Hacker News Reader

Comment by paulpauper | Hacker News Reader

This is good for eth because it takes them out of circulation, like a token burn. In this case, 400k eth. ETH has recovered its losses and then some despite BTC falling today. North Korea presumably has access to little liquidity. They cannot sell , as they are being backlisted. The major BTC hacks from 2014-2016 in part contributed to BTC's record 20x surge in 2017 because those coins could not be sold on the market and hinder the rally. So there is an unexpected positive to this.

View on HN

Just to clarify, it’s good for cryptocurrency when a portion of that finite currency is irreversibly removed from circulation forever?

In that case I assume it’s best if all ETH were to cease to exist completely. I can’t really argue against that.

There a wide spectrum between "some removed from circulation" vs "the entire thing ceasing to exist". think of this as a 400k token burn.

For physical materials, like gold, this applies because gold is useful other than as a medium of exchange.

But ETH is a mathematical construct. It should be true in the limit up until the very last measurable quantum of ETH is erased, and the very last bit holds the entire value of the cryptocurrency.

To put it another way when does “deleting eth is good for eth” cease to be a valid argument?

When I really think about ETH and well others. I question is there really some market cap. Or is the value actually more so the coins in active circulation, with some lowering factor for big reserves. That is that market cap is in sense a lie, and amount of circulating tokens is what really indicate the value. As thus removing tokens from circulation actually would remove value. Just that calculating market cap is really hard. Unlike say redeemable stocks for say ETF.

the founder of Bitcoin literally said lost btc is a gift for everyone else. there is likely some optimal about of burning that increases value of other tokens vs. destroys the network.

As long as it’s not your eth though. In that way, I guess yes it is good if you’re holding onto a ton of Furbies and there’s a massive Furby culling elsewhere.

A solar flare could take out every computer on the planet and someone on HN would say “this is good for bitcoin”

It's like a token burn. These are always bullish.

Isn't it a little premature to celebrate a few intraday candles when ETHBTC has been falling consistently since 2017? It will need to rise 304% to get back to where it was, but alright, congrats on your 2.8% recovery.

the price action shows surprising optimism despite such a large hack . This is a possible reason , among others.

Why can’t the stolen coins be sold? If they can’t then what’s the point in stealing them?

How is North Korea possible dump $1 billion on the market when everyone trying to blacklist them? Hackers typically have access to much less liquidity as the coins are considered tainted, so they either are never sold or sold gradually on dark markets or OTC where there is no market impact.

So the anonymity touted is not so anonymous?

Most crypto isn't anonymous - it's pseudonymous. You can trace what a wallet is doing, but it's not tied to a real life identity.

Seems like the tokens are tied to a specific IRL identity in the case

It only takes one connecting piece of data for the pseudo anonymity to become a complete history of every transaction you have done. This is one of the reasons crypto coins will never become currencies

that's only true if you only ever use a single wallet, and nobody does that. you don't sound like someone who actually has tried using crypto.

> you don't sound like someone who actually has tried using crypto.

you are quite wrong, I bought a computer from a neighbor with them as one example. I stopped using them because they are a PITA compared to my CC and already digital money. I still have "truly" anonymous monero too, mined not bought

If you think multiple wallets keeps you anonymous, I have a bridge to sell you

Where did anyone say ETH was anonymous?

There do exist anonymous tokens, such as XMR and the like, but no one knowledgable would ever think coins with (public!) transparent ledgers were somehow 'anonymous', only merely decentralized.

ETH is supposed to be an electronic contracts market.. Is everyone who writes a contract from now on going to include code to block using these coins as collateral? If there's no consensus to interfere with the transaction, I assume people will watch the coins in motion and extend a larger map of tainted accounts and coins, yet be unable to interfere in many algorithm decided actions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com