Bitcoin Forum

If coins held by Satoshi is destroyed/denied my democracy called Bitcoin. I'm sure, everybody gains. And every rational human being tries to maximize profits. So why aren't they denying his fortune which in fact is no use( Of if it is used in future, it would only cause instability to Bitcoin economy)
Why not people are working on it?
Is Bitcoin truly democratic? :P

Genius like him are never into money. What good is money for him?. ;)

Genius like him are never into money. What good is money for him?.

Because it belongs to him. If we start working to deny people their coins we destroy the currency.

You're right about geniuses not being into money, but you don't need to destroy Satoshi's coins. It should be clear by now that Satoshi never intended to spend any of it. Bitcoin is her/his/their gift to the world.

Think about that. Really let it sink in.

Its scary how much power we have over this currency. We have the power to deny acceptance of a certain persons money xD

Every great person has to crusade! I'm not telling you to destroy one, two, hundred, thousand, ten thousand.. but millions of coins.
What good are coins to him? Considering, he is genius..he wants our following, not money.

You're right about geniuses not being into money, but you don't need to destroy Satoshi's coins. It should be clear by now that Satoshi never intended to spend any of it. Bitcoin is her/his/their gift to the world.

Think about that. Really let it sink in.

I think you are a genius and don't need your bit coin. I will follow you for life if you send all of your coin to the address in my signature for disposal. 

Is Bitcoin truly democratic? :P

No.  Bitcoin is decentralized.

If Satoshi did not intend to spend his fortune, he would have destroyed it.

Otherwise, it's reasonable to assume that he intends to spend it in the future...

If coins held by Satoshi is destroyed/denied my democracy called Bitcoin. I'm sure, everybody gains. And every rational human being tries to maximize profits. So why aren't they denying his fortune which in fact is no use( Of if it is used in future, it would only cause instability to Bitcoin economy)
Why not people are working on it?
Is Bitcoin truly democratic? :P

Genius like him are never into money. What good is money for him?. ;)

Its scary how much power we have over this currency. We have the power to deny acceptance of a certain persons money xD

It doesn't belong to you.  Taking something which doesn't belong to you is theft.  It really is that simple.

It doesn't belong to you.  Taking something which doesn't belong to you is theft.  It really is that simple.

I think most Bitcoiners are scared to do anything like this.  If you take away Satoshis BTC, then who's to say Bitcoiners won't band together and take away yours in the future because "you don't need it" or something like that.  

It would destroy the legitimacy of BTC.

You want ME to support taking the wealth from the man/women/group that created Bitcoin giving us the ability to free ourselves from the banksters.

........No sir.. it is democracy you just have to accept not many people agree with you.  This is how democracy works.. it's not what ever BTCIndia wants they get..

This is a hard fork.  Go ahead and code this change to fork the reference client, fork the blockchain, and start up your theft-coin and then see how many people follow to mine and use it.

Let us know when you have completed this task so we can all watch to see how it turns out.

If you really believe it, stop discussing it and actually do it.  It won't be bitcoin, it will be some alt-coin, theft-coin that is pretty worthless in protecting people and their assets.

If coins held by Satoshi is destroyed/denied my democracy called Bitcoin. I'm sure, everybody gains. And every rational human being tries to maximize profits. So why aren't they denying his fortune which in fact is no use( Of if it is used in future, it would only cause instability to Bitcoin economy)
Why not people are working on it?
Is Bitcoin truly democratic? :P

Genius like him are never into money. What good is money for him?. ;)

If coins held by Satoshi is destroyed/denied my democracy called Bitcoin. I'm sure, everybody gains. And every rational human being tries to maximize profits. So why aren't they denying his fortune which in fact is no use( Of if it is used in future, it would only cause instability to Bitcoin economy)
Why not people are working on it?
Is Bitcoin truly democratic? :P

Genius like him are never into money. What good is money for him?. ;)

Out of curiosity what is your native language?

Hindi! Any comments? Please, feel free to speak out your curiosity.

As has been mentioned this would be a hard fork. If that were to happen i would continue to use the original uncompromised version, as i am sure others would too. The market will then decide which rendition is superior.

If I was a little more awake I would have noticed your user name  :)
Thank you for your swift answer. I've gotten pretty good at placing native language by unusual sentence structure, but I didn't have a clue here. Thank you for indulging my curiosity.

Back OT: having created a world changing technology I think he is entitled to whatever he can make from it. I don't see how his using it would destabilize bitcoin any more than any one else doing so.

Because it belongs to him. If we start working to deny people their coins we destroy the currency.

Pretty much this. This reply to the OP sums it up perfectly in a single sentence. What advantage would bitcoin have above FIAT money if a group of people, no matter who they are, could deny you your money. Does that sound fair to you? Bitcoin is truly democratic because I can't use a law set by a central authority to mess with what you own. No matter how you arned it. Absolute and total neutrality, this is what makes bitcoin special (along with the other innovations. You can use it in whatever way you like, but it's up to others to decide  whether they should trust you or not.

Relevant video: Andreas Antonopoulos on Bitcoin Neutrality

Please, fork and destroy Satoshi's coins.

Since I will then have coins on both protocols, I will immediately sell all of my theftcoins and use the proceeds of that sale to purchase more bitcoins.

Are you sure? Is it not possible for you to convince the majority of the network to fork and destroy, for example, my coins if you wanted to?

Is the network itself not a central authority?

Hindi! Any comments?

It would take a massive amount of work convincing the network to allow something like that. The chance of it ever happening is incredibly low.

Saothsi worked too hard on Bitcoin to 'deny' his coins.
Holy shit, isn't this the thing we're trying to achieve, to raise beyond Fiat?

Hell yeah it is... This post is just nonsense if not a bad troll atempt.

India got himself ignored by me, I hope you all will consider doing the same.

Zero tolerance for trolls, Bitcoin is too important.

Agreed. He is a troll.

This user is currently ignored.

Chill! I'm just a kid in capable of doing right. Just here for discussion.

You're right about geniuses not being into money, but you don't need to destroy Satoshi's coins. It should be clear by now that Satoshi never intended to spend any of it. Bitcoin is her/his/their gift to the world.

Think about that. Really let it sink in.

Morals are quite appreciated!
Is it your value of Bitcoin growing on its own? Zerosum game my friend! Zerosum! Stylish Thef- I like to call with my limited experience and knowledge.  

And who is stealing his coin? We're just denying, or destroying things that we believe won't be used in future. Fair enough? Don't you discard things that, you believe won't be used in future? Why not keep lead battery forever?

You have no way of knowing that. He could be waiting until his stash is worth even more money. Perhaps he is waiting until he can cash out, aquire a large chunk of the worlds resources and then enslave humanity as an evil tyrant. We don't know.

You're right about geniuses not being into money, but you don't need to destroy Satoshi's coins. It should be clear by now that Satoshi never intended to spend any of it. Bitcoin is her/his/their gift to the world.

Think about that. Really let it sink in.

What if he retaliates and hits the kill switch?!?   8)

When you think about it, the height of greed is the OP wanting to fix the 'problem' of satoshis' stash for his own selfish motives.

If coins held by Satoshi is destroyed/denied my democracy called Bitcoin. I'm sure, everybody gains. And every rational human being tries to maximize profits. So why aren't they denying his fortune which in fact is no use( Of if it is used in future, it would only cause instability to Bitcoin economy)
Why not people are working on it?
Is Bitcoin truly democratic? :P

Genius like him are never into money. What good is money for him?. ;)

OP is just jealous.. that is all

While no one is ever going to agree to stop Satoshi from accessing his coins, they nonetheless remain a huge wildcard in the future of bitcoin. Just the possibility that he could move those coins has to add some negative value to an objective evaluation of bitcoin's value.

I love how everyone shits on Alt Coins that premine as "scam coins" but when Satoshi does the same thing its totally cool cause you know...Bitcoin.

It doesn't belong to you.  Taking something which doesn't belong to you is theft.  It really is that simple.

Yeah, tell that to Mike Hearn and his merry band of blacklist supporters.

Mike,
Re: defence vs attack (hmm am I still allowed to use that spelling?)

It's more subtle than that I think. What we have here is the issue of layering. In the world of banks, it is also the case that there is such a thing as irreversible payment. But it is hidden behind many layers and only accessible to the most powerful financial institutions. Even a SWIFT international transfer is pretty close to irreversible; but it is also heavily censored. That network can only be used if a big list of conditions are met. And above that layer are the real "hard money" layers (to the extent that any fiat money can be "hard"). Interbank settlement (often on a batch basis e.g. Euroclear and Clearstream) and RTGS (where it exists).

So the everyday experience is one of interacting with non-real time and reversible payments. Clearly the average punter wants to use that kind of system, including its time and cost payoffs, even if he's not aware that he does. Because he wants the right to get his money back, which he doesn't always get, but he does in the most clear cut cases of fraud.

There is no reason a Bitcoin economy cannot have these layers.

If people cannot be bothered with the complexities of hardware wallets etc. , then payment services can be provided to them fully featured. Bank accounts, fraud detection, insurance, transparency or privacy in whatever blend required. All of that is possible, and what's more with scripting Bitcoin can offer either more lightweight or cheaper or just out and out better versions of at least some of these features. The attack you refer to - whether it be by law enforcement or by all kinds of other agents, can occur at this level, and that's fine because everyone who joins that level buys into it.

But Bitcoin offers something else which is priceless to everybody - an intrinsically unpoliticisable base level of value transfer which is far more secure and far cheaper and faster than anything that came before - for those who choose to learn how to use it.
That can be used by individuals, corporations or governments whenever they choose to do so, because nobody can stop them.

If you try to mix in those higher layers to the underlying protocol, you destroy it.

He's still pushing that?  I thought the community gave a resounding no to anything that threatens fungibility.

I never bought a Bitcoin, nor I intend to. ;)

I love how everyone shits on Alt Coins that premine as "scam coins" but when Satoshi does the same thing its totally cool cause you know...Bitcoin.

If satoshi wants to destroy his/her/their/its coins, they will.  

The whole point of this thread seems to be based on the transfer of greed rather than any sort of democratic concept.

The mining was open to anyone, except it was a very new concept back then and NO ONE else joined for a very long time. Someone had to continue mining to keep the network afloat.

Tell us what coins you mined so we may destroy those as well :)

I don't have any Bitcoin neither bought or mined. Is that clear? Nor I intend to. I know, you won't be able to digest thought for money oriented materialistic western soul.

I don't have any Bitcoin neither bought or mined. Is that clear? Nor I intend to. I know, you won't be able to digest thought for money oriented materialistic western soul.

I don't have any Bitcoin neither bought or mined. Is that clear? Nor I intend to. I know, you won't be able to digest thought for money oriented materialistic western soul.

Oh! is Satoshi a person? 

Democracy != everyone for themselves.  History is filled with examples of the voting majority doing what's right rather than take the easy gain for themselves.  Who do you believe voted for women to get the right to vote? Who voted for equal rights for all races? Who votes for freedom of religion in a country overwhelmingly Christian?

OP is so completely selfish that he believes (or wants to believe) that everyone else is too.  He has answered his own implied question - 'If everyone is in this for themselves, why haven't we taken this selfish step?'.  Clearly we are not all as selfish as he is.

My client and miners will NEVER invalidate a single satoshi. Thankfully, I am not alone.

I don't have any Bitcoin

I think most Bitcoiners are scared to do anything like this.  If you take away Satoshis BTC, then who's to say Bitcoiners won't band together and take away yours in the future because "you don't need it" or something like that.  

It would destroy the legitimacy of BTC.

OP is a fucking troll.

We don't want "fair", we want free.

Take a few examples from todays political correctness arena, and analyze them. You will discover that fairness in newspeak is the same as redistribution from one random group to another random group, and that the "from" group is the unmentionables, they supposedly do not exist.



[/quote

But we all have to pay our "fair share." Otherwise people might not get free cell phones.  :D

people might not get free cell phones.