Hacker News Reader

Comment by g09980 | Hacker News Reader

Just people are very cautious online with signaling that they have any crypto.

I don't buy that. What's the threat vector?

Are you not able to be anonymous with an HN account if you choose? So much so that creating multiple accounts doesn't matter?

Yes, you can be anonymous on HN - that assumes you've stayed anonymous. Obviously these people didn't and so they need a new account. The motivation is huge.

The threat vector boils down to using a phone number porting attack to gain access to Coinbase, and maybe also email. It has happened to many public owners of crypto.

Or even the five dollar wrench attack.

You are able to be anonymous on HN by creating a new account which is not tied to your regular account history.

If you had millions of dollars in crypto you would too. It's not nearly the same as having it in a bank or mutual funds which cannot easily be taken from you in a flash.

People can simply hack your laptop or bludgeon you with a hammer until you give them up instantly.

I mean, if bludgeon you with a hammer is part of your threat model, I think there's still some concern that people will bludgeon until you agree to make a bank transfer.

Banks have transfer limits, so no you can't generally make a million dollar bank transfer.

sounds like crypto needs a bank lol

That feels unlikely to me. Why would there be so many people who 1.) have enough crypto to be worried, and 2.) want to talk about crypto but didn't create a separate account prior to this negative article?

> Why would there be so many people who 1.) have enough crypto to be worried

Because it's easy to have enough crypto to be worried. For example, if I had bought 10 BTC @ 100€/BTC = 1.000€ (which, at the time, was a reasonable investment size for a crypto starter, and a droplet of water for a seasoned person with a bit of money to throw around) and held them until now, I'd have 100k€ worth of BTC.

That's more than enough motivation for a criminal for example to fleece your home while you're away (e.g. if you posted on your HN-relatable Twitter account that you're off to a conference) and look for a paper wallet. I have seen people literally stab each other over 100€ worth of marijuana, to put things into perspective...

You answered a different question by cutting mine in half... my bitcoin holdings are stab-worthy, I understand why someone would hide their identity.

My question reflects my suspicion of astroturfing. What would explain an anomalously high number of new accounts fighting the claims of price manipulation in bitcoin? It's unlikely to be people just hiding themselves - they would already have accounts.

> You answered a different question by cutting mine in half...

I apologize - I messed up the indentation and thought you were replying to another comment. Sometimes I feel HN could use some Reddit features...

> It's unlikely to be people just hiding themselves - they would already have accounts.

Yeah but for example my RL identity can be inferred from my username, my post history and probably my Twitter feed. So if I were someone who had a stake in high BTC rates - no matter if as a plain wallet holder or as operator/stakeholder in a BTC/coin-related enterprise - I would certainly make a new account, and probably even a new one for every comment, to hide the association.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com