Bitcoin Forum

It is assumed that significant part of bitcoins belong to Satoshi and few early adopters who mined when difficulty was low. Those funds represent significant part of potential Bitcoin supply, and significant part of world economy if Bitcoin is successful.

Bitcoiners claim that they don't rely on trust and any centralized authority, but in fact they trust Satoshi who probably can debase bitcoins anytime. And this seems to be a weakness of the cryptocurrency. People will probably panic if any of those early mined bitcoins move.

If Satoshi wants to ever spend his bitcoins, he should probably announce it in advance and start moving that funds at predictable pace (e. g. 1000 btc/day) to improve the long-term success of Bitcoin. That doesn't necessary mean to spend it. Just move it so that people don't panic when you really decide to spend it.

If Satoshi doesn't plan to ever spend his bitcoins, then he should probably destroy them (e. g. send them to some nonexistent address).

What do you think?

Why do people just automatically assume that we're at the best of times for BTC, why not cash out when it's 1000$/btc? Better yet why not cash out from USD to BTC?

what no option that he might just slowly give them away once the currency is more main stream?

I am not talking about the best time to cash out. My point is that some anonymous entity controls significant part of Bitcoin supply. Is it really more trustworthy than Federal Reserve? If it moves a single satoshi from the first few blocks, you'll probably see panic selling on the markets.

So I suggest that that entity decides whether it plans to spend bitcoins, or not. If it plans to spend them - then it should announce it in advance and do it at predictible rate, otherwise it would be a pure market manipulation and a nightmare for all bitcoiners.

If it doesn't plan to spend them, then it should destroy them.


Yes, it sounds good. I believe that is "Spend them at predictable pace" option.

Pretty good point actually.

what if some/most/all of them are lost? is that a possibility? by lost i mean, the owner can no longer access them or the owner isn't able to access (like owner is dead) , forgot password etc   :o

Im going to go anal:

-bitcoin/bitcoins: is the currency and, as any other currency, you dont capitalize the first letter.

-Bitcoin: is the name for the network, the protocol and even the software, therefore you capitalize the first letter.

Note that you can not write "Bitcoins", you can only write "bitcoins" because only the currency can be plural and you never capitalize it.

I agree, if bitcoins become world reserve currency S. owns alot of the world which is wrong. However if he decides to cash out n market toumbles, its a good buying opportunity because it can only happen one time

Edit: just realized... I would also own a good part of the world. Hmmm... Makes u think  :o

I used this word ~5 times in the original post, and wrote it with mistake only once. Just a typo.... But thanks for going anal your message, I fixed it!

Most of us have voted that he does what he wants with them.  I do not see how having him move them is beneficial to anyone.  They could be destroyed and will never move.  If he does move them, I vote that he sends them here:

1GLo32zbSmY8obFh9BNe47kwUaN7L8FVm1

(thats what she said)

They might decide to come up with a logarithmic valuation based on the difficulty of the generations, let some out that way, and keep the rest as a backup hash table for some as-of-yet undesigned or purposed algorithm, even a novel fork.  It all depends on how good the salsa is that night.

Why would anyone panic if he moves them...? Why cant he use bitpay and spend them to buy nice things?

I see no problem here.

Newbie here so corrections welcome:

1. If Satoshi destroys his coins then the value of the remaining coins has to go up to adjust right? So, really Satoshi is just "giving" coins away pro rata to everyone else who holds the remaining coins -- that's not debasement. It's actually worse then "spending" them in the sense that you've now irrevocably reduced the available liquidity further.

2. If Satoshi announces that he is going to liquidate his holdings than what is Satoshi going to liquidate to -- FIAT? Doesn't that contradict the whole premise for which Bitcoin was invented? In effect, aren't you asking the person who has the strongest feelings about the matter to go against their beliefs -- much less logic if Bitcoin is successful?  That still won't debase the currency -- I think you are misusing the word debase. I would agree that spending them would increase liquidity which will likely reduce any premium related to the scarceness of coins. However, not spending them is no different than people having savings in bitcoin. Satoshi just happens to have a lot of savings. :)

He should start donating BTC to charity, it would be great for the image of BTC to have its wealthy founder be an anonymous philanthropist.

If you turn your head to the side, the votes are giving this thread the finger.

He could offc do whatever he wants.

But - if he wanted to announce that they are in the market, it would be enough to move them around a little.

Oh my god. I love you. You speak the truth.
Even though, wouldn't you say the Dollar for the currency as a whole? So saying Bitcoin when speaking about the currency is ok to my mind. Bitcoin is the currency as a whole, network, protocol, or software if you want. bitcoin is for 1 bitcoin. bitcoins is for 1+ bitcoins.

He/they could be holding them in reserve in case the fees scheme does not prove to be sufficient incentive to keep mining when block rewards drop. In that case, satoshi just starts putting huge fees regularly or randomly onto small TX to create a new block "reward" regime, or a lottery reward ... just a thought.

There maybe other technical reasons why retaining a 10% cache of all the coins could be used to counter against attacks on bitcoin.

NB : Satoshi actually refers to it as BitCoin ... in all his posts so getting anal about nomenclature is silly.

Not just if you turn your head to the side. The essence of this thread is that we "the community" have some say over how Satoshi should spend his coins. In fact, we "the community" agree with the immutable logic that Satoshi should spend his coins however the fuck he wants. Which of course he should. And there is absolutely nothing we "the community" can do to stop that from happening.

So yes. The votes give this thread the finger. Logic gives this thread the finger.

If I was Satoshi I wouldn't let anyone know who I was. With that much untraceable wealth its just inviting criminals to kidnap him. Satoshi if you are reading this don't come out!!!

Then again if Satoshi was unfortunately dead, then there would be a mad hunt for his computer and the millions stored in them. Junk yards and second hand computer stores would be searched relentlessly.

I voted other. I think "unused" bitcoins at the moment should be invested into BTC related businesses and ideas to help boost the integrity, security and understanding of the currency! If I get lucky anytime soon I am going to set up some kind of grant or investment site to help BTC users who have innovative ideas. I personally have had many ideas that I think would/could benefit the community and currency but the only problem is the funding. :)

Andy B

Fair statement i suppose :P

Andy B

The idea that anyone who owns bitcoin can be told how to spend their bitcoin, the idea that anyone who owns bitcoin can and should not only be told what to do with them, but can have their bitcoins taken away from them flies in the face of the basic principles of what bitcoin is.

That thread poll is closer to "one in the pink, one in the stink".

YES! This is an excellent idea! Maybe you could lead by example so that Satoshi could see what it looks like to be philanthropic. After all, if you are going to suggest that someone else part with his money when the community demands, then you should be willing to do the same, no?

There is a charity address in my signature below. Thanks for your support!

Well, donating to people who perform work to continue making Bitcoin would be wise...and in his (and our) self interest.

What Satoshi does with their money is their business, now bugger off.