints out of thin air..

The other is an organization body that you freely choose to associate with, eg: using Etherium.

I don't understand how you can conflate the two.

Vitalik did not print billions of dollars out of thin air and then force every citizen of the US to bear that cost through the inflation of the US dollar eating away at their savings and investments.

replies(1): >>45954938 #
98. Aurornis ◴[] No.45954274{5}[source]
> Another similar email-then-bill situation is me responding to them

That’s not what I’m talking about.

Responding to a company is responding to a request they made for your time.

That said, most contractors I’ve worked with would not bill for a short email saying they’re unable or unwilling to do some work as a professional courtesy. The contractors who literally bill and round up for every email are usually going out of their way to maximize billing, which is eventually accounted for in the rates we’re willing to pay for them. We learn quickly that certain contractors will bill and round up for everything, so the most we’re willing to entertain as an hourly rate for them is lower as we know they’re going to send arbitrarily higher amounts of hours over.

replies(1): >>45954391 #
99. chaps ◴[] No.45954391{6}[source]
Sorry, that's not me. They were more than welcome to fire me as a client.

I've been oncall for long enough in my career to know that a "quick email" is not, really, a "quick" email. It can completely derail everything you do for the day. If on-request work takes five minutes to write an email, then that time includes reading the email, thinking about the email, responding to the email, the cost of derailment of other contract work, the cost of getting back into that other contract work, the research needed to tell them "no". Again, it's about setting boundaries with the client.

100. bhawks ◴[] No.45954620{5}[source]
Coinbase didn't halt trading or withdrawals during the Bitfinex hack.

Somehow I think Nathaniel Popper would have been able to put that fact directly in his NYT article instead of a throw away tweet if there was a material impact. Heck he wasted a paragraph quoting one of Coinbase's board of directors on the risks of unregulated exchanges like bitfinex versus Coinbase.

101. bhawks ◴[] No.45954693{3}[source]
Yeah you're right, Coinbase is definitely insecure as evidenced by this.

The fact that lax security has never caused them to loose billions of dollars of customer funds is just luck and paper covering passwords on a whiteboard.

replies(1): >>45954896 #
102. chaps ◴[] No.45954896{4}[source]
Yeah. Lots of stuff exposed stuff out there can stay exposed for quite a long time without being targeted or noticed. I've found quite a bunch and usually all it takes is... looking. Just one of those weird things about the modern world.
103. DonHopkins ◴[] No.45954901{6}[source]
I have the same problem with Oracle / Lawnmower.
replies(1): >>45961797 #
104. immibis ◴[] No.45954938{7}[source]
I don't make any choices about how much money Ethereum prints out of thin air, who it prints it to, or how much the transaction fees are.
105. nightpool ◴[] No.45955118{4}[source]
Gah! Sorry, complete slip of the fingers. No offense to Cloudflare intended!
replies(1): >>45956142 #
106. fragmede ◴[] No.45955243{6}[source]
In the wake of every scandal in finance is a wave of regulations. Finance is one of the most heavily regulated industries the is. That smart people keep finding new areas that haven't yet been regulated doesn't mean that the existing areas agent heavily regulated and audited.

If you give me $5, and then I pass it on to Bob for you, how many licenses and how much paper work do you think I should need to do that if I did that as a business? If you give me some money and I am a business, how much paperwork should that incur?

replies(2): >>45955849 #>>45957347 #
107. chaps ◴[] No.45955849{7}[source]
The big problem is that the exchanges are largely self-regulated. Or at least when I was in the field. A company I worked at sued a counterparty to our trade because we had proof of market manipulation. I won't say any of the details of who, etc, but the trades of the counterparty were so... plainly obvious of market manipulation in violation of the exchange's rules. At one point in that lawsuit the exchange's lawyers accidentally CC'd my bosses, showing that the exchange was colluding with the counterparty.

From what I was told, the issue for the exchange was that if they were found out to not enforce their self regulation then it'd be the precipitous event to the hammer coming down on them from regulatory bodies.

So yeah. Regulation's kinda shite here.

108. dang ◴[] No.45956142{5}[source]
Fixed now!
replies(1): >>45956237 #
109. nightpool ◴[] No.45956237{6}[source]
Thank you dang!
110. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45956278{5}[source]
What you can do, and what has been done in the past, is get a critical mass of large cryptocurrency actors to agree that a protocol change should be applied and that the results of that protocol change are called "Bitcoin". As the Bitcoin Cash folks quickly realized, it's not tenable to try and maintain a disagreement with Coinbase and large miners about about what the Bitcoin protocol is; if you don't want to accept the upgrade, your only practical option is to make a fork and call it something else.
111. bdangubic ◴[] No.45957347{7}[source]
give me some examples of this “regulation” actually doing serious “regulating”? on paper, there may be 1,000’s of statutes and whatnots doing all sorts of regulations - in practice though… not to mention this industry is probably the most “self-regulated” when you actually dig in than most others…
replies(1): >>45977773 #
112. andirk ◴[] No.45958256{7}[source]
And anyone can become a miner. It's not reasonable on small rigs because there are so many miners now, but if most of them leave, then the common man can get back in to mining.
replies(1): >>45961211 #
113. immibis ◴[] No.45959358{7}[source]
Yes, actually, and the bigger the company is, the bigger the government it is. Apple is more powerful than many small- to medium-size countries.
114. protocolture ◴[] No.45960279{8}[source]
We have 2 near identical supermarket chains in aus.

I use the one with the better self service checkout, that doesnt reliably make me wait for the schlub.

115. wat10000 ◴[] No.45961211{8}[source]
There is an interesting failure mode, though. Bitcoin is supposed to adjust mining difficult every two weeks to maintain the pace of roughly one block every 10 minutes. But that interval is based on block count, not time. Adjustment happens every 2016 blocks.

If miners suddenly fled en masse, it’s possible for the chain to be left stranded where the small number of miners remaining couldn’t realistically get to the next 2016-block interval to adjust the difficulty down to match the drastically decreased mining capacity. If mining capacity dropped by a factor of 1000 and it happened right after an adjustment, then bitcoin would be producing about one block every week, and it would take about 40 years (if mining capacity stayed constant) to reach the next adjustment.

replies(1): >>45961348 #
116. adastra22 ◴[] No.45961348{9}[source]
This is well known and studied. I’ve produced and field tested an alternative, close to optimal adjustment algorithm and the code for a soft-fork transition. This could enable a set of miners to get “pre-agreement” on transaction ordering in an out of band forward block chain while they work to fight down the difficulty of the old chain.

https://freico.in/forward-blocks-scalingbitcoin-paper.pdf

117. pests ◴[] No.45961797{7}[source]
That's odd
118. eckesicle ◴[] No.45970370[source]
I very much doubt the veracity of this claim. I worked at Coinbase for many years and this runs completely afoul of the culture there.

Even leaving your laptop unlocked for seconds in the office would have someone /pwn it in slack and get flagged by security.

If there’s one thing they took extremely seriously it was data security.

replies(1): >>45993691 #
119. fragmede ◴[] No.45977773{8}[source]
Here's the DEA with a specific money laundering case: https://www.dea.gov/press-releases/2025/05/29/two-money-cour... but there are many more of your search for money laundering.
120. chaps ◴[] No.45993691[source]
You're misreading my post with Coinbase-tinted glasses. My post is about the building that Coinbase operated out of. Not Coinbase itself.