Mt. Gox CEO Returns To Twitter, Enrages Burned Investors 281
An anonymous reader writes Mark Karpeles doesn't seem to understand how much anger and trouble the $400 million Mt. Gox fiasco caused his customers. According to Wired: "After a long absence, the Mt Gox CEO has returned to Twitter with a bizarre string of tone-deaf tweets that were either written by a Turing test chat bot, or by a man completely oblivious to the economic chaos he has wrought. His first message after losing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of bitcoins? 'What would we do without busybox?'—a reference to a slimmed-down Linux operating system used on devices such as routers. He's also Tweeted about a noodle dish called yakisoba and Japanese transportation systems." Andreas Antonopoulos, the CSO with Blockchain says, "He continues to be oblivious about his own failure and the pain he has caused others. He is confirming that he is a self-absorbed narcissist with an inflated sense of self-confidence who has no remorse."
He didn't sacrifice a goat to the SJWs. (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait a sec. He had a Magic: the Gathering club? That's cool. I loved playing Magic back in the day. Never got too deep into it, but it was fun if you ignored the greedy bastards in it.
So he migrated from one overpriced product that made it easy to scam someone, to another.
Re:He didn't sacrifice a goat to the SJWs. (Score:5, Informative)
MTGOX
Magic The Gathering Online eXchange
He couldn't even be bothered to get a new domain name...
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:He didn't sacrifice a goat to the SJWs. (Score:4, Informative)
I believe he bought it as a Bitcoin exchange and never actually ran it as a card exchange. There are rumors of a dodgy history in France before he moved to Japan also.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Correct. The mtgox domain was registered by Jed McCaleb (who created eDonkey) to use as a trading card site in 2007. He reused the domain in when he created the bitcoin exchange. Then he sold the whole operation to Mark Karpeles, who is the person this article is about.
Re:He didn't sacrifice a goat to the SJWs. (Score:4, Interesting)
If you use Bitcoins you are dealing with a currency that has ZERO safety nets
Not so. It's not treated as investment or cash, sure, so you don't get any protections like you do with banks. But insofar as it's good available for sale, if you pay and the seller does not deliver, you can certainly sue him, and the state will prosecute and will force him to part with cash - if he has any.
Re: (Score:2)
you trusted your BC to some yahoo that ran a fricking Magic:The Gathering trading club...really?
What? You don't do all your banking at the comic book shop?
Re: (Score:2)
you trusted your BC to some yahoo that ran a fricking Magic:The Gathering trading club...really?
What? You don't do all your banking at the comic book shop?
might be safer to put your money into comic books rather than bitcoin, ha ha.
the thing is, the coins have fluctuated in dollar value but actually haven't crashed or disappeared.
MTGOX was just one exchange, and a goofy one at that IMO, there are many others and more will come.
BTC isn't going anywhere. Both as an idea and a currency.
Re: (Score:3)
So scams are okay because only stupid people fall for them? Got it. But I have to wonder: why limit this to just intellectual weaknesses? Surely the same principle works just as well for people who fai
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Surely there's nobody over there who would possibly want to use a completely anonymous and untraceable monetary system that would ever dream of causing any discomfort to another human being...
It's not a problem... those people have the $$$ now
Also.... Karpeles is portrayed to the world as weasel and an self-centered arrogant moronic arsehole.
It's not clear whether he is too stupid to understand the real dangers and how his tweets will be interpreted, or if it's intentional self-deprecation possibly
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Furthermore, why would you assume he "lost" it, whether or not he is Yakuza?
Re: (Score:2)
He'd have been compelled to or otherwise coerced into killing himself.
Well, don't you get to give up a pinky finger for your first offense? Bonus points if you do it by yourself? Extra bonus for a dull knife.
This just in. (Score:4, Insightful)
Man who quite obviously ran an elaborate scam and legally (as far as I'm concerned) stole money from a bunch of morons and suckers is a narcissist and sociopath. Are we supposed to be surprised?
This guy is like people who rob little old ladies and see nothing wrong with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
most countries do not recognise virtual goods as property (though that is changing) and they certainly don't recognise bitcoin as currency. As such even if it could be proved he stole them I doubt there is much that could be done in most countries, regulations have upsides as well as downsides, many with their heads in the sand didn't seem to realise this.
Re: (Score:2)
Your bank account is just virtual property.
Re: (Score:2)
You miss the point.
Re: (Score:2)
What did he steal? It's not a currency, the whole point of bitcoin is that it doesn't have any of the usual financial protections. Now people find out that there's a downside.
Re: (Score:2)
He stole people's property.
Did he? They gave him bitcoins to hold onto for them, now the bitcoins are gone. That's about all we know. If he stole them then where are they? Or where are the proceeds of them?
Well, it is a property offence (Score:2)
Strictly speaking, it is embezzlement [wikipedia.org]
In other jurisdictions, this may be known as misappropriation.
Usually the burden of proof lies on the person you entrusted the property to (especially if it is a paid service) to explain what happened to it. If he can't/won't, you can invite the court t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How was it legal? He stole people's property.
So, bitcoins are now property that you can steal?
Please show me a law that shows bitcoins are any more real or worth any more than virtual gold in World of Warcraft.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This just in. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
But nothing physical was taken. How is that loss different from pirated videos or music?
The value of pirated videos or music has no demonstrated value. There's no evidence that the provider of music or video actually suffered a loss. The bitcoins in question had a monetary value of $400 million. That is, they could be exchanged for that much at the time. $400 million buys you a lot of physical stuff.
True value (Score:2)
Not true. I seriously doubt you can find anyone who is/was willing to buy all those bitcoins for $400 million. I also doubt anyone is/was willing to accept all those bitcoins in exchange for $400 million worth of physical goods.
Lets say for example I take a slug of tin and stamp it into many coins of my own making. Nobody is willing to give
Re: (Score:2)
So what now? Can we be done with the "nobody lost anything because of downloading" argument once and for all and move on to something more substantial as a reason for both copyright reform and ethical Internet usage?
Of course not. You aren't the only alleged pirate out there. And your behavior may be typical of the breed, but that hasn't been shown.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Stolen doesn't just apply to the physical world. It means that you've been deprived of something you previously possessed.
If your physical thing is stolen, you no long possess it.
If your asset is stolen, you no longer possess it. Most people have digital assets in the form of cash in a bank or stocks in an account; there is nothing physical for either. Bit coins fall in this category.
If your trade secret is stolen, you no longer have a secret.
If your copyright is infringed upon, you still hold the copyri
Re: (Score:2)
If your copyright is infringed upon, you still hold the copyright.
So if infringe on your privacy rights that's ok because you still have privacy rights?
Re: (Score:2)
Suppose copying and using intellectual property is not stealing. Therefore it is okay and legal to pay $0 for intellectual property. Then you should be able to walk into an auto dealership and take possession of a new car for say, $5,000, where the actual retail price is $25,000. This should be legal because the physical raw materials used to build the car cost only $1,000 to $2,000 and the remainder is spent on mac
Re: (Score:3)
Suppose copying and using intellectual property is not stealing.
That would be good, because it's not stealing, it's copyright infringement. That's why we call it copyright infringement, because unauthorized copying infriges on the copyright owner's right to restrict who can make copies of the copyrighted work.
Therefore it is okay and legal to pay $0 for intellectual property.
No more than murder not being called "life theft" makes it legal to murder someone.
Re: (Score:2)
This is quite possibly the worst cop out I've heard from piracy supporters. Before music was digitized on CDs, you had to purchase/borrow vinyl records or cassettes to listen to music. Making copies (pirating) of these analog mediums was very lossy, so copying was not worth it because of the huge loss of audio quality. However, once music was digitized on CDs (and later MP3), copies were perfect, with no loss of mus
Re: (Score:2)
Not all the bitcoins have been lost. Killing him might make those still under his control become inaccessible.
This is purely conjecture, I never had an account on Gox.
Re:This just in. (Score:4, Insightful)
I know. I've been rolling on the floor watching these bitcoin reports go by. Someone creates an anonymous, untraceable and intentionally unregulated way of exchanging money. That should be your first clue to run the other way as quickly as possible. But instead, a bunch of people start shouting "hurray! this is wonderful! those damn governments and their rules! No we can put it to "the man" and not be burdened by their silly rules! Being anti-establishment makes us so cool!" somehow thinking that anonymous people on the internet are somehow more trustworthy. Then when the blind sheep are fleeced, the first thing that happens is a great hue and cry for "Call the police! I've been robbed! They've broken the law! Justice! I demand justice!" - going right back to the same governments they had decried before, back to the same rules and regulations that they had scoffed at before - all for the very same reasons that those rules and regulations and agencies had been setup in the first place - because anonymous people will rob you blind if you give them a chance. A lesson learned by most people ages ago - but something that is apparently news to the new generation of ever-so-wise, anti-establishment, internet geeks who somehow thing that basic human behavior is now different because they have a computer...
Sadly, no lesson was learned, no wisdom won. I've yet to see a post saying "oh, well, I guess there is a reason for those laws and regulations. I guess that thinking that a trick of technology could fix human behavior was naive. I guess this is what I should have expected all along." Alas, this also fails to surprise - it is also human nature to close one's eyes and fervently believe that the reason that one's pants are on fire couldn't possibly have anything to do with one's decision to walk through puddles of gasoline while smoking a cigarette...
Re:This just in. (Score:4, Insightful)
"That's libertarians for you â" anarchists who want police protection from their slaves." [wikiquote.org]
-- Kim Stanely Robinson, _Green_Mars_
Re: (Score:2)
This here is what's known as a straw-man.
It could be a strawman, if he were debating you. However, I'm inclined to believe he's just mocking those outraged libertarians who are reaping what they've sown.
Not everything is a debate.
Re: (Score:3)
I run with libertarians. There are only a small proportion that don't believe that there is a small role for the state, mostly in enforcing contracts but also other law & order functions.
It could be argued that these people reaped what they sowed but on the other hand, they would also say that they have been denied the system they would have used to address their grievances by government interference.
So if "straw man" was incorrect, I'm happy to accept "misinformed" or "willfully ignorant"
Re: (Score:2)
An interesting and dangerous reminder of the nature of bitcoins. I am sure there were many bitcoin users who expressly intended to cheat on taxes and hide other criminal financial transactions. I'd bet a lot of them wont be laughing until, well, Mark Karpeles, 'er', twitters no more. Likely safest place for him right now is prison. Bitcoin is a seriously dangerous currency to play with.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Because, "You cannot cheat an honest man."
Of course you can. Haven't you ever been shortchanged? You can't hustle an honest man.
Hustling is making the victim think he's cheating you.
Re: (Score:2)
Just like a comment from an AC.
Re: (Score:2)
Busybox (Score:5, Informative)
It's not an operating system.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Its GNU/Busybox, thank you very much.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, that would make it BIG
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're right. Chewie, turn the ship around!
Most Important (Score:2)
What did he say about yakisoba? Does he like? Hate it? Get some on his shirt?
Re: (Score:3)
What did he say about yakisoba? Does he like? Hate it? Get some on his shirt?
In Japanese, "yaki" mean fried, and "soba" means noodles. So "yakisoba" is just fried noodles. There is a wide variety of yakisoba, with various additional ingredients and sauces. Unless you have celiac disease, you should be able to find some type of yakisoba that you like.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That and frappuccinos.
How do we know he's real? (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean, first thing I would have though is "that's not actually him".
LOL (Score:5, Funny)
I have to say, the responses to his tweets are the funniest thing I've read all week.
Jon Eaton @sketchy1poker 20m
@MagicalTux die you fat fuck
Angry Mofo @angrymofo Jun 18
@MagicalTux Where's my Bitcoins you cunt ?
Icecream @Bird8880 Jun 15 :)
@MagicalTux I hope you die in the next earthquake fat ass
Re: (Score:2)
I'd use a smiley if I was making a cheeky remark to a cherished friend.
An alternate explanatio (Score:5, Insightful)
OR.....the Twitter account could be compromised, and the attacker is trolling you. I mean, they don't exactly have a stellar security record.
Re: (Score:2)
Their security record is generally pretty good. In most cases where a celebrity claims their account was "hacked" after a ridiculously stupid or insensitive tweet is posted is just PR covering their ass.
Re: (Score:2)
Their security record is rubbish - I've had two occasions on which my Twitter account was compromised, both times an unknown (to me) device was added to my Twitter account without my knowledge and spam tweets were made. My Twitter password is unique to twitter, and I have only ever used it to log in from my mobile devices, so the likelihood of the breach being due to something my end is exceedingly small. Have a quick search around, this is a known issue - there is an unacknowledged problem with Twitters
many levels of ridicule in this article (Score:5, Funny)
Quoting a guy named "The Arbitrageur (@FiatMoneyEnd)", complaining about how he had lost his money, was a particularly dry touch.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure he learned nothing (Score:3, Insightful)
The funny, though rather predictable, thing about the bitcoin faithful is that this did nothing to shake their faith in it. The problem, according to them, wasn't the lack of tracking, regulation, oversight, or any of that, no it was clearly that MtGox "did it wrong" and that this "makes bitcoin stronger" and so on.
They see this an as anomaly, not an inherent risk of their chosen currency. They have a poor understanding of economics. Same reason why they think BTC's built in deflation is a GOOD thing.
"...he is a self-absorbed narcissist..." (Score:5, Insightful)
"...he is a self-absorbed narcissist with an inflated sense of self-confidence who has no remorse."
So you're saying he has what it takes to be a Fortune 100 CEO?
Re: (Score:2)
bright future (Score:2)
So? (Score:5, Insightful)
He's also Tweeted about a noodle dish called yakisoba and Japanese transportation systems. Andreas Antonopoulos, the CSO with Blockchain says, "He continues to be oblivious about his own failure and the pain he has caused others. He is confirming that he is a self-absorbed narcissist with an inflated sense of self-confidence who has no remorse."
Sounds to me like he's just using Twitter the same way everyone else uses Twitter. Why does tweeting about yakisoba make him a remorseless narcissist? He may be that, but regardless Twitter isn't the best venue for heartfelt apologies. I bet he also failed to take responsibility for Mt Gox last time he sent a text or wrote a sticky note.
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
Twitter shaming has always felt wrong to me. There is a whole story of a person's day, and life, that went into whatever that tweet was.
And Wired just assumes that everything somehow is in the context of MTGOX, and should be interpreted that way.
Nope, not buying it. Your magical ability to decide what people are thinking is stupid and doesn't work right.
That's not being fair. Does every post have to have a "PS Sorry for losing your money" appended to it?
I don't read replies to my tweets. Celebrities don't. Sponsors of tweets don't. People who have their friends on twitter do. Which camp is this guy in? Hint: he's not just tweeting to his buddy. That's pretty obvious.
Did you try twitter? Did he just ignore you like he ignores most of the responses? Oh, I'm guessing this isn't really a two-way communication system for him like you use it. In fact, it may be possible that people use communication platforms in entirely different ways compared to how one reporter at Wired does.
Fuckhats.
Sure this guy's a major douche canoe. That doesn't mean we can read intent into every inane unrelated tweet he sends into the void.
What is he supposed to do? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm evil incarnate and I'm about to punish myself on behalf of the Twitterverse
Ok... I'm cutting. I'm slicing my wrists right now
That was pretty deep. Blood everywhere. Hard to type
I'm so sorry. Your virtual money went to virtual money heaven and it's all my fault.
Getting dizzy now. cant..... focus
keyboard so sticky
i dndt thk that woold hepeen we tried too stipthem and it
i'm sorry
Bitcoin is not a place one goes to enjoy the protections of traditional state issued currency and state regulated banking. Twitter is not a place one goes to find sincerity. Slashdot is not the place to indulge your fake outrage.
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot is not the place to indulge your fake outrage.
Are you new here?
Re:What is he supposed to do? (Score:4, Funny)
Why do you people keep summoning me??
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe he should just shut up, and not try to "speak to the Internet" (which is basically what Twitter is)?
Odd parallels (Score:2)
So basically he's just a Wall Street bankster, but with Bitcoins.
Re: (Score:2)
No because even junk bonds actually represent something of actual value.
Re: (Score:2)
No because even junk bonds actually represent something of actual value.
Yeah, junk. The stuff you pay people to take away.
Man uses Twitter for original purpose... (Score:4, Insightful)
This reads like it should be an Onion article. He's using Twitter for what it is typically used for -- self-absorbed useless posts. Why is anyone surprised? If they were all about how awesome his new $400 million yacht is, then I could see the issues. This is just that he came back to Twitter, and started using it normally.
Re: (Score:2)
He used his work related twitter account for posting personal messages and opinions to tons of people who only follow him for his work.
Of course they're going to yell at him.
News just in - twitter is full of shallow comments (Score:2, Insightful)
wtf... (Score:2)
It is Twitter, not the international apology bulletin board.
If you are following this guy hoping he will say sorry and wire you part payments of bitcoins, then you have sadly misunderstood what Twitter is used for.
I don't really see what the big deal is (Score:2)
He didn't actually do anything different to what every OTHER banker does every day...
system (Score:2)
It's kind of the purpose of the whole corporate system that companies can keel over and the people behind it can continue living their lives.
If you don't like it, tough luck, it's the world we live in, we wanted it this way.
What did you expect? (Score:2)
An apology footer in each tweet?
Heh (Score:2)
"Oh man, you're still going on about that? I said I'm sorry, okay? Now let's drop it and move on."
(More seriously, though, my sympathy with the people who put their life savings into Bitcoin approaches zero.)
LOL ... (Score:2)
In my experience, that's what it means to be a CEO.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it.
-- Publilius Syrus
Re:Really? (Score:4, Informative)
"Give me your bitcoins, I'll hold onto them for you. They aren't regulated as a currency by the government (and you love that) also they are untraceable (you love that too), they are just data so if I lose them ... well I'll try not to lose them."
Who would have thought anybody with half a brain would actually fall for that, but they did, to the tune of like $400 million worth of the damn things!
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
You put a bitcoin in an account at one of these 'exchanges'? Well kid, I'm afraid I have some bad news: from the perspective of the bitcoin system, the exchange now owns the bitcoin. You just gave it to them. You now own some flavor of promissory note that's probably roughly on par with really shit commercial paper, except that it probably doesn't even offer interest to compensate you for the risk and time value. Good work on that.
If you want to enjoy the properties of bitcoins, You. Must. Hold. Bitcoins. IOUs, however you dress them up, do not have the properties of the currency or commodity in which they are denominated. If you want to bank, try a bank. Yes, they are abhuman scumweasels that enjoy massive regulatory capture in most markets; but unfortunately you don't really have better options.
Re: (Score:2)
You put a bitcoin in an account at one of these 'exchanges'? Well kid, I'm afraid I have some bad news: from the perspective of the bitcoin system, the exchange now owns the bitcoin. You just gave it to them. You now own some flavor of promissory note that's probably roughly on par with really shit commercial paper, except that it probably doesn't even offer interest to compensate you for the risk and time value. Good work on that.
So, pretty much the same thing as if you put gold or cash in a bank?
Re:Really? (Score:4, Insightful)
So, pretty much the same thing as if you put gold or cash in a bank?
No, I'm not quite sure how this isn't obvious to you but banks are regulated and insured by the government.
Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes in that putting something in a bank turns it into a promise from the bank, whatever it is, assuming the bank will take it.
No in two main senses:
One, purely pragmatically, most countries that issue fiat currencies recognize that banks are de-facto extensions of ordinary currency circulation and regulate accordingly. This is probably all kinds of moral hazard; but it does mean that the IOU you get from a bank deposit has almost exactly the same backing as cash, up to whatever the FDIC's account threshold is. A bitcoin exchange, or any other generic commercial debt is in a distinctly different regulatory category, usually one that involves getting less of your money out when things go south.
The other, architectural, is that bitcoins derive much of their charm (for many, not all, users) from possessing certain interesting inherent properties: no central issuer, known supply, no double-spending or transaction reversal, etc. All enforced either by the protocol or by the cryptography. Very nice, invariant across jurisdictions, apparently well regarded in terms of design. Someone's IOU, whatever it's denominated in, has none of those properties. The fact that they tend to be downright dodgy as well is just a bonus.
I'd hazard a guess that there are plenty of unhappy Mt. Gox accountholders who would have looked at me like I was crazy if I'd asked "Would you like to make a non-diversified, unsecured, investment in a speculative-grade Japanese security?"; but blithly did exactly that, because bitcoins, missing the minor detail that all the bitcoiny goodness disappeared the moment they handed them over.
Re: (Score:2)
Either that or his head is firmly planted in reality and he, unlike many of the Mt Gox users, recognizes that bitcoins are worthless. No one lost a dime. People lost bitcoins ferchrissakes.
As long as bitcoins can be exchanged for money, they have value and people who were planning to turn them into cash but lost them effectively lost money. People who planned to sit on them until they hatched are the only ones who lost nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
No. The people who lost bitcoins lost nothing. The people who exchanged bitcoins for actual money took advantage of the other type who thought bitcoins had some value.
Bitcoin is like a check. It represents a transfer of things that have value- i.e. physical products or services and money. The check itself has no value. The people who were piling up bitcoins made the mistake of thinking the "checks" were worth something.
Re: (Score:2)
Bitcoin is like a check. It represents a transfer of things that have value
The U.S. government officially, legally, and in all other ways disagrees with you. Bitcoin thus has every bit as much value as any fiat currency.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree that it is a currency.
Who are you disagreeing with? Certainly not me.
It is just a work of art:
Works of art have value. Thanks for agreeing with me. You may retire in cowardly shame at this time.
Re: (Score:2)
Or when some number in a database at your bank get changed and your balance becomes 0 because your credit card got skimmed.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why you should always use a credit card for large purchases, even in part, and when purchasing online. Not only do you have whatever protections you receive from local legislation, you also have the extra protection of the credit card company. It's UK law, but check out Section 75 Consumer Cr [moneysavingexpert.com]