[janmo]

It is pretty much a prisoners dilemma. If the coins are blacklisted, then both the Hacker and the victim are in a lose situation and it is a stalemate.

Now let's imagine the victim tells the hacker they are not willing to negotiate and hope that law enforcement will catch the hackers like they did in the Bitfinex case. The hacker could destroy some coins every X days to make it clear to the victim that this is not a good idea.

This is just a wild scenario. But had I been the Bitfinex hacker I would have done crazy things such as sending blacklisted coins in small amounts to many random addresses, those of exchanges, developers, non-profits, Satoshi Nakamoto etc.. Just to create chaos as it would have caused those people a lot of trouble and would have forced some kind of resolution.

[nullc]

FWIW, bitfinex was willing to buy the coins back on what they claimed was a no-fault basis and even put a significant amount of coins into third party escrow for that purpose.

Back in the early days of Bitcoin... Zhou-tong, after robbing his own business (Bitcoinica) blind, did something kind of like what you were suggesting -- raining down coins on random people and creating general chaos. I think it was more mania and panic rather than a well considered strategy.

I think in general you don't see stuff like that through a mix of (1) it's less easy than you think, and (2) thoughtful people don't become serious thieves in the first place, it's not worth it.

[jcpham2]

I miss the Zhou tong memes.

[uxp8u61q]

You watch too many action movies.