Hacker News Reader

Comment by badideaprojects | Hacker News Reader

It just all seems like cosplay. Time, expense and inconvience in order to gain anonimity from casual twitter followers?

Will this protect him against a slightly funded and half motivated actor? Probably not.

“Announcing Jameson Lopp as a speaker at Baltic Honeybadger 2019 Bitcoin conference #bh2019, (link: https://bh2019.hodlhodl.com) bh2019.hodlhodl.com”

https://twitter.com/hodlhodl/status/1099286199783481350

Unless he is making a virtual appearance, just follow him or grab him there.

EDIT: I should make it clear I’m not just referencing the article but also the twitter conversations I’ve seen from th author (swatting is a good reason to take some of these steps obviously). For example, https://twitter.com/lopp/status/920669889064570880. He even comments himself in that thread “Local PD isn't going to send out the SWAT team again without calling me first”

View on HN

The article started out with him being swatted. If your threat model includes anyone that can obtain your address and the lack of morals to swat someone then the steps listed above should work fine.

Going to a physical location and kidnapping is something far above the event that motivated the change.

> Will this protect him against a slightly funded and half motivated actor? Probably not.

He hired a PI to test the work. Presumably that defeats this viewpoint? Not saying it protects him from the FBI, but I'd say if a PI can't find you then anyone who does want to is going to need to be more than slightly motivated to do so.

Will this protect him against a slightly funded and half motivated actor? Probably not.

There is a large contingent of online craptivists who won't be bright enough or motivated enough to get to him, and the ones who are bright enough and motivated enough will probably be more interested in other people.

just follow him or grab him there

At least he's crossed the threshold of people having to do that.

"I don't need to outrun the bear. I just need to outrun you."

Maybe as a bitcoin shill, he should not have crossed the threshold of people WANTING to do that to him in the first place.

Then at least he could still stay in touch with his friends and family, and so many people wouldn't be so motivated to extract their revenge on him.

But no, running his illegal get-rich-quick pyramid scheme and fooling and exploiting other people was more important to him than his own and his dog's safety.

If he wasn't just doing this for cosplay and attention, and was actually concerned about his privacy, then maybe he shouldn't have contacted the New York Times and had them write an article about him, huh?

So your theory is that Lopp is taking these steps to protect himself from people who want to hurt him because he talks about Bitcoin publicly and the Bitcoin price has come down? That is wacky.

And you also claim he is a criminal who profited from an “illegal pyramid scheme”? Does this apply to anyone who has sold Bitcoin for more than they bought it for?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com