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.

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I recomment that you read my earlier comment to read my argument.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        You claim that “governments order companies to do stuff all the time”, but how does that apply to an entry in the blockchain, which we’ve agreed is the authority on who owns property. The hint is: a company couldn’t change an entry in the blockchain, even if the government ordered them to do it.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Why would they change an entry on the blockchain?

          To make the dumb idea of tracking peoperties on the blockchain there needs to be admin tools to restore the NFT to the proper owner.

          If the NFT gets transfered to someone else illegally, there needs to be tools to add another entry to the chain with a note saying that the NFT was stolen, and this new change restores the ownership to the lawful owner.