Bitcoin Snafu Causes Miners To Generate Invalid Blocks 179
An anonymous reader writes: A notice at bitcoin.org warns users of the cryptocurrency that many miners are currently generating invalid blocks. The cause seems to be out-of-date software, and software that assumed blocks were valid instead of checking them. They explain further "For several months, an increasing amount of mining hash rate has been signaling its intent to begin enforcing BIP66 strict DER signatures. As part of the BIP66 rules, once 950 of the last 1,000 blocks were version 3 (v3) blocks, all upgraded miners would reject version 2 (v2) blocks. Early morning UTC on 4 July 2015, the 950/1000 (95%) threshold was reached. Shortly thereafter, a small miner (part of the non-upgraded 5%) mined an invalid block--as was an expected occurrence. Unfortunately, it turned out that roughly half the network hash rate was mining without fully validating blocks (called SPV mining), and built new blocks on top of that invalid block. Note that the roughly 50% of the network that was SPV mining had explicitly indicated that they would enforce the BIP66 rules. By not doing so, several large miners have lost over $50,000 dollars worth of mining income so far."
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Post should have clarified: (Score:5, Informative)
On the bitcoin.org website: "WARNING: many wallets currently vulnerable to double-spending of confirmed transactions."
Offhand, I'd consider that a significant "compromise", given that vulnerability to double-spending dramatically undermines confidence in using Bitcoin. If this situation continues for any length of time, you can just about guarantee that the bad guys will begin to exploit it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
AIUI we have a situation where some miners are enforcing stricter rules than others.
If the strict miners significantly out mine the loose ones then not much will happen. The blocks that don't pass the strict rules will quickly be forked off and die and noone sensible accepts a one-block-confirmed transaction for anything important.
However if the loose miners out mine the strict miners you get a long lasting fork between the strict and loose miners. People whose clients only enforce the loose rules will see
Re: (Score:3)
Re:This is a GODDAMN DISASTER! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep. How many times has the Fed said "jeez, sorry, you know that cash that we issued, really it's not valid, you need version 2.137 of the cash, you lose.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is a GODDAMN DISASTER! (Score:5, Insightful)
How the fuck can anyone trust Bitcoin after this and the other incidents that have happened? How?
You can trust Bitcoin by learning how it works and following the proper procedures that you would if you playing with real money.
The Bitcoin system is highly resistant to "rouge" or bad actors in the system. Someone running mining software that does not follow the agreed upon rules for the system is an example of a rouge actor. When this happens the rest of the system votes down the decisions made by the rouge actors. In this case some miners were not following the system wide agreed upon protocol, generated bad data, and the rest of the system (correctly) rejected that bad data thus maintaining the integrity of the overall system as designed.
What was lost were some rewards that would normally have been paid out for operating correctly. Since the rouge actors were not operating correctly, they were not rewarded (for their invalid work). If you were hired to paint a house white and you painted it orange, would you expect to be paid? The miners did not do the work they were being paid to do. True, many miners mine within a pool and depend on the pool operator to do the right thing, but if the pool operator is not doing the right thing, it is not a flaw in Bitcoin. Lke the painting analogy, if you work for a painting company and the painting company gives you the wrong color of paint, you wouldn't expect the homeowner to pay you, if you want to get paid for your labor, your beef would be with your boss, the the homeowner.
On the transactional (non mining) side, if you are running an incomplete Bitcoin client, it is now taking longer to achieve a level of confidence that your transaction is officially as "approved" by the network. As always it is the responsibility of those making the transactions to wait an appropriate time to ensure that their transactions have been approved. This has always been the case with Bitcoin and has not changed.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Tell me, are "Rouge Actors" apt to break out in Song at the slightest provocation?
Re: (Score:2)
Only if they congregate at Moulain.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How about blanc and bleu :)
Let's just ask the guy who set it up. We can't? He's in hiding? He's been hiding for YEARS? Oh yes, I can really trust it now.
From learning how it works it's a shameless pyramid rewarding those who get in early so long as a steady stream of people decide to sign up but there is zero value or trust holding up the pyramid. Short term users who use it as a b
Re:This is a GODDAMN DISASTER! (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's just ask the guy who set it up.
Even if he was still around, he might have set up a broken system. Instead, you should learn about how it works and check the mathematical proofs.
We can't? He's in hiding? He's been hiding for YEARS? Oh yes, I can really trust it now.
I'm not sure why a public figurehead of something like this would be inherent trustworthy. I'd actally say some public CEO type pushing a reality distortion field would be less trustworthy than a bunch of open source software backed by provable, verifyable maths.
Short term users who use it as a barter item and unload it quickly are not exposed to much potential pain,
And that's why it's popular. For people who use it as a form of currency in transactions, the risk isn't high, so there's the trust. The thing with large crowds is that a huge number of people putting a small amount of trust in something equates to a large amount of trust. As long as people find it useful for transactions, money will keep cycling through and it will stay afloat.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything about bit coin is scammy from the get go. From the psychopath term mining bit coin, you are not mining, you are simply insanely burning energy for nothing wasting computing cycles on a complete illusion. Secret transaction seem to be the goal, especially for the originators who computer cycled huge numbers of bit coins for little effort, the top of the pyramid scheme. Who backs bit coin, no one, don't compare it to a countries currency, a whole country and it government backs that and they still
Re: (Score:2)
No, this is exactly the reason why open source is having such a problem. 'You can always audit the source code'. Yeah okay buddy, because I have the time/money to spend on extra programmers just to audit the problem you created.
You do realize that you can purchase open source software commercially, right? Then you get the same level of support that you get with proprietary software, and you get the source code as well.
Re: (Score:2)
And the original point stands... have you audited the source code? Have you compiled / built the product from the source code? If not, then have the alleged source code isn't any better than trusting the Windows source code.
Re: (Score:2)
And the original point stands... have you audited the source code? Have you compiled / built the product from the source code? If not, then have the alleged source code isn't any better than trusting the Windows source code.
Circular argument; I take it that you have done both?
Just because an individual states they do not have the competency to verify an action, it does not immediately make the original action invalid.
Source code verification and auditing is a problem in ALL fields, and is not a particular malignancy associated with any particular programming methodology. However, the ease at which one may perform a public audit, and verification, of any code in question is greatly enhanced when anyone can view the code. Furt
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
How many bitcoin banks have decided to cut and run at this point?
The best part about bitcoin is that there's no takebacks or market controls. Meaning when you get scammed like happens so often, your money is GONE. Definitely the currency of the future, better than credit cards with all those shitty government and business protections. Obviously the wild west mentality is better than anything with protections.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
How many bitcoin banks have decided to cut and run at this point?
Bitcoin is cash. What you call a "bitcoin bank" is really just a "bitcoin wallet" in somebody else's possession, and it is about as safe as trusting somebody with a wallet full of cash.
The closest thing to a bitcoin wallet involving a bank is putting cash in a safe deposit box. If you do that in the US it isn't protected by the FDIC. If you want to be protected by banking regulations you have to deposit your money.
Bitcoin was never designed around letting others hold your money. The design was really fo
Re: (Score:3)
Bitcoin leaves open the problem that people can scam you and take your money. Credit card companies and paypal and what have you mitigate that problem, but do so at the cost that people can falsely accuse you of scamming them and taking your money, pretend to pay you but don't, confiscate or freeze your money with little accountability, and do a lot of other nasty things.
Are the ways to abuse the system worse than the things the system is supposed to protect you against? I don't know. But it's a valid quest
Re: (Score:3)
What about spending ridiculous amounts of electricity to print your own mone
Re: (Score:2)
With most other currencies, there is always the chance that once a payment is done, it can be taken away. For example, you sell something on $AUCTION_SITE, get paid via credit card, then find the CC company slurped the money back out, as the credit card owner has disputed the charge... now it is your job to sue the individual and get your cash back, although you were technically "paid".
Or, you get a check, cash it, and get a NSF charge because of it bouncing.
Even cash has this problem. You take a $20, onl
Re: (Score:2)
Last I heard the largest "bitcoin bank" was a Magic the Gathering online trading card exchange site (MTGOX) - and it blew up in a truly spectacular fashion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is a GODDAMN DISASTER! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This is a GODDAMN DISASTER! (Score:5, Funny)
I always loose my mind when I see idiots writing rouge instead of rogue.
It really effects me deeply.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I always loose my mind when I see idiots writing rouge instead of rogue.
It really effects me deeply.
Agreed, I see red too...
BTW, it's "affects" :)
Re: (Score:3)
And lose. Pretty sure it was trolling.
Re: (Score:3)
I always loose my mind when I see idiots writing rouge instead of rogue. It really effects me deeply.
Agreed, I see red too...
BTW, it's "affects" :)
Woosh :-)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Shortcuts? Since when has using not-up-to-date software been considered a "shortcut" to anything but being hacked?
It doesn't have to do with out of date software, but software that is pretending to say it has been updated to do checks when it doesn't to save cpu cycles. That is a shortcut, not doing proper checks.
Shocked (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean the money they just created out of thin air isn't really real?
Stop the presses.
Re:Shocked (Score:5, Insightful)
Most money is created out of thin air (by adjusting the percentage of deposited money banks are required to keep).
Re: (Score:2)
Most money is created out of thin air (by adjusting the percentage of deposited money banks are required to keep).
Um, maybe you mean "value".
Pro-tip: people who wear dead men's shoes sometimes use satire.
Re:Shocked (Score:5, Informative)
It works like this: Say the banks are allowed to lend 90% of the money that is deposited, and have to keep 10% of it. Then Alice deposits $1,000. This means that the banks lend out $10,000 since they had to keep 10% of the money. If the government wanted to create money, rather than bothering with silly printing presses at the mint, they could declare that banks could lend 95% of the money deposited. Then if Alice deposits $1,000, the banks could lend out $20,000.
Now, you might have noticed my numbers aren't quite what you expected. Well, it works like this (when the banks lend 90% of a deposit). Alice deposits $1,000. Then Bob borrows $900, and deposits it in a bank. Then Charlie borrows $810, and deposits it. Then Dylan borrows $729, and deposits it... By the time everyone is done borrowing, depositing, and lending, 10 dollars have been lent for every 1 deposited. Of course, in reality only some of the borrowed money gets deposited immediately -- some of the money gets spent and put in a bank, and some gets kept around in wallets or under a mattress. But yeah, most of the money people "have" is in fact created out of thin air, not even paper.
Just don't ask what happens when too many people want to withdraw their money from the bank.
Re: (Score:2)
As an example of what happens when to many people want to withdraw money from the banks just see Greece this week.
Re: (Score:2)
Withdrawals are reasonably statistically predictable, and in practice this is not normally a problem, as long as everybody is confident that they can withdraw their money when they want to. Once people lose that confidence, they'll all try to withdraw their money before the bank goes bust, and so the bank runs out of money. That's called a run on the bank, and the big reason for guarantees for bank deposits (FDIC in the US, for example) is to maintain that confidence. Since I know I'll get my money back
Re: (Score:2)
What point are you trying to make here, specifically? Money hasn't been backed by gold since the 70's. Dollars are backed by the government itself. The bitcoin shills keep saying 'FIAT DOLLARS' like the US dollar is going to fail tomorrow. If the US dollar fails, the entire world economy fails, and even those that are invested in buying gold/silver are completely fucked. ALSO all of your bitcoins will immediately be absolutely worthless.
As for fractional banking, it's been done that way for far longer than
Not to quibble but (Score:2)
socially constructed concepts, like money, ARE, just like us, an emergent property of the universe.
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, banks are (gasp) loaning out money. Would you feel better if banks were running computers and generating bitcoin?
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't correct. Banks can only lend out what they have. They can't manufacture leverage out of thin air. Leverage is a function of being lent money, not of lending out money.
The correct example is that the bank receives $1,000 in deposits from Alice and is allowed to lend out $900 of that. However, this means that the bank only has $100 cash on-hand so it cannot return Alice's $1,000, at least not immediately.
This does not mean that banks do not employ leverage, banks do borrow money, typically in t
Re: (Score:2)
Banks can only lend out what they have, but they have more assets than were originally deposited.
Alice deposits $10K. Bob takes out a loan of $9K for a major purchase, give the money to Carol, and Carol deposits the money in the bank. That means the bank now has $19K in deposits, and can lend another $8K to Don, who pays it to Edith, who deposits it in the bank, so there's now $27K in deposits.
Even if the dollars were small gold coins, this would work, as Alice deposits 10K of the things, and 9K go o
Re: (Score:3)
Haiku ?
Banker smokes cigar
Inhales smoke
You're burned
Re: (Score:2)
No. Real money is created out of paper, ink, and metal.
How interesting. More real than precious metal coinage? More real than a cheque?
And here I was thunking that some forms of currency are just promises worth less than the paper they're printed on (like cheques - except you pin your trust on unknown people) - and all this time the promise is of tangible value, not some sort of fiat where value can be modified by the whim of a government. Bet the Greeks are relieved.
Re: (Score:2)
Given real money, I don't have to trust where it came from. I have to trust that other people will want it, and normally other people will. It doesn't really matter whether I have money in my bank, or paper money in my pocket, or coins made of certain metals, as long as the people I deal with it will accept it for goods and services.
Re: (Score:2)
Given real money, I don't have to trust where it came from. I have to trust that other people will want it, and normally other people will. It doesn't really matter whether I have money in my bank, or paper money in my pocket, or coins made of certain metals, as long as the people I deal with it will accept it for goods and services.
People are different. Some qualify trust, others blindly without historical reference. Some argue without sophistic devices, unimpeded by false logic. Others rely of half-concealed false qualifications to support emotional over-investments in their own gut-instincts (real money), or red-herrings to give the appearance of weight to that without substance (I don't have to trust where it came from - so forgery is not an issue?).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Money isn't, value is.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the money they just created out of thin air isn't really real?
That's usually a pretty funny bitcoin comment, but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the situation in this case.
How much electricity was used last month to mine? (Score:5, Interesting)
The irony is that just a few stories down, there is a lot of talk about why more people don't drive EVs and how important it is for the world to get off fossil fuels.
So... how much power generated by fossil fuels was consumed "mining" bitcoins last month?
I can't think of anything less "green" than a computer pulling hundreds of watts sitting around 24/7 chewing on random numbers.
Re: (Score:3)
So... how much power generated by fossil fuels was consumed "mining" bitcoins last month?
Very close to zero. Bitcoins are mined where power is cheapest, which means where there is plenty of hydropower, like in Iceland and the US Pacific Northwest. It is not cost effective to mine bitcoins using electricity from FFs.
Re: (Score:3)
My power comes from coal and natural gas and costs less than 11 cents per kWh.
Are you suggesting that is too expensive to mine with?
Are you suggesting that no one outside of those areas are mining Bitcoin?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My power comes from coal and natural gas and costs less than 11 cents per kWh.
Are you suggesting that is too expensive to mine with?
Yes. That is about twice the price of wholesale hydropower.
Are you suggesting that no one outside of those areas are mining Bitcoin?
There are a few small miners outside these areas, but the big ASIC miners are located in areas where cheap hydropower is available.
Re: (Score:2)
There are a few small miners outside these areas, but the big ASIC miners are located in areas where cheap hydropower is available.
And there is no better use for this power besides running computers 24/7?
Your replies miss the point I'm afraid...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then consider those compute cycles could have been used for Folding@Home and actually helping humanity.
Re: (Score:2)
Then consider those compute cycles could have been used for Folding@Home and actually helping humanity.
Economics is already forcing some users to recycle the heat from ASIC's as space heaters and this demand will continue to grow. Additionally, the coinbase reward for mining is slowly being replaced by Tx fees which will continue to grow rapidly especially when sidechains and inter payment channels like the lightning network are scaffolded on top of Bitcoin to really scale bitcoin up from 4-7 transactions per second to over 100k tx per second. These proposals do not depend upon PoW (proof of work... but cert
Re: (Score:2)
Then consider those compute cycles could have been used for Folding@Home and actually helping humanity.
Ending large-scale war and dictatorships will be the most amazing thing to happen for humanity in the past six thousand years.
Yeah, folding proteins is also important.
Re:How much electricity was used last month to min (Score:5, Informative)
Very close to zero. Bitcoins are mined where power is cheapest, which means where there is plenty of hydropower, like in Iceland and the US Pacific Northwest. It is not cost effective to mine bitcoins using electricity from FFs.
Bullshit. Give us one shred of evidence that this is happening. Anyone involved in bitcoin mining isn't one bit interested in environmental issues, and coal is still the cheapest form of energy.
Re:How much electricity was used last month to min (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone involved in bitcoin mining isn't one bit interested in environmental issues
They don't use hydropower because it is "environmental". They use it because it is cheap.
coal is still the cheapest form of energy.
No it isn't. Areas with plentiful hydropower have electricity prices much lower than coal.
Re: (Score:3)
It is not cost effective to mine bitcoins using electricity from FFs.
Jesus, Firefox now generates electricity too?
Re:How much electricity was used last month to min (Score:4, Funny)
That's why they're called "plugins".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the current plan was distributed malware so that somebody else paid for the power?
You would need to run and manage a botnet of thousands of computers to generate as many hashes as a single ASIC. It just isn't worth it. Nearly all new bitcoins are mined on ASICs.
Re: (Score:2)
http://blog.malwarebytes.org/fraud-scam/2013/11/potentially-unwanted-miners-toolbar-peddlers-use-your-system-to-make-btc/
As for thousands, why not? Botnets are huge these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Far less than the amount of power used to run the credit card networks.
Re: (Score:2)
Per transaction, or total?
I'm willing to bet that a single Bitcoin costs a whole lot more to produce than a credit card transaction takes to process.
Or to put it another way, if you were to replace the entire existing credit card system with Bitcoin, would it use more or less power than the current system?
---
Or perhaps if you were to be honest about the whole thing... Even with Bitcoin, you still are using the existing system, since very few places take bitcoin and most that do convert it into dollars or e
Re: (Score:2)
Per transaction, or total?
I'm willing to bet that a single Bitcoin costs a whole lot more to produce than a credit card transaction takes to process.
Or to put it another way, if you were to replace the entire existing credit card system with Bitcoin, would it use more or less power than the current system?
---
Or perhaps if you were to be honest about the whole thing... Even with Bitcoin, you still are using the existing system, since very few places take bitcoin and most that do convert it into dollars or euros right away.
So you now have twice as many transactions, once for bitcoin, another for the "old guard" banking system.
Fair point. There are some initial costs to upgrading fintech and creating a fairer form of currency that doesn't rob people with unexpected inflation, bail outs, and bail ins. Even if you prefer inflationary fiat currencies instead of dis-inflationary ones with a planned social contract owned openly by the users you should be grateful that this competition will at least temporarily keep governments and banks slightly more honest.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not opposed to the idea of Bitcoin, or competing currencies.
I'm just opposed to the idea that it consumes tons of power to run RNG and that it will be required to run for more than 100 years.
The irony is that I get the need the reduce our consumption of Earth's resources. If we had magic fusion reactors and unlimited power, then I wouldn't care.
But we don't. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's look at a real-world application: I want to pay a certain amount of money to somebody else. With Bitcoin, there has to be expensive computation to transfer them. With a credit card charge, or bank transfer, there may be very little computation. The idea of Bitcoin mining is not fundamentally to produce Bitcoin, but to encourage people to verify transactions.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't get your logic, because both EVs and computers use electricity. Are you saying that EVs get their electricity from green sources, and Bitcoins are mined with filthy old fossil-fuel power?
Also, consider monetary systems where banknotes are hauled around in armoured trucks, vs. a computer network that accomplished the same with a fraction of the resources.
In general, people should do more with computers/networks, instead of driving around to offices.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get your logic
Yea, clearly you're not alone there... that is what I find so amazing...
If you don't get it, I don't know what else I can say. It is plain as day to me, if it isn't to you... well, I'm at a loss as to how to explain how pointless it is to run RNG for days/weeks/months for such a purpose...
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get your logic, because both EVs and computers use electricity. Are you saying that EVs get their electricity from green sources, and Bitcoins are mined with filthy old fossil-fuel power?
Also, consider monetary systems where banknotes are hauled around in armoured trucks, vs. a computer network that accomplished the same with a fraction of the resources.
In general, people should do more with computers/networks, instead of driving around to offices.
FlyHelicopters isn't too bright. He's wrong a lot of the time, and every time somebody explains why he's wrong, as you did in your third and fourth sentences, he responds with shock that no one can understand why he's right. It's a rather childish defense mechanism, but he can't seem to help himself.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably a few coal trains.
Well sure, thus my question as to why people here rail against SUVs and such, but seem to love Bitcoin so much...
Re: (Score:2)
Because government is bad, ...m'kay.
Re: (Score:2)
Fair enough...
How does Bitcoin solve that? Should it become more than a side show, do you honestly believe government will stay out of it?
Re: (Score:2)
Even worse, what prevents any large government with sufficient resources to deliberately destabilize the protocol by injecting bad data?
Re: (Score:2)
Apathy, mostly. Why would a government do that?
Re: (Score:2)
If you disagree with this, you're obviously okay with the government stealing everyone's money with inflation, and you're also a worthless lazy bastard who's probably in debt and on the government dole.
So what you're saying is that your argument doesn't stand up without insulting and attacking anyone who disagrees with you?
Bitcoin is also intentionally designed to have its own built-in and unmodifiable monetary policy separate from any government or regulating body.
And when the government outlaws bitcoin exchanges? Oh sure, there will be a black market, there always has been. But it will prevent it from being anything more than a minor thing.
The current monetary policies of central banks aren't perfect, but they are far better than what we'd have if the whole world was stuck with a currency that couldn't be managed.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I think current US monetary policy has done pretty well over the years. We haven't had another great depression since the Great Depression, and I think that's a pretty big success. I also think moderate inflation of about 2% per year or so is generally okay and normal for a healthy economy.
I don't consider myself a tool of the government, "banksters", or corporations, although I do think governments, banks, and other corporations have important roles to play in the modern economy. And I wouldn't ca
Re: (Score:2)
Bitcoin is hip, it's new, it's not your dads money.
If you use bitcoin you're part of the future not part of the past.
You want to be part of the future, cutting edge don't you ?
That's the fashionable crowd.
For others there is the partially correct impression that bitcoin is much more anonymous than credit/debit cards.
Re: (Score:2)
If Dogecoin ever replaces Bitcoin (including its value per coin), I'll be freakin' rich!
$50,000 dollars (Score:3)
Re:$50,000 dollars (Score:4, Funny)
Re:$50,000 dollars (Score:5, Funny)
Now it's $48,200...
Now it's $46,900...
Now it's $45,700... ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can we stop this stupidity of writing "$50,000 dollars"? It's 50,000 dollars, or $50,000. Would you write "5kg kilograms"?
No, I'd write 11.02lbs pounds...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Please be assured that if you aren't currently free and are in possession or mineral resources, we'll be on our way to bomb you into freedom shortly... :P
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ah, screw that. It doesn't matter if you're free or not. If you've got oil or minerals, we're going to bomb the shit out of you...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cute but oh so clueless.
Re: (Score:2)
i don't think it does, anyone who is paying attention already knows that's it's mostly rubbish and that it's main virtue is that you can use it to buy illegal drugs online.
Re: (Score:2)
A value that fluctuates every single second (e.g. an exchange rate between Euro and USD for instance)
A value that decreases over time (inflation, etc.)
Do you understand sharing billions among the governments so that every country owes every other country money and vice versa? Because I sure as hell don't.
Do you understand Quantitative Easing? I don't.
Do you understand quite a lot about any currency whatsoever beyond you earn a number, you have that number in your bank, and at some point you "cash out" tha
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)