Money and State

moneyandstate.com · Group blog · on HN since 2014

Money and State is a cryptocurrency blog, associated with Erik Voorhees, on Bitcoin, regulation, privacy, and the ShapeShift hack.

What HN saysHN links its response to SBF on crypto regulation, its SegWit2MB post, and its account of the ShapeShift hack.
22HN people shared it
7linked it in comments
15stories submitted
151story points
2 years agolast shared
2014people per year2026

Most-shared posts

  1. 1
    The Hack at ShapeShift
    5 people · 19 points · first shared 2016 · 4 comments on HN
  2. 2
    Bitcoin is out, blockchain is in
    5 people · 12 points · first shared 2015 · discussion on HN
  3. 3
    The True Cost of Bitcoin Transactions
    2 people · 108 points · first shared 2017 · 115 comments on HN
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
    Sophistry and the Savior
    2 people · 1 points · first shared 2022 · discussion on HN
  7. 7
    The Separation of Mind and State
    1 people · 2 points · first shared 2024 · discussion on HN
  8. 8
    The Cryptobond and Autopublic Companies
    1 people · 2 points · first shared 2016 · discussion on HN
  9. 9
    A VC-backed corp transitioned into a DAO
    1 people · 1 points · first shared 2022 · discussion on HN
  10. 10
    Thoughts on segwit2mb
    1 people · first shared 2017

What HN people wrote when they linked it

pr337h4m · 2022-11-16
It's surprising that SBF sounds so libertarian suddenly - he was lobbying for government control of crypto just one month ago (which rightfully made him super-unpopular among the OG crypto crowd) https://www.moneyandstate.com/blog/response-to-sbf He does sound sincere here - no idea what to make of this.
Kinnard · 2017-04-10
You are correct and such proposals have been put forward: http://moneyandstate.com/thoughts-on-segwit2mb/
elevensies · 2016-08-03
I've just run across this the other day, it is a set of guidelines for securing cryptocurrencies: https://cryptoconsortium.org/standards/CCSS . It is about the core crypto asset concerns, not about how to protect a web server. Here is a report which uses the guideline to assess a company's posture after a hack: https://www.scribd.com/doc/309591980/ShapeShift-Postmortem (sorry about the scribd link, haven't been able to find pdf.) Here is a narrative description of the hack that the above report is about: http://moneyandstate.com/looting-of-the-fox/
firasd · 2016-05-22
I just finished reading this: The Hack at ShapeShift http://moneyandstate.com/looting-of-the-fox/
TacticalCoder · 2022-11-13
> 4. White House Monitoring FTX Collapse, Calls for Crypto Regulation Officials were precisely busy receiving gigantic bribes (well, "donations", the biggest ever made from any sector after those made by George Soros) from SBF/FTX to draft legislation giving the CFTC jurisdiction over crypto exchanges. And who was the chief lobbyist of FTX? An ex-CFTC commissioner. Let that sink in: the main FTX lobbyist was an ex-CFTC commissioner lobbying for a legislation giving... Full control of crypto exchanges (including the decentralized ones) to the CFTC. You cannot make that shit up. So crooks running scams have drafted a legislation that'd give them complete control over crypto exchanges. The ongoing legislation, if it passes, is the one drafted by the very villains who were planning to execute the biggest scam ever (he was obviously after pension funds and sovereign wealth funds: there was no limit to his megalomania). As Erik Vorhees just blogged: “The complex derivatives and custody issues which froze financial flows in 2008, back when safe, regulated financial institutions had no idea who owned what and markets collapsed under the layers of counterparty risk... these would not (can not!) happen in DeFi." "Have they even learned how to use it? How many of those drafting crypto laws have ever actually executed a DeFi loan?” “Yes, DeFi removes some of your power as regulators... but it solves the problems you’ve been trying to regulate. Isn’t that more important?” I…
mmt · 2018-09-13
2 weeks seems like an outlier. A recent thread [1] described someone getting cash from an ATM via bitcoin in 20 minutes. One of the comments theorized that this was because the ATM service used only 2 verifications instead of 6, taking a slightly higher risk due to the small transaction amount (which implies a typical wait time for a large amount of an hour, not 2 weeks). Of course, even 20 minutes is too long to wait for a vending machine transaction, so your point still stands. I also found an article [2] that incorporates the problem of delay in even determining what the fee would be. What was also interesting is that it [2] detailed a transaction cost 8x what was quoted above, and seems to be backed up by https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactionfees.html . It brings a new concern, volatility, to someone like a vending machine operator whose transactions aren't "micro" but are always going to be on the small end of "every day". Presumably, it's possible to have a cryptocurrency without these issues. Lightning may sufficiently solve this for Bitcoin (and/or other cryptocurrencies), but that has yet to be seen in practice, at scale. If a DDoS attack forces all (or even just some) Lightning transactions on-blockchain, what does that do to transaction times and costs? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17898721 [2] http://moneyandstate.com/the-true-cost-of-bitcoin-transactions/

Keyboard shortcuts

/Search
j kNext / previous blog
EnterOpen selected blog
vVisit the blog site
fFollow / unfollow
lSwitch grid / list view
dSwitch dark mode
g hHome
g pTop posts
g tTopics
g fFollowing
g lLiked
g yHistory
g qFAQ
EscBack / close