Just wanted to second this. I ran several public Linux servers at a major university. China and Russia based IPs we’re constantly trying to brute force all of our servers. It got the point where we would just apply a geoblock just in case one finally managed to get through.

I’m all for avoiding nationalistic dog whistles when discussing things, but both China and Russia have rightfully earned their places as bad actors on the internet.

I'll third this. Every single IP that I have geo-located that has attempted to get into one of my home servers/routers is coming from China. I didn't go as far as blocking all of China because I was sure that some point down the line it would cause some other random issue and I would have long forgotten blocking Chinese IP's. If I remember correctly I used fail2ban or similar software to blacklist IP's after X failed attempts. That plus moving all services to non-standard ports (save for 80/443).

What if all the hacking actually originated from America?

They just compromised a bunch of random computers in China and Russia, running an old copy of Windows XP, and built themselves a botnet.

What further evidence do you have, other than an IP address?

Right, it wasn't necessarily hateful on purpose, but as another poster pointed out, what does it mean that we default to using one specific group of people for that example? If they'd said "PRC hacker" it'd be a different story, but the word "Chinese" conflates a nationality and heritage. It does this, by the way, in written Chinese as well, hence a lot of arguments I've had in the past with PRC-citizen exchange students about whether Taiwanese people are Chinese or not (even though they are, obviously, not PRC citizens, Taiwan being a sovereign nation).

As a Chinese, I care.

Not Chinese, I also care. That comment is an example of subtle racism.

Image the following comment: "You better buy a good bike lock, else you're at risk of having it stolen by a black man."

A comment like the one above would spark near universal outrage at the commenter, and with good reason. It's racist, and the original comment here is the same. Unnecessarily racist.

> Random descriptions add flavor.

That's not flavor.

I want to say, apt username.

Because the insurance is against the bank being unable to pay deposits due to bank insolvency. The FDIC does not insure depositors against wire transfer fraud.

The comment i replied to implied the current fiat system has checks and balances that can help prevent fraud and scammers.

I'm more highlighting that both crypto and traditional banking are similar in the transfer mechanism than saying banks should be held liable.

Assuming miners are smart, you can 'bribe' them without ever speaking to them.

Your coins have been transfered to Mr Evil in block number 6000.

Simply publish a transaction which pays your $1B in bitcoins to another address you control with a $200M transaction fee.

Any rational miner who sees this will decide to 'undo' Mr Evils transaction and all that occur after it by acting as if those transactions don't exist. They will mine your new transaction as part of a new block number 6000, and pocket the $200M for themselves. However, they will need to make sure their block number 6000 remains part of the chain.

By the time they've done this, block number 6001 and 6002 have been mined on top of Mr Evils transaction in block 6000. That means someone must mine block 6001 and 6002 again, at significant computatonal cost. To do that, the miner who mined the new block 6000 can incentivise others to work on top of their block by paying the 200M to themselves, but again with a big fee.

The above only works if all miners are rational, and have coded this strategy into their mining pools. Are there examples of this happening in practice? (There will be public evidence of it in the blockchain).

You would need to know them personally. There are lots of big mining farms around the world, and many smaller ones. You would need to be friends with the big ones to pull anything like this off.