Earlier today a user under the handle of “daoattacker” came to the DAO slack channel and seemingly gave away 6.37 bitcoin.
I was preparing to write an article on an alleged statement from the DAO attacker, so when I checked the slack channel the giveaway was just ending, but everyone was posting their bitcoin address. I was not sent any bitcoin or any other currency nor did I request through address posting, but I asked the alleged attacker some questions. The following has been modified only cosmetically – to add capitalization at beginning of sentences and punctuation at the end:
Andrew Quentson (AQ): Hi, I was about to write an article on your alleged pastebin. How can you show you are actually the DAO hacker?
Daoattacker (DA): (1) i’m not a hacker, nothing was hacked.
(2) i’m not “the attacker”, I’m intermediary, this is a team project
(3) the point of this pastebin is open dialog; soon we will have a smart contract to reward miners who oppose the soft fork and mines the transaction. 1 million ether + 100 btc will be shared with miners.
AQ: How soon? We talking hours, days?
DA: Sorry don’t have an exact date. Takes time to verify and make sure it is bug free
AQ: How can you show you are the owner of the child dao that has some 3.5 million ether I believe?
DA: Words don’t matter. Proof doesn’t matter. Smart contracts do.
DA: I saw your message in #general (Andrew Quentson asked for a summary of what was going on)
The 6.37 bitcoin giveaway is just a little demonstration that money speaks, and people in crypto are here for a profit. They don’t care if they’re being paid by “an attacker”.
AQ: Some suggest that a potential solution may be for you to have some of the funds and the rest returned in return for no fork, are you in any negotiations towards that end?
DA: Everything is on the table from our perspective, as long as there is no fork.
Read the full article written by Andrew Quentson on cryptocoinsnews.com