Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
A cryptocurrency exchange in Canada has lost control of at least $137 million of its customers' assets following the sudden death of its founder, who was the only person known to have access the the offline wallet that stored the digital coins. British Columbia-based QuadrigaCX is unable to access most or all of another $53 million because it's tied up in disputes with third parties.
The dramatic misstep was reported in a sworn affidavit that was obtained by CoinDesk. The affidavit was filed Thursday by Jennifer Robertson, widow of QuadrigaCX's sole director and officer Gerry Cotten. Robertson testified that Cotten died of Crohn's disease in India in December at the age of 30.
Following standard security practices by many holders of cryptocurrency, QuadrigaCX stored the vast majority of its cryptocurrency holdings in a "cold wallet," meaning a digital wallet that wasn't connected to the Internet. The measure is designed to prevent hacks that regularly drain hot wallets of millions of dollars (Ars has reported on three such thefts here, here, and here.)
Thursday's court filing, however, demonstrates that cold wallets are by no means a surefire way to secure digital coins. Robertson testified that Cotten stored the cold wallet on an encrypted laptop that only he could decrypt. Based on company records, she said the cold wallet stored $180 million in Canadian dollars ($137 million in US dollars), all of which is currently inaccessible to QuadrigaCX and more than 100,000 customers.
"The laptop computer from which Gerry carried out the Companies' business is encrypted, and I do not know the password or recovery key," Robertson wrote. "Despite repeated and diligent searches, I have not been able to find them written down anywhere."
The expert, she added, has already accessed Cotten's personal and work email accounts and is now trying to gain access to an encrypted email account. Cotten also used an encrypted messaging system, but the chances of successfully reading the communications appear dim because, the expert has reported, "messages would disappear from the encrypted messaging system after a short period."
-- submitted from IRC
Related Stories
A group of aggrieved crypto-coin investors want to exhume the corpse of a digital money exchange boss in a bid to find their missing millions.
Lawyers representing the out-of-pocket Quadriga CX punters have filed a request [PDF] to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to dig up and examine the body of Gerald Cotten, the deceased CEO of the now-defunct exchange.
In the letter, attorneys from law firm Miller Thomson ask that a detailed autopsy be performed in order to determine the exact cause of death for Cotten, who is interred at a cemetery in Halifax, Nova Scotia.
[...] Cotten is the exec who singlehandedly caused the crash of the Quadriga CX exchange late last year when, while apparently traveling in India, he was said to have died of complications related to Crohn's disease.
How? He apparently had the only copy of the passwords for the wallets where the funds (about $190 million) were held. That was the end for the Quadriga CX exchange. It was later discovered that Cotten had already drained the wallets to personal accounts. Given the circumstances of the death and the handling of the funds, there is a question that the death might have been faked.
It is hoped the exhumation and autopsy will clearly identify the body as actually being that of Cotten and thus end speculations of a possible ruse.
Previously:
Laptop of Crypto-Exchange Owner who Died with Keys to $137m Finally Cracked
Digital Exchange Loses $137M as Founder Takes Passwords to the Grave
Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/12/16/dead_coin_exec_exhumation/
When Canadian developer Peter Todd found out that a new HBO documentary, Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery, was set to identify him as Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin, he was mostly just pissed. "This was clearly going to be a circus," Todd told WIRED in an email.
[...]
The mystery has proved all the more irresistible for the trove of bitcoin Satoshi is widely believed to have controlled, suspected to be worth many billions of dollars today. When the documentary was released on October 8, Todd joined a long line of alleged Satoshis.
[...]
Since the documentary aired, Todd has repeatedly and categorically denied that he created Bitcoin: "For the record, I am not Satoshi," he alleges. "I think Cullen made the Satoshi accusation for marketing. He needed a way to get attention for his film."
[...]
The search for the creator of Bitcoin has dragged into its orbit a colorful cast of characters, among them Hal Finney, recipient of the first ever bitcoin transaction; Adam Back, designer of a precursor technology cited in the Bitcoin white paper; and cryptographer Nick Szabo, to name just a few. Journalists at Newsweek, The New York Times, and WIRED, among others, have all taken stabs at solving the Satoshi riddle. But irrefutable proof has never been unearthed.
[...]
The case for Sassaman was first outlined in 2021 by Evan Hatch, founder of crypto gaming platform Worlds. Whenever speculation about Sassaman bubbles periodically to the surface, the spotlight is thrown on his widow, software developer Meredith Patterson, who believes the theory is unfounded."People used to be really fucking nosy and entitled. I'd get people writing me with a two-page list of dates and locations, asking where I was at such and such a time or place," says Patterson. "Where do you get off? A complete stranger walking up to a widow and trying to interrogate her. It's like, fuck off Sergeant Joe Friday."
[...]
"I was relieved for myself and my family that they named Peter Todd," says Patterson. "But I feel sorry for Peter Todd. Frankly, nobody deserves getting a target painted on their back."
[...]
Todd expects that "continued harassment by crazy people" will become the indefinite status quo. But he says the potential personal safety implications are his chief concern—and the reason he has gone into hiding.
[...]
Hoback sees things very differently. Though there have been cases where violent extortionists have targeted crypto holders, plenty of people have been unmasked as Satoshi before—and nothing terrible is known to have happened to them, he argues. "I think the idea that it puts their life [at risk] is a little overblown," says Hoback.
Following on from an earlier story about the Canadian Crypto exchange whose owner died under suspicious circumstances with the keys to $137m of customers' assets, Business Insider Australia reports that some progress has been made[*] Spoiler alert: the funds are all gone.
The case has sparked numerous theories, including that he faked his own death and ran off with the cash.
However, court-appointed auditor Ernst & Young was able to crack Cotten's laptop. What they found, according to an EY report dated March 1, the accounts had been emptied in April 2018, eight months before his death.[*]
[* Ed.'s Update/Correction -- FP]
[...] A court-appointed auditor, Ernst & Young, has secured Cotten’s laptop, home computer, USB keys and home computer. Using public blockchain records, it determined the digital wallets thought to contain millions were emptied in April, eight months before his death [...]
I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @07:59PM (6 children)
Finally! You can take it with you! Downside: its cryptocurrency, not actual money.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Monday February 04 2019, @08:36PM (4 children)
But you can't use it in heaven, because they still lack an internet connection.
BTW if you chose cremation you can take actual bank notes with you. :-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by richtopia on Monday February 04 2019, @09:04PM (1 child)
Give it a few years and Heaven will be connected:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_(satellite_constellation) [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday February 05 2019, @06:11PM
Assuming, you're going with that, we've already had Satellite for a really, really long time. The cool new thing about Starlink is that it will actually be a lot closer to the Earth, so actually much farther from "the heavens".
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 4, Funny) by Gaaark on Monday February 04 2019, @10:05PM
No, you'll probably be the victim of a man in the middle attack: the mortician/embalmer will take it from you.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 2) by driverless on Tuesday February 05 2019, @03:13AM
Neither does hell, but then again you don't need one because all of Pornhub is already there with you, or will be eventually.
(Score: 2) by DeVilla on Thursday February 07 2019, @01:13AM
I know one religion that's been offering triple your money back if you don't achieve "eternal salvation". So, it's hell, but you'll have some spending money.
(Score: 2) by BsAtHome on Monday February 04 2019, @08:01PM (2 children)
The first rule of backup is to have backup people for your backup people.
The second rule of backup is to have backup backup people for your backup backup people.
Then you start building redundancies and eliminate other single point of failures.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Monday February 04 2019, @08:02PM
Or insurance. And insurance, probably.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05 2019, @03:02PM
Always backup your backup backup.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Captival on Monday February 04 2019, @08:08PM (24 children)
With hundreds of millions on the line, they can't hire one good hacker to get into this laptop? I wouldn't be surprised if they're covering up some embezzling, or even the guy faked his own death.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @08:23PM (3 children)
" or even the guy faked his own death"
I was guessing this, for market manipulation reasons.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @08:31PM (2 children)
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @08:46PM (1 child)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @11:27PM
"Gerry Cotten", hmm? Any relation to Jerry Cotton [wikipedia.org]?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Snow on Monday February 04 2019, @08:55PM (10 children)
Do you know how encryption works? You don't 'hack' properly implemented encryption. You brute force it.
Brute forcing the laptop is almost certainly a waste of time and energy. The keyspace is probably way too large to make it worthwhile, and that's assuming that the laptop is genuinely the laptop that has the info you want on it (instead of the real laptop being on an Indian beach with Gerald).
The laptop is almost certainly a dead end.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Monday February 04 2019, @09:41PM (5 children)
Technically you perform cryptanalysis, of which the secondary tool is brute forcing. The primary is looking for how the encryption may have been *improperly* implemented. There is a lot more improperly implemented encryption than there is properly implemented encryption. Unless you're a nation state, or willing to spend $50k for cloud resources, you're really not brute forcing anything properly implemented that is strong enough. I think that's why the NSA compromised a well used CSPRNG, to make sure that most encryption is improperly implemented.
In either case, you're assuming a single container. For highly sensitive data on my laptop you need to get through 5 containers. All individually encrypted. Main boot drive to start Ubuntu, second data drive to unlock access to secured data. Afterwards VeraCrypt containers within other VeraCrypt containers, each with hidden volumes. Hidden volumes are not so easy to brute force, because they're not so easy to find.
The solution to this not happening though is so very simple. I'm working on a project with other people right now where they can't lose what I have. I have the encryption keys in a folder with a paper that has the passphrases written out. This is stored in a safety deposit box at a bank with a lawyer having access to it in the event of my death.
That's what you do when you're not fucking idiots and are trying to be responsible, especially when you have investors in the project that had no problem asking what would happen if I died. I'm really surprised the people backing this guy didn't ask the same questions. I've had people balk at me building them platforms simply because I was a design team of 1. How this person got to manage nearly $200 million as a team of one person essentially is mind boggling.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Snow on Monday February 04 2019, @09:48PM (1 child)
It's worse when you consider that Bitcoin has native multisignature capability that can require x of y keyholders to sign a transaction for it to be considered valid.
In any case, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the problem appears not so much to be that the funds are locked, but rather there are no funds.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday February 04 2019, @10:38PM
Heh...put the funds in a Swiss account and 'die', leaving the evidence highly encrypted.
NICE!
Wish I'd thought of it. :)
Kind of like hiding a body in a mass grave and pouring, what...lime?lye? all over it and building a data center over the whole shebang.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 3, Interesting) by lentilla on Monday February 04 2019, @11:59PM
Here's a possible solution (and apologies if this is not news to you): Shamir's Secret Sharing [wikipedia.org]. This splits a secret into a number of component parts, and even allows for redundancy. For example: I could share my key with Alice, Bob and Charlie, and set the rules such that only two sub-keys are required to unlock. In the event of Bob's untimely passing and my decampment to an Indian beach - Alice and Charlie together could unlock the goodies.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday February 05 2019, @10:13AM (1 child)
If you're referring to what I think you're referring to, I'd not describe it that way. They compromised a *suite* by adding a CPRNG that was: utterly inefficient; chock full of the most suspicious-looking "nothing up my sleeve" numbers ever seen; not independently crypto-analysed; completely optional to use; and almost universally shunned (for the priorly stated reasons).
If so, in other yeah-right-that's-gonna-work news, my 7-year-old son just built a death robot to protect the flat from flying spider aliens.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05 2019, @03:06PM
Any flying spider aliens yet?
Just want to know if it is worth the effort of having my 7-year old build a death robot.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Monday February 04 2019, @10:00PM (1 child)
Exactly. But a lot of people just don't understand. They fail at basic logic. Well, many just don't get it about DRM either, so this isn't exactly surprising.
1. Either it's possible to communicate securely, or it isn't possible. As far as we can tell, it is possible to communicate securely. The only way to crack a properly implemented code is brute force, and there will be so many combinations it will take way more than 1 trillion years for 1 trillion computers to try them all. It will be utterly impractical, now, and forever. It won't be some idiotically short 3 letter combo such as OPE, Peace On Earth. Currently, the big joker in that could be quantum computing. If quantum computing makes it possible to simultaneously try as many combinations as desired, create a superposition of all possible combinations, then some forms of encryption, such as RSA, will be breakable.
2. Everyone can do it, or no one can do it. It simply won't be the case that some people can communicate securely, and others can't. WWII was an exception only because the Axis was too arrogant, and many believed their own propaganda that they were superior humans and thus dismissed out of hand the notion that the Allies might have cracked their communications. Thought they were too smart to make breakable encoding schemes, or, alternatively, that the Allies were too stupid to break it. If they couldn't break their own stuff, then of course the Allies couldn't break it either, so they thought. But today, it seems many in the military and government still think they can have it both ways like that, don't appreciate that the state of communication security that existed in WWII was the consequence of a bad blunder by the Axis, and think it can be replicated today, have it so we can read their messages, but they can't read ours. Thus, the push to plant backdoors everywhere, classify strong encryption as munitions and forbid its export, and other such nonsense.
The only real chance of cracking this cryptocurrency is the social engineering angle. Perhaps the keys were recorded in plaintext somewhere. Maybe they're in a password protected file on a personal computer, and the password is weak and can be guessed.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Tuesday February 05 2019, @01:25AM
It all depends on how smart 'our' side actually is.
Classifying strong encryption as munitions implies they think it'll work and are concerned. It implies that if our opponents get strong encryption they'd be safe.
That's exactly what you'd want them to think if you'd actually compromised their systems top to bottom and read everything in the clear. At the very least you'd want to sow confusion about what you're actually working on.
I'm doubt they're working on breaking good encryption head on, though sabotaging the method if possible would be on the list. Compromising the communications chain at another level is easier...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @10:15PM
'Properly implemented' is the key word. Without details it's impossible to say how hard a job it would be, but no technology is perfect and the attack surface is too large for any one person to see all of it, much less protect it. Chances are this guy just pulled a fast one though.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday February 05 2019, @10:06AM
The only time you brute force is when you have absolutely no idea what the solution to the problem might be (or you know the problem's so trivial it's not even worth using anything non-brutish to solve it).
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Monday February 04 2019, @08:59PM (6 children)
You watch too much TV. In the real world it does not work like that. At least if everything is set up properly.
Without a decryption key, you simply CAN'T decrypt data. Or if you can without guessing until way past the heat death of the universe, then your encryption was worthless crap.
Then again, did they try 12345? :P
(Score: 3, Insightful) by turgid on Monday February 04 2019, @09:02PM (4 children)
It's only the hard drive that's encrypted. The 0s and 1s are just regular unscrambled binary. You can read it off with a very sharp magnetised knitting needle. My friend in the SAS showed me.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 3, Funny) by edIII on Monday February 04 2019, @09:25PM (3 children)
May I have some of what you're smoking? :)
You can't encrypt a hard drive and have unscrambled (plain-text) bits...
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Immerman on Monday February 04 2019, @10:45PM (2 children)
Sure you can -the bits on the hard drive are always unscrambled, perfectly ordinary zeros and ones*. It's only the data they're storing that can be scrambled...
*Actually often 2s,and 3s as well, and quite possibly many more. Very few modern storage media use binary-state physical data representations.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05 2019, @03:09PM (1 child)
Pretty sure magnetic storage is still ones and zeros, SSDs I know sometimes use other states.
Unless something has changed in the last two years since I was let go from that industry.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday February 05 2019, @04:08PM
Yes SSDs mostly use 2-3 bits (4 or 8 potential charge levels) per physical storage location, but I'm fairly certain so do many modern hard drives. Not the new vertical-magnet style ones of course, but if you're storing data as a traditional horizontal magnetic alignment you can use a somewhat more sophisticated read-write head to set and detect N/S alignment as well as E/W, doubling the data density. Or go another step to an 8-point compass and you can store 3 bits per location.
Hmm, I could swear I had heard about new drives coming out that did that years ago, but Google is being uncooperative. I suppose it's possible I misremembered.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Immerman on Monday February 04 2019, @10:39PM
>In the real world it does not work like that. At least if everything is set up properly.
Make up your mind. Are we in the real world, or is everything set up properly? Generally speaking the two are postulates are incompatible.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05 2019, @02:50PM (1 child)
I find it highly questionable that this is stored on a single prone to dropping, spilling stuff on, breakable, laptop; which requires the CEO to manually unlock something and then probably manually transfer something every time one of their 100000 customers wants to use their crypto-money.
That's what I find the questionable bit.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday February 05 2019, @04:15PM
That would be questionable, but that's not how you'd use a cold wallet.
Think of it like the vault at the bank. When you go in to make a withdrawal, they're not going to go get "your" money out of the vault - "your" money is just a tally on a ledger sheet. What they really do is give you some money from the limited-capacity register (a hot wallet) and update the ledger sheet. Then they periodically move money between the register and vault as needed to keep the register from getting empty (or overfull from deposits).
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Unixnut on Monday February 04 2019, @08:10PM
This applies to crypto, non-crypto and other exchanges.
Just like "on the Cloud" is a synonym for "someone elses computer", "On the exchange" is a synonym for "someone elses bank account/wallet".
Now, crypto exchanges are a bit more risky that non crypto ones, because you can't just print/magic up a bunch of Bitcoin and distribute it to those whose deposits have been lost, like you can with fiat currencies (unless you are in Cyprus, where you just have money go missing from your account), which is why it is all the more important to keep cryptos in your own wallet, under your control.
I keep the bare minimum of money on exchanges, just enough for the trades I am doing, and anything left over is money I can afford to lose, and this applies to both Crypto and normal exchanges, and I would recommend it as good practice to others.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Snow on Monday February 04 2019, @08:19PM (10 children)
Kinda sucks... All the evidence so far suggests that if I do get anything back, it will be pennies on the dollar.
One of the great things about the blockchain is that you can follow the money. Some people have collected a bunch of addresses used to collect and payout funds to and from Quadriga. Based on the initial analysis, it appears as though Quadriga DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A COLD WALLET.
The initial findings show 'robbing peter to pay paul' type activities where other deposits were rerouted to be used as withdrawals (which in itself is not damning, but combined with the apparent lack of a cold wallet is quite concerning).
Also, the 'death' of the Geral Cotten is rather odd. He died in India of 'complications from his chron's disease' while setting up an orphanage. That's quite the death story...
Pray for me SN. Hopefully I get a bit of my money back (I'm not too hopeful though).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @08:36PM (1 child)
Your comment makes me wonder... is there a deeper conspiracy going on? It wouldn't be the first time somebody has faked their death to get lots of money (to get out of a debt, or to abscond with money). $137M is a LOT of money, too.
Is there any way to check if this money gets spent in the future to confirm if there is fraud going on here?
(Score: 2) by Snow on Monday February 04 2019, @08:44PM
That was initially the goal of collecting the wallet addresses.
Take the different payout and deposit addresses, trace them back to a cold storage account and then monitor it for movements. The problem is that no cold storage account could be located.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @08:40PM (1 child)
is there any benefit to these e-wallets?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @08:42PM
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @08:41PM (4 children)
(Score: 2) by Snow on Monday February 04 2019, @08:48PM (3 children)
They also held many millions in CAD and USD. (Or were supposed to...)
This will almost certainly be investigated by some government agency. Will the crypto site be competently investigated or will the focus be on the CAD/USD side of things?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @09:27PM (1 child)
It will not be investigated. It wasn't a crime, just an accident. In essence, you loaned your money to a private person, and that person died with no records where he hid the money. Even if you prove wrongdoing, getting the money back seems to be impossible. It's actually worse in the case of fraud - the money was hidden specifically from investors. A civil lawsuit against a null company - what is the purpose? The crying widow says she is not involved; and there is nobody else.
The only real chance to get somewhere is to find the "dead" partner, if he is not dead after all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @11:57PM
Aren't there bank accounts too?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday February 05 2019, @10:54AM
Are they registered as a bank or equivalent? Because if they aren't, they aren't even a legitimately operating business entity. They'd be a criminal organisation, presumably by design guilty of wire fraud and money laundering. *By design*. And people gave them money why?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @11:18PM
A fool and his box-top stamps are soon parted.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @09:06PM (2 children)
Dear Friend, My name is Aishwary Bhavsar. I am the widow of a very rich cryptocurrency manager. Regrettably all the money ($137 million) is stuck in a laptop with lost password. The money is now legally written off as dead loss. To get the money I need expert hacker to break in the laptop but I don't have money to pay him. If you would please be kind and send me $1000 to pay for expert I give you half share in the money. Please email back only if serious.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Tuesday February 05 2019, @01:28AM
Or - I've emailed the encrypted version of one wallet. Learn the pass phrase and we'll split the money from the rest.
(file contents filled with /dev/random)
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday February 05 2019, @10:55AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 04 2019, @09:52PM (2 children)
There are three goals in infosec and if you don't have some kind of 3-of-5 or escrow system for your encryption keys you're failing one of them.
(Score: 1, Troll) by realDonaldTrump on Monday February 04 2019, @10:42PM (1 child)
Thank you. Thank you. Our F.B.I. has been working very hard on the Escrow. The Key Escrow. Otherwise known as RESPONSIBLE ENCRYPTION. So our Law Enforcement guys can get in when they need to. Remember San Bernardino!!!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05 2019, @02:21AM
Remember, remember the 5th of November.
(Score: 5, Funny) by kazzie on Tuesday February 05 2019, @07:13AM (2 children)
Get cryptocurrency miners to brute-force the encryption key: the more keys you test, the greater share of the money you get when the encryption is broken.
Simples!
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday February 05 2019, @10:57AM (1 child)
Award yourself Post Of The Story from me.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Tuesday February 05 2019, @04:42PM
Thanks!
I was kind of expecting someone to go to great pains to point out why it could never work, but it seems they've not come by yet.
(Score: 2) by DavePolaschek on Tuesday February 05 2019, @01:19PM
...or they would have had $1337 million in assets.