Technology

59402 readers

3517 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

636

Hackers steal NFTs worth millions. In other news, NFTs worth millions. (www.theblock.co)

submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by yesman@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

166 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The way I read the article, the "worth millions" is the sum of the ransom demand.

The funny part is that the exploit is in the "smart" contract, ya know the thing that the blockchain keeps secure by forbidding any updates or patches.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] StupendousMan@lemmy.world 100 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Sounds like a great way to make an insurance claim on a bunch of NFTs worth "millions" that you could not convince anyone to buy.

[–] gravitywell@sh.itjust.works 39 points 11 months ago (2 children)

What insurance company is dumb enough to insure NFTs?

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ones that think they can't be stolen

[–] stom@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

You can in fact insure things that it is possible to steal. Cars, bikes, household posessions, you name it. It's quite common.

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

If the insurance company thinks the nft can't be stolen, it's money for no risk. That's why they would easily accept insuring an nft.

I think you misunderstood my comment.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

In a highly simplified way: total risk of insuring from theft is roughly other-risks * theft-risk, so if theft risk is 0, it means that other risks, such as insanelly high risks in asset valuation are irrelevant to the total risk which will always end up as 0.

So it makes sense that being paid to insure that which cannot be stollen against theft is risk-free money quite independently of all else. (Of curse, if something has a non-zero probability - even if tiny - of being stolen none of that holds)

I think that's the whole humourous point the previous poster was making: that which NFT promoters kept on telling us guarantees unique ownership which cannot be taken by others (and hence cannot be stollen) turns out that it can.

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Ones that understand the Internet and/or technology. And believe the "secure" hype.

[–] eclipse@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'd say more likely to be able to declare a capital loss on taxes.

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago

Can I carry that loss over for the next... 100 years or so?