On Friday, former Mt Gox CEO Mark Karpeles posted on X promoting a pull request he opened on the Bitcoin Core GitHub repository. The request outlined a one-time hard fork to recover roughly 79,956 BTC stolen from the exchange in 2011. The Bitcoin community quickly dismissed the idea, with the vast majority of developers and users calling it an attack on the protocol’s core properties of neutrality and censorship resistance.
Mt Gox originally started in 2010 as a platform for trading Magic: The Gathering cards. Jed McCaleb, who went on to also be a co-founder of Ripple and Stellar, created it and sold the site to Karpeles in 2011 in exchange for six months of revenue. Karpeles became CEO and turned it into the dominant bitcoin exchange. By 2013 the platform handled 70 to 80 percent of global Bitcoin trading volume during the year’s big price rally; however, the exchange also suffered repeated technical problems throughout its run.
Can we get some bitcoins back to MtGox creditors?https://t.co/Z7rymy1vuS
— Mark Karpelès (@MagicalTux) February 27, 2026
Karpeles carries a reputation for poor management of the crisis surrounding the eventual collapse of Mt Gox. He faced criticism for not acknowledging insolvency sooner and for pointing to Bitcoin’s transaction malleability bug as the main cause of lost funds. A 2014 ETH Zurich study (PDF) later showed the exchange lost only 386 BTC to malleability attacks. The specific 2011 theft targeted in the new proposal involved hackers using stolen credentials to move funds to a known address that still holds the coins today. It’s unknown if anyone even has access to the private keys associated with that address, although humorously enough, Craig Wright once tried to claim ownership over the address as part of his debunked claims to be Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto.
Karpeles did not run the exchange when this specific theft happened but took over shortly afterward. Mt Gox filed for bankruptcy in early 2014. At the time the collapse raised fears that Bitcoin itself might not survive because so much of the early industry depended on the platform.
In terms of the technical details of Karpeles’s proposal, the code changes would implement a hard fork at a future block height that would let anyone spend the unspent outputs at address 1FeexV6bAHb8ybZjqQMjJrcCrHGW9sb6uF if they provide a signature from a designated recovery address 1zUrwsmiJxs19c8SJ8FyGZRXD1zUW77Wj. The recovered funds would go through Mt Gox’s court-supervised rehabilitation process to creditors. Karpeles notes the rule “makes a previously invalid transaction valid” and requires all nodes to upgrade.
Bitcoin developers and users shut down the discussion fast. The pull request was closed automatically within hours and locked as spam. One comment from longtime Bitcoin Core contributor Pieter Wuille directed serious consensus changes to the Bitcoin development mailing list instead. On X, longtime Bitcoin user and past employee at multiple Bitcoin startups Mandrik sarcastically wrote, “Yeah, let’s fundamentally change what Bitcoin is because someone did a terrible job running a custodial exchange.” Ark Labs’s Alex Bergeron replied simply “go away” before adding that Bitcoin users cannot rewrite the rules when losses occur.
Binance floated a similar idea in 2019 after losing 7,000 BTC worth about $40 million in a hack. CEO Changpeng Zhao suggested a coordinated reorg with mining pools to erase the theft, but he quickly dropped the plan after receiving pushback from Bitcoin developers and users.
Of course, another crypto network, Ethereum, took basically the exact step Karpeles now advocates in the early days of its existence. In 2016 the network hard-forked to recover funds from the DAO hack. Bitcoin developers at the time called it a dangerous precedent, and many detractors claimed that it undermined the supposed “code is law” ethos of crypto. Early Bitcoin contributor Peter Todd warned it “sets a precedent that an option to go deal with one of these failures is to go reset the chain.” Karpeles apparently sees this part of Ethereum’s history as a useful comparison to his new proposal, stating on X, “[Ethereum] showed us doing the right thing can work.”
Fortunately, bitcoin custody practices have strengthened since the days of Mt Gox. Exchanges such as Coinbase built robust security and compliance systems, and traditional financial players including BlackRock now offer bitcoin exposure through ETFs. That said, hacks and errors still happen. Earlier this month, a South Korean crypto exchange mistakenly sent its users paper bitcoin worth $43 billion before correcting the error. And late last year, a $120 million exploit on a longstanding and audited DeFi protocol shook confidence across the sector and raised questions about when these sorts of decentralized systems can be fully trusted without centralized fallbacks.
To be clear, nothing in Bitcoin’s code stops a hard fork like the one Karpeles suggested from being implemented if enough nodes and miners adopt it. The real barrier comes from economic incentives. Bitcoin’s value rests on its neutral, rules-based design that treats all participants equally. Changing the rules to favor one group of victims (in this case Mt Gox customers) would signal that the protocol can bend for political reasons, and that shift would likely reduce demand for the asset overall; therefore, the userbase as a whole is incentivized to resist such proposals. This was also a key aspect of Bitcoin’s block size war, where various hard fork attempts championed by major players in the industry were all unsuccessful.