Bitcoin Forum

 Bitcoin should be forked and Satoshi's 1 million Bitcoin destroyed completely, if he really owns that much.
A sudden withdrawal of of 1 million (or large gradual withdrawals) should be regarded as an attack on Bitcoin.

Or it should be frozen for now until developers are sure no one is going to withdraw the whole thing and crash the market.

How is withdrawing 1 million BTC an "attack" on bitcoin? It's Satoshi's money. Let him do whatever he wants with his money. He can spend it all on blackjack and hookers and hell do I care how he wants to spend it.

People like to complain about altcoins with a premine but bitcoin essentially has a premine as well.  Its not like anyone else really even knew about bitcoin back then and those that did weren't really interested.

If people want to fork and block those coins I would be fine with it, it is a community decision after all.  If Satoshi really cared about the money he could spend it beforehand, a lot of new investors are scared he will come and dump on the market someday.

Why Satoshi's million BTC should be destroyed completely and who has the right to do so? Even if he really owns that much, then it is his own right to do everything with it. He created it, he owns it and he has the right to withdraw/sell or even burn it anytime he wish.
You have too wild imagination to destroy what other's have.

If you will allow that, what would prevent them to do another fork if they see another address accumulating bitcoin? Then bitcoin will be useless because of the endless fork.

Besides, satoshi has the right to own that bitcoin just like you have the right to own the bitcoin you currently possess. Are you turning bitcoin into a government that can freeze or capture your money if they want to?

I am totally against this. Satoshi created the coins fair and square. And no Bitcoin does not have a premine. Premine is when blocks are mined before public release. Other people were mining in 2009/2010 at the same time as Satoshi. If you were to accumulate large amounts of coins would you be okay with the network forking to negate your holdings? Lastly this would set a bad presendent for decentralizated networks going foward.

Fork what you like, just don't assume people will naturally want to follow your fork.  I suspect anyone who respects property rights will not be following a chain that advocates theft.  This topic has come and gone so many times now and yet some people still don't seem to understand the concept of ownership after all these years.

Are you thinking that bitcoin creator is a fool person? A fool person can't create this kind of advanced technology. So how are you thinking that satoshi might withdraw his/her 1 million bitcoin at a time? Why he/she will want to dump his/her created coin? New fork/upgrade will not acceptable by community is it's not done by satoshi himself. So I don't think upgrade is possible without satoshi. And there is no reason to destroy his/her btc. How greedy are you, how you wondering that creators bitcoin should destroy. If other people try to make fork then it will different coin, it would not be bitcoin.

Very stupid idea. Apart from the miners, I don't think that anyone else is going to support such a move. If you destroy the 980,000 coins that Satoshi own and redistribute these coins to future mining reward, then all of us will face losses. It will create additional supply of coins to the market and the prices can crash quite heavily. It may trigger a correction, which can last for many years.

feel free to create your own fork altcoin from the current bitcoin because nobody ever wants a bitcoin that allows others to spend their coins based on arbitrary reasons they think of.

if we start with coins that you claim are Satoshi's then there is no stopping there. next someone else will come and say let's spend Ucy's coins because i don't like the guy's name. and we must follow that fork too if we follow your fork.

how about start by destroying your own bitcoins to prove how noble your idea is before desiring that other peoples coins should be destroyed

This person or a group of people gave us something we all value, and this is how you want to express gratitude? By destroying the money or taking it away? And for what, only out of fear that once this money might be withdrawn and make the market bleed? How many whales would panic if such a fork went through? First Satoshi's money, their fund can be the next to go, right? Not to mention the FUD such an event can generate. Some say you can fork whatever you want, just don't expect others to join you. I, however, think that a person who cares about Bitcoin and the market would not go for an idea that can split the community into two once again, making it weaker.

What do you mean by destroy, you can't destroy bitcoin otherwise it defies the whole idea of it being the crypto that it is today, it is true that 1 million bitcoin is not something that needs to be taken lightly and if at some point that amount as you said would be moved either at one time or gradually from one address it will bring a lot of drama and controversial to the bitcoin market and community, but at least we know that such thing would not to happen as i don't think satoshi himself would do anything that will influence bitcoin in a bad thing at least not after all these years.

It's going to be a tough sell to convince the community and developers to accept a fork for the sole purpose of destroying the coin accumulation of one individual, the creator of Bitcoin, especially because your sole reasoning is "Satoshi has too many BTC."

I have always seen those addresses as a "security bounty", anyways.

And yet some investors agree with the kept tokens of the team in one ICO project?
Why not the creator of bitcoin can keep his own part.
And to also add up he did not get it for free. He mined those coins and believed in the technology that he created.

Why not try to be on his position and what if someone tells you to do the same? Destroy your owned coins because you own it? C'mon!

Why should Satoshi's 1 million Bitcoin be destroyed?

I think you should just burn your own coins!

Satoshis bitcoins can if he never claims them, maybe one day be used to pay miners to continue their mining operations, but this should not be necessary for the next many decades, but his coins should be enough to pay for mining rewards for hundreds or even thousands of years.

Yeah, bring the pitchforks and let's burn all his coins, the damn kulak (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak#Human_impact)
To be really honest I'm amazed you haven't proposed that the coins should be redistributed to the addresses with a balance of less than two satoshis.

Oh, and there is one fork, don't remember if it's bitcoin diamond/silver/platinum or whatever that claimed it will destroy every coin before block xxxxx, till satoshi's disappearance.

If anyone is able to destroy those bitcoin from the genesis block, the entire system will crash without a doubt, do you really know the reason why people are investing in bitcoin and why the market has flourished to a multi billion market, it is simply because of the trust in the system and another factor is  decentralization, if anyone is able to destroy the coins then that trust factor is diminished, so think carefully what you wish for  :P.

and what exactly gives you the authority to decide what other people do with amounts of bitcoin they have? Satoshi or anybody else having a large amount of bitcoin is none of anybody's business. that is why bitcoin is bitcoin not some shitcoin!
and why don't you start with this address and all the others that are linked to it (which belongs to you):
https://www.blockchain.com/en/btc/address/1KkDVZKQyC9am8S2Kw3Skvu3nbTYbFiome
i say lets burn your coins first because your username here has 3 letters and i don't like it, that is the same reasoning you are using to burn Satoshi's coins anyways :D

Why would he want to destroy something that he has invented? For the second part of your question, there are two possible explanations. The first one is that he probably has lost the private keys to the wallets and therefore he is unable to spend the coins. If that is not the case, then he is waiting for even higher prices to sell his coins.

I think that the precedent of such a fork would completely destroy the trust in Bitcoin itself. Such a suggestion goes against the very nature of bitcoin. It is a permanent ledger of all prior transactions. Even if those coins did eventually move, the market would absorb them and those coins are already counted in the circulating supply calculations regardless. He mined them and had a fair launch...you could have learned about Bitcoin at an earlier period of time and mined a huge amount of coins yourself if you had done your homework. Bitcoin is a global free market that is designed to be immune to any central interference.

Such a fork would mean Bitcoin is no longer decentralized.

You know what a few years ago a whale created a Sell wall on one of the mayor exchanges and he/she dumped a large amount of coins onto an exchange. The Bitcoin users stood together and they chipped away at that wall, until it was gone in a few days.

When Satoshi's coins gets dumped, the price of bitcoins will go down and people would be buying low priced coins like crazy, then the market will recover slowly and we will continue as normal. The plus side of this is the 1 000 000 coins that would once again be available in the total supply of bitcoins.  ;)

one of the main reasons why I (and many others) chose bitcoin was because it allows us to have full control over our money and it doesn't let anybody else touch it. your idea is taking that away and I would never follow that bitcoin.

it was JGarzik's fork if I am not mistaken where he started the fork after the SegWit2x failed. and it was obviously an altcoin that nobody paid any attention to and died in its early days.

Once the developer and community start deciding like this that person has so much amount of coin let burn it, then nobody is going to support any project.
You forget that early investor always get huge benefits if project become successful.

Anyway OP idea is against the Bitcoin idea that says "nobody else can control your money".

People like OP just want to get rich quick, this is why they are into Bitcoin, and this is why they are so worried about theoretical scenarios when someone crashes the market. I wonder if in the future we'll have more attack that will target this part of the community, something like SegWit2x and Bcash have tried - promising people high profits while saying that Bitcoin will fall because it will get abandoned.

I still feel that "attack" isn't the right word.  Do you feel that the OP is trying to attack Bitcoin, or is it just that their views might be a little misguided?  Same with the different fork proposals you mentioned.  Just because some users might have ideas that don't integrate well with your own beliefs, doesn't necessarily mean we have to presume hostility on their part.  People are allowed to have bad ideas every once in a while.  It's if/when they take things to excessive levels that we should start to think of it as an attack.

It would be fair to describe the actions of certain individuals in their chosen methods to promote certain fork coins as an attack, but that doesn't mean we can attribute the actions of these particular individuals to all users of those chains.  Nor does it mean the fork coin itself is an attack.

I understand the temptation for people to go with the "if you're not with me, then you're against me" mentality, but sometimes we take it too far.  One could argue there's enough toxic behaviour in the community already and that we don't need to contribute to that by treating every opposing idea as some sort of threat.

Is it possible to freeze someones withdrawal transaction without even affecting other transactions on the Bitcoin network? I thought we can freely send and receive our Bitcoin without any hindrance, so the development team is still in charge o our moneys flow if that is a yes.

Right, let him sleep in peace. Don't disturb him to say 'freeze his/her 1 Millions Bitcoin until he is active', it is Satoshi's money and he will decide when he will withdraw his money from the market. The last 10 years he is holding from an unknown source.

It's actually around 4.76%. Sorry. Couldn't help it.  ;D

Pretty much. We don't even know if he's alive or dead. But regardless? Taking his funds just to increase the circulating supply is simply just wrong in a moral and ethical level.

Obviously, you won't get consensus on this

And if you decide to just fork off, so to speak, thereby creating another shitcoin, people will continue to use the original Bitcoin. Other than that, it has already been done in the past, so you may want to learn about Litecoin which has exactly that done and doesn't have 1M coins premined to Satoshi Nakamoto (or Charli Lee, for that matter). If I'm not mistaken, even Bitcoin Cash with its subsequent forks didn't destroy Satoshi's coins

you are funny , lets fork and destroy your coins instead , would you like that?
and why withdrawing 1 mil coins is an attack on bitcoin? sounds like nonsense to me
even if withdrawing or transferring it or whatever he wishes to do with them is threatening anything
it is his coins and he can do with them what he pleases
besides I have a very strong feeling these coins are not going to move any time soon if at all

Dumping 1 million BTC could cause a crash but the chances for Satoshi to come back just to dump his wallet is so small and if he does the market can always recover.

If all of his BTC would be taken away there would be a hard fork and this isn't reasonable. Imagine if your BTC would be taken away because of the same reason.

That will not happen, because if he moves those bitcoins his anonymity will instant disappear... So he could become instant rich but not for much time because police would take him to jail before he could even touch that money.

But maybe frozen those btcs is a smart move.

Terrible Idea that nobody needed a thread on.

If the 1million bitcoin didn't move at all when it was worth $20 billion, it is quite likely that it never moves as Satoshi left the project years ago.

Nobody would have started bitcoin with an endgame of earning more than $1 billion, that would be insane.

And most importantly, with a vengeance

As is often the case, the waiting for an event is more frustrating than its outcome itself, so when the market eventually recovers from such a shock, it should recover with a surplus as these coins will no longer be a potential pain in the ass of many big-time investors. It will just open doors to future unimpeded growth

Further, if Satoshi (or whoever controls the keys from his coins) decides to sell them, he can easily sell the best part of them off the market, i.e. trade them over-the-counter via private connections with deep pockets. In this case, his sell-off won't affect the market very much and we will still have the burden of his stash off our backs

there is absolutely nothing good about this!
first of all you don't know and you have no way of knowing which coins actually belong to Satoshi so you would be guessing and destroying any coin of anybody who mined bitcoin in early days!
secondly you are not allowed to touch other people's bitcoins! doing that would defeat the whole purpose of bitcoin and turn it into a shitcoin right away.

What?you damn no respect for the founder and creator of bitcoin?after you earn from what the man/woman gaved you this is what you will give in return?how dare you man.Satoshis privilege for having that amount (if the person really does) is tolerable because of what he did,and Satoshi is not that stupid to withdraw the said 1million bitcoin straight forward when she knows what will be the effect to the creation she made.

This is a very bad idea and would destroy the trust in Bitcoin. If you start forking coins out of the network, that would be the beginning of the end. Nobody has the right to decide at Bitcoin which coins are ok and which are not. Once the coins from Satoshi have been foked away, which coins will follow? Yours, mine or which ones? And who will decide that? As you can see, such a move would destroy the credibility of a decentralized currency. Even though Satoshi's coins seem like a threat, they're not.  ;)

I see it the same way. Messing with the blockchain is the end of bitcoin. This is exactly what Satoshi wanted to prevent when he started bitcoin: a system where the flow of money is regulated. The only reason why forks should happen is to improve the programming, not to tell who can own what.

From a moral standpoint, I can't help but think some people are looking at this from the wrong angle.  I get why people want to defend satoshi because "they're the founder/creator", or "it's disrespectful" or "because of everything they've done for Bitcoin", etc, but the same should apply to absolutely anyone.  Theft is theft and that's what the OP is advocating.  Even if there was someone really terrible who tried to do bad things to Bitcoin, it would still be wrong to for anyone to say we should fork and destroy their coins.  Two wrongs don't make a right.

To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty Ownership Rights, to purchase a little temporary Safety Market Stability, deserve neither Liberty Ownership Rights nor Safety Market Stability."

Fork versus destroy are two different things if you ask me

And while I certainly agree that stripping someone of his legitimately obtained coins is an outrage in and of itself, this is not the same as forking as it would be as outrageous to forbid someone to fork Bitcoin (even if it were technically possible). So, in a sense, a fork is a workaround for the moral issues your raise in your post

Therefore, if someone did actually try to do something nasty to Bitcoin (say, Satoshi himself, for whatever reason), it would be a right and legit thing to do according to your own considerations as everyone is free to do anything with their fork (including destroying someone's coins)

Don't get me wrong, anyone has the right to create that fork, but I have to right to call it morally reprehensible.  The people on that chain would be immoral hypocrites in my eyes.  They would believe their property rights should be respected when they disrespect the rights of others.  If that's what they want to do, they're perfectly free to.  But I suspect their chain won't be very popular.

That's a completely different matter

Technically, you can consider anything "morally reprehensible", at least as long as we stick to the opinion that morality is an entirely personal issue. But in that case we can't actually claim that something is moral while something else is not as it is only a matter of personal preference. To put it simple, you are now trying to twist your reasoning in such a way that it wouldn't look too inconsequential

Basically, you say that it is morally reprehensible in your eyes while still trying to make it look like it is a bad thing in general. To sum it up, if we assume that anyone has the right to fork, we should as well assume that they also have the right to do with the fork whatever they choose and that cannot be judged or argued from a moral standpoint

Theft is normally considered a bad thing in general, yes.  I wasn't aware we were debating that.  You can create a fork to deprive people of their coins if you want, but I'm going to take the personal view that you're a bad person if you do it.  What part of that wasn't clear?

There's a catch, though

If forking is not a theft, then your train of reasoning fails instantly. If we accept that forking a coin is an inalienable and natural right of everyone (which looks a plausible assumption in my eyes), then you can't possibly claim that a fork is a theft as theft cannot be considered such a right, to begin with. On the other hand, if you disagree, then there is no other choice but to accept that a fork, and any fork for that matter, is a bad thing on its own (a theft in itself). That's the power of simple logic. So what is your pick?

Neither, because I fundamentally reject your entire premise.  The act of forking only becomes an act of theft if the purpose or intent of your fork is to deprive someone of their property.  Each fork should be judged on the effects of its code.  

If we take your stance to its logical extreme, if I were to create a fork that redirected every single transaction to an address where I controlled the private key, would you dare to claim I'm not trying to steal from people?  Or are you now saying I don't have the right to create that fork where I can steal from people?  Now what is your pick?  Suddenly you realise the dilemma.  

The only reasonable stance is that people can create forks like that, because:
 
a) no one can stop them from doing it
and
b) I personally wouldn't want to try to stop them if I could because it's not my place to do so

But what we can do is say it's morally wrong and then let people decide for themselves if they want to follow that fork or not.

^^ calling it "theft" is just branding it with a false description if you ask me. and this has nothing to do with theft. this is all about the fact that nobody should be allowed to make decisions about other people's funds in bitcoin. if we allow that to happen, then it won't stop there. next thing you know people would start wanting their money back when they lost it in some scam, there will be roll back forks all around us and immutability of bitcoin is going to be a historical feature.

Split Bitcoin as much as you like but it will not affect the value of the original Bitcoin . Bitcoin has been forked several times but its the new coin thatl struggles to be relevant. Forking can not destroy Satoshi's Bitcoin holdings but will make him richer for forks incentives Bitcoin holders with their new coins.
Bitcoin Cash gave for each bitcoin (BTC), an owner got 1 Bitcoin Cash (BCH).Bitcoin Gold gave for each BTC, an owner got 1 Bitcoin Gold (BTG). Bitcoin SV gave for  each Bitcoin Cash (BCH), an owner got 1 Bitcoin SV (BSV).

But is it my premise in the first place?

Wasn't it in fact you who first mentioned a fork (a certain fork) as a means of depriving people of their property? But there's another catch, still. When you create a fork, is it legitimate to claim that the coins in that fork actually belong to their owners on the original blockchain? As I see it, this is not the case here, so your entire idea of "depriving people of their coins" via a fork seems highly dubious to me as there's technically nothing to deprive of

Apart from that, it also goes against the whole Bitcoin paradigm, i.e. removing value judgments from anything related to cryptocurrencies. But this is exactly what you are doing here. Really, your point ultimately boils down to saying that a fork should be morally judged on some abstract assumptions like the ones stated which some people may agree with while others not so much

You bring it right to the point with your statement. Nobody should be allowed in a system like Bitcoin to determine which coins are ok and which are not. A fork to improve programming I will always support, but not a fork that takes any coins out of the system. Such a fork will never get my support.
In the end no one can predict if Satoshi will use his coins at some point or not, but one way or another they belong to the 21 million Bitcoins that there will be at some point. So no one shouldn't be afraid of it.  :)

There are a legion of Bitcoin forks already (and counting)

But they are mostly of no interest to anyone. Thus, if someone wipes away Satoshi's satoshi (provided it hasn't been done already and not just once at that), are you going to lose sleep over it? As there can be only one true Bitcoin, there seems to be only one true Bitcoin fork and that is Bitcoin Cash so far (though the doors are open). It makes a good vehicle for speculation, just in case. In fact, people are heavily overestimating the impact of these forks

Oh right, so you want to impose rules and regulations, terms and
conditions to owning bitcoin is it?

Ill bet you wouldnt mind storing millions of bitcoin and further
you would "withdraw" them at an oportune time that is beneficial
for your pocket.

Is Bitcoin decentralized or not? What you're talking about is hard-coding censorship into the protocol. That would destroy everything Bitcoin stands for today.

Free markets are free markets. Someday, those coins will probably be moved and sold because they're held on exposed public keys. If someone wants to dump 1 million coins on the market, it's a good thing in the long run. Distribution from one entity to many is healthy for the overall distribution of money supply. It may result in a painful few years for holders, but it's not worth engaging in hard-coded censorship over.

Exactly. I can't see why it would be beneficial to destroy ~1,000,000 BTC because all it does is damage the trust within the community. The belief that all 21,000,000 coins exist, and won't be destroyed, is paramount. Just because someone doesn't want their investment to go down in value they're willing to break that trust is ridiculous.

It's a good thing that nothing like this has happened yet, as it would set a dangerous precedent. I don't like the other concepts of "re-adding" the coins to the overall pool after a certain time limit, as that makes things like vaults useless, in some cases. Let the free market do its thing and don't try to adjust it based on what you want. If the market gets flooded, too bad. There's no justification for destroying anything in this community.

Even if its sold someone else will buy it. You shouldn't fear the free market, embrace it and learn to use it to your advantage. Cheap bitcoins? Buy while you can...

Or perhaps he lost his priv keys anyway. Can you track how much of the 17.5 million bitcoins are "moving"? Some will never move again from lost keys. Forking over something like this is unacceptable.

You have a socialist mind, and want "intervention", but there is no State or institution so you are appealing the Bitcoin developers AND the community that keep the nodes and mining. But they won't accept such a thing.

Transitioning from a culture where you are used to a State controlling, to one where there is no one who can manipulate the money no matter what, is part of the maturity. It isn't even Bitcoin's maturity, but the people that think they understand it.

Accept that there is that million out there, and that it could be moved at any moment, or never. Its part of bitcoin's value.

Oh; Satoshi sold his million. Good for him, he deserves it. Or let him hold them for another decade, when the price gains an extra zero or so...

I don't think so, and every user is 'fully entitled' to treat their money in the bitcoin format. If you are weak with this opinion, meaning that the meaning of bitcoin decentralization can be declared lost. Decentralization is one of the principles of Satoshi Nakamoto, this factor has finally created trust in the user community and has been able to increase the value of bitcoin itself, but banks and governments do not remain silent whenever they often take reactionary actions in the community whose purpose's to limit the use of bitcoin broader.


If they do this thing, then the loss of public trust and the decline in the number of users will certainly occur significantly, then what can we be proud of with the performance of bitcoin.

Every fork in disagreement will just create one more additional chain. Satoshi's Bitcoins are part of the mystery and history of Bitcoin.

You are kidding right! No one has the right to block someone of his own money even is the whole community agreed on this that would still be wrong and will for sure lid to the end of Bitcoin because no one will dare to hold big portion of Bitcoin ever again because simply he might wake up and see his money gone with a fork.

Took a vacation and coming back on this.  :-X

Lols, If I was importuned to buying 1M bitcoin at it earliest stage, I would have kept them and probably sold some during the ATH season. Oh yes! they are mine and there is nothing anyone can do about that, I determine when to spend it. This same situation is currently applicable to Satoshi's 1M bitcoin holding and he deserves even more than that. I doubt he's really interested in selling off his bitcoin, if he chooses to, people will be happy to buy cheap, but he will not.

There's no fork that will get close to bitcoin let alone destroying it. We don't know for sure how much bitcoins that Satoshi has. He originated the technology and he has right to use, spend and withdraw as he likes. Fine, withdrawing the whole amount will be felt as bitcoin is not just any altcoin.

I am against it. Would i want to see 1 million bitcoin dumping on exchanges, no! But i don't believe it will happen. Even i don't think satoshi will ever lay finger on that bitcoin. Still, it is his and he can do whatever he wants.

only if it was you but unfortunately its not . in the case of satoshi , he did hold 1m bitcoins but he didnt sold them at the 2017's peak  . maybe he is waiting for much higher ath ? hmmm...


yes he deserve more than that but there is no point of owning a bitcoin on his wallet because bitcoin is already his own invention and he offically owns all the 21m bitcoin  .


we will never know . maybe he will sell it in the future or not but lets hope he wont ,  because if that happens  , i think this can cause an impact on the price of bitcoin  . bitcoin can go down quickly but the price might also recover quickly because alot of people will use this oppurtunity to buy more coins .

I really don’t think anybody needs to worry about Satoshi’s bitcoin’s. He could be dead for all we know. The price hit near 20k USD & he sold nothing so even if he’s alive bitcoin is his work, his art, his masterpiece. I don’t think he would crash the price by selling.

What have you done for BTC ? i think nothing and just came here and say this ? lol Satoshi is one who made this thing we must be a billionaire make his life we havnt problem with this and it cant be any problem with withdrawing or anything we all must be grateful to him he the god of btc and crypto that is all i know.

Maybe Satoshi has just send them to addresses where he doesn't own the private keys. Mean these coins are lost forever and we don't need to speculate and worry what happens when he's going to send or sell them. And if it's not the case I can guess he won't ever sell them because that wouldn't make sense to come back, when Satoshi left, everything was well planned.

I think he isn't in for the money and doesn't plan to sell if BTC reaches x USD.  :D

Leaving them for now makes the most sense. Maybe later freeze them.

Its not the right time to do that i guess and i believe Satoshi is not dead yet and he’s still working behind the scene. He will not crash the price because he wanted bitcoin to be on the main market so i think he will still hold that bitcoin until we reach the moon.

Bitcoin shouldn't be forked, forking usually going to create a problem in the market and create more unnecessary coin into the market, and Satoshi also won't be that stupid to destroy its own coin by selling the coin in a huge bulk, and it can't be consider as an attack, everyone got the right to sell the coin no matter how big is the amount

Uh huh. How will you decide what is 'really' his and what is someone else's?

Why not get rid of all coins mined before 2017? The people who mined them were probably dicks compared to all the cool dudes we have now.

I have a better idea

I don't suggest burning all those coins (prior to 2017, 2018, 2019, whatever...) as this is an obvious overkill but why not announce sort of "bank holidays" (let's call it blockchain holidays), so that no one of the old holders (say, older than a month) can move their coins anywhere. In this way, we will be leveling out the playing ground for newbies

We can even go as far as to set the length of these holidays depending on how old your stash is. For example, if you kept the coins for 7 years, your won't be able to touch them for 7 weeks (7 months would do even better). What do you guys think of this idea? Will it help Bitcoin adoption?

I mean the fed could just print a bunch of money and crash the price to 0 if they wanted to. they would buy it all up and just sell it at a loss... they don`t care.

Leave satoshi`s coins alone, he or she earned them just like everyone else, sure he/she had mad advantage because of higher rewards but still it is the same with gold, whoever was there first collecting had a bigger advantage because scarcity was less common.

Also in the future it will reveal who satoshi is when they move the coins.

I don't care how much money satoshi really had, but people want to destroy his money is beyond crazy. what if it was not his money and someone else (like a whale) able to gather 1 million bitcoin, will people still going to destroy that money. it's his money and let him do whatever he wants and I am sure everyone even Satoshi himself understands that withdrawing 1 million bitcoin is not possible on any type of market. we are not kids anymore no one is going to be doing like that.

It is definitely not crazy

And even less it is beyond crazy. It is just human nature at work, envious and greedy. The difference is that destroying (burning) coins on the blockchain looks like a feasible and actually doable thing, technically speaking (unlike stripping somebody of their wealth via "conventional" means). That's basically why people go wild over this idea. So it doesn't really matter if it is Satoshi's coins, some obscure whale's stash, or even their (thy) neighbor's money (in the latter case the destruction of these coins would feel very much like an ultimate act of justice)

It is creating a large market I means business market. satoshi should not withdraw this large number of btc because million investor is faced odd by this withdrawn.

yes you are right, indeed that is his money. but if all the BTCs that he has are sold to the market, can this not cause turmoil. this will make a dump worse than last year.

Forking bitcoin will not be a solution to your perceived problem, if bitcoin is forked it can only affect the price for the main time but the original bitcoin will still maintain it dominance, and if you see withdrawal of 1 million bitcoin from santoshi wallet as an attack on the general bitcoin market also ask your self that this man developed and operate the bitcoin network Alone and can do whatever he wishes at any time.

Forks don't destroy coins, what forks does is chain split which gives the new chain some attributes of the old chain. We all should be grateful to satoshi anything he does with his tokens shouldn't be our concern.

Why should we punish him for something that he did not do he is wiser than an idiot like you, of course he will not crash the market by doing that, if he has an intention to do that, he would have done that when Bitcoin was at it's on all-time high, and besides that his share, he has the right to do whatever he wants to do with it.

What will happen in case he suddenly re-appear after 1-2 years? He is the creator of Bitcoin, and we need to show our respect for him. And as long as these coins can't be spent, it can have a positive effect on the exchange rates. And I guess this is beneficial for all the users, with the exception of those traders who engage in short-selling.

I think it's none of our business, we should show gratitude to the man by giving us something great and life-changing, even if he sold it all and crash the market, it will eventually get up, if he did it, more people will earn more Bitcoin, because there will be many bitcoin in circulation.

The impact will be big, but real Satoshi if really exist won't harmed it's own creations, he will rather to keep being anonymous and holds those coins with him instead of showing up and create doubts that he will dumped all those coins that he's keeping and make a huge downfall.

We don't know exactly who satoshi is, we don't know every of his addresses and how much bitcoin he holds. We also don't know the miner said to have 1 million bitcoin is really satoshi. And I don't believe we can just fork to destroy that coins without going back in the past i.e. about the time of bitcoin origin.

Who knows if he had other wallets stashed up with Bitcoin which he keeps spending from. Even if he shows up, he won't dump the coins in the market there's always joy seeing one's work prosper.

Your proposal is not ok. Satoshi create bitcoin and he should do what he want with his bitcoin, without him i think we never had crypto coins so let the things go on and don't worry, Satoshi will never dump his bitcoin.