An academic institute or intelligence service testing the network?
Nothing else can explain the sudden gigantic increase in hashing power ~6 months ago.
It would be too much work to set up for one miner (not to mention vastly unprofitable to run only for 1 week & disappear)
well i'll go the speculation on this one if i was to make 400,000 btc ~6 months ago i'd be waiting for $10+ to sell, that is 4Million dollars - vastly unprofitable?  ? for 1weeks work and setup? lmao Yes, that would've been vastly profitable... So why didn't he sell? I don't get it. |
|
|
|
There's a lot more differences than just the changes to the parameters: IXCoin is nothing new, it can use BTC as currency for exchange, whereas bitcoin has to use fiat currencies to get value in.
Either I don't correctly understand what you're saying (English is not my mother tongue) or you are wrong. Who said you can't exchange ixcoin to fiat currencies? I was trying to say IXCoin has the advantage of being able to bootstrap via BTC. Much easier, as we all know, than having to build exchanges that handle USD/EUR/... and also much easier for people to get money into. I didn't mean to imply it's not possible to trade IXC directly to fiat. I doubt it'll be done, though, because IXCoin is a scheme to get money from people. BTC is just the easiest to use, because everyone susceptible to this scam probably has bitcoins. |
|
|
|
I don't really understand why everybody is bashing ixcoin. They are very clear of their intent - generate all coins faster, but keep the rest intact. I think this is absolutely excellent - we have a single difference that we can study. And possibly a final argument in the "inflation-deflation" debate.
There's a lot more differences than just the changes to the parameters: IXCoin is nothing new, it can use BTC as currency for exchange, whereas bitcoin has to use fiat currencies to get value in. You can't compare 2 slightly different seeds if you put them in completely different soil. |
|
|
|
Btw, didnt Satoshi mine Bitcoins before releasing it to the public? And what were these coins used for?
Satoshi went public right away, I think, although there was not much interest. 73% of the coins mined in 2009 ("by satoshi and friends") where never moved. See here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=37333.msg459338#msg459338. So he and the other early early miners either kept or lost the majority of their coins. |
|
|
|
You do realize no one knows him. Thus we can't provide you with answers.
I was asking for speculations and maybe a list of nuggets mined by him? |
|
|
|
Current difficulty: 1805700.8361937, Estimated difficulty: 7222827.06887830, 300% increase in 2015 blocks, 1w 6day 23hr 50min 0se
Oh dear....
every .. fucking .. time ^^ |
|
|
|
While playing with some queries about coin age using bitcoin-abe (thanks John Toby) for this thread Satoshi Nakamoto - 1,5 million Bitcoins - We need answers, I noticed a weird spike of "non-moved coins" in calendar week 9 of year 2011: like this? even 0.01 BTC help continue cool queries/charts: 1SQL2R5ijCn2ZiBG8aDYpCiecNPuxzMJJ Then someone popped into my mind (drumroll): the MysteryMiner! Remember him? If this was before your time, here's a little explanation: In the beginning of March 2011, a huge increase in hashrate happened, it didn't last very long (about a week?) If I remember correctly, it was determined the blocks came from a single ip, not sure, though. Someone on #bitcoin-dev coined the name "mysteryminer" for the person/group behind that. - Is this a coincidence?
- If so: Why else the extreme spike in "kept coins" in week 9?
- If not: Did MM keep all these coins througout the price rallying to $30?
- If so, why?
- Did he loose them?
Any explanation is welcome ^^ EDIT: Any speculation also welcome |
|
|
|
I believe that vast numbers of Bitcoins were found and lost in the early days, because back then, people were mining just because Bitcoin was an interesting technology project. When they lost interest and quit mining, wallets were easily lost in OS reinstalls etc. because why would you bother backing up a bunch of funnymoney?
So I predict that a big portion of those early Bitcoins that have not been moved, will never ever be moved, because the wallets are just lost.
I tend to disagree. Who reinstall their OS without migrating his data? Also: the early early miners where probably "hoping like hell" it would succeed, why else go to the length of writing the code. A backup of wallet.dat is cheap enough. I don't think many of the old coins are lost, but that's speculation for now. EDIT: also, I see what you did there. Your prediction might be very hard to falsify. |
|
|
|
True. My finding was, that the very early adopters did not sell out.
Why wouldn't they sell their BTC, when they had a good chance to do that? [$20 per BTC] Because they are not greedy bastards but want bitcoin to succeed for other reasons. |
|
|
|
What surprised me about molecular's analysis though is the amount of coins that were never moved. I wonder if that is the usual trend, or it shows a different behavioral pattern for first comers. Has anybody made a "the number of coins that haven't moved since" graph?
Been thinking about that one or a similar analysis (coin age) and thanks to your post, finally came around  I did this by identifying the leaf nodes of the transaction chains and then determining the time of the block these were included in. That's the "last time these coins were moved". CAVEAT: I know I'm making the mistake of including blocks from orphaned chains here. Still looking for an easy way to exclude these. The error should not be too huge, though.
select year(from_unixtime(block.block_nTime)) as year, month(from_unixtime(block.block_nTime)) as month, sum(txout_value)*1E-8
from block_tx
inner join block on block.block_id = block_tx.block_id
inner join tx on block_tx.tx_id = tx.tx_id
inner join txout on txout.tx_id = tx.tx_id
left join txin txin2 on txin2.txout_id = txout.txout_id
where txin2.txout_id is null
group by year, month;
Made a pretty histogram of the result: like it? even 0.01 BTC help continue cool queries: 1SQL2R5ijCn2ZiBG8aDYpCiecNPuxzMJJ Note: 2009 summed up = 1,205,454 - all summed up: 7,087,766 Now, what conclusions can we draw from this? |
|
|
|
Thank you so much for looking up the video! Speaking of Ted.com, what are the chances of having Bitcoin's main spokesperson give a talk at TED about Bitcoin early next year? Seems to me to be a perfect fit.
Yeah, it's been suggested before that Gavin hold a TED talk. It was, if I remember correctly, concluded that it might still be too early. Maybe it's time now . It'd be quite a receptive audience, I think, that also tends to have some money (a big plus for us ^^) Maybe Gavin (while I think he'd do a great job) is not the right guy for this one, though... there are a few other eloquent bitcoin people. Damn, if forum search was better I would try to find the post where someone made a list. Any suggestions? |
|
|
|
I hope this is the right place to ask this and not considered offtopic. I'm having some fun writing queries for my (finally finished after half an additional day of importing, thanks again for the optimization, John) bitcoin-abe db (example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=37333.msg458441#msg458441). Now I know I'm making the mistake of including blocks from orphaned chains. Is there an easy way to exclude blocks from orphaned chains in a sql query? |
|
|
|
Nice work Molecular!
Although, it is also possible Satoshi owns no bitcoins.
True. My finding was, that the very early adopters did not sell out. |
|
|
|
Even so, there are many early adopters who (at least claim to) have very little coins left.
Hehe. For some early adopters, "very little" might still be in the thousands, though. I can understand some of them cashed in too early, though. Imagine you're a little short on cash and the bitcoin value just shot up 400% to USD 0.80!! I'd be tempted to sell, myself. I've been having a hard time holding on to my little stash myself at times. This just emphasizes the point that being an early adopter, an being it successfully (holding on to the bitcoins), is not so easy, and these people can be envied, but it's not unfair in any way. We all had the same chance. Of course some luck was involved, too, but that's almost always the case. So don't bash the early adopters, they're the ones that got the stone rolling in the first place. Like someone once elaborated on in a TED talk: it's not the leader/inventor that is the most crucial person to the success of something, it's the first follower (showing a video of a guy standing up and starting to dance pertty stupidly, then another one following, then more people successively, until everybody dances). He argues that without the first follower, there wouldn't have been a party, and the leader would've looked like an idiot. I think it's true. |
|
|
|
Yes: what does this have to do with the questions asked by OP? In was in response to several comments to the OP addressing early adopters. My point being that every worthwhile endeavor has early adopters, all taking a risk, hoping it'll become profitable. You'll always have somebody wishing that they were on the ground floor before it went viral. I stand behind my wiki posting. Thanks for clearing that up. And I have to agree with you. |
|
|
|
Yes: what does this have to do with the questions asked by OP? |
|
|
|
probally owns a supercomputer that puts out a few PetaFLOPs
I'm pretty sure he doesn't. When you own >5% of any given currency, you don't need more. Also: Satoshi seems to be a sensible guy and one that knows when to retreat and let others take over. He's done his share well and got rewarded. Let's hope he changed the world with this. |
|
|
|
I did some more analysis on "2009 coins" using bitcoin-abe (thanks a lot, John Toby!): I looked at mining profits 2009, using block_id <= 32485 (last block mined in 2009, at 2009-12-31 23:51:57) as condition. The overall mining profit was:
mysql> select sum(txout_value/1E8) from block_tx inner join block on block.block_id = block_tx.block_id inner join tx on block_tx.tx_id = tx.tx_id inner join txin on txin.tx_id=tx.tx_
id inner join txout on txout.tx_id = tx.tx_id left join txin txin2 on txin2.txout_id = txout.txout_id left join tx tx2 on tx2.tx_id=txin2.tx_id left join block_tx block_tx2 on block_tx2.tx_id=tx2.tx_id where txin.txout_id is null and block.block_id <= 32485;
+----------------------+
| sum(txout_value/1E8) |
+----------------------+
| 1624252.87 |
+----------------------+
1,624,252.87 BTC (2.87 BTC fees) crosscheck: 1624250 BTC / 50 BTC/block = 32485 blocks, ok Next I was interested in wether or not these mining profits where sold or not. This is too hard to determine from the data, so I resorted to determining wether they were moved to other addresses and if so, wether the respective transaction took place in 2009 or after 2009:
mysql> select case when txin2.txin_id is null then 'not moved' else case when block_tx2.block_id <= 32485 then 'moved i
n 2009' else 'moved after 2009' end end as move_status, sum(txout_value/1E8) from block_tx inner join block on block.bl
ock_id = block_tx.block_id inner join tx on block_tx.tx_id = tx.tx_id inner join txin on txin.tx_id=tx.tx_id inner join txout on txout.tx_id = tx.tx_id left join txin txin2 on txin2.txout_id = txout.txout_id left join tx tx2 on tx2.tx_id=txin2.tx_id left join block_tx block_tx2 on block_tx2.tx_id=tx2.tx_id where txin.txout_id is null and block.block_id <= 32485 group by move_status;
+------------------+----------------------+
| move_status | sum(txout_value/1E8) |
+------------------+----------------------+
| moved after 2009 | 294800.15 |
| moved in 2009 | 137600.13 |
| not moved | 1191852.59 |
+------------------+----------------------+
This likely means, that the majority of the coins mined in 2009 (73%, 1,191,852 BTC) are still in possession of the original miner (he might have given the coins to someone else by giving him the private keys. It's likely, though, that the recipient would've moved the coins to new addresses because otherwise he'd have to trust the sender to not use the keys). Therefore I think we can safely assume that the people that mined the early coins in 2009 (likely "Satoshi Nakamoto and some friends") did not sell or otherwise give away the majority of these coins. The coins that were moved (27%) might also well be still in their possession. We can therefore state: Satoshi and friends have at miminum 1.2 Million BTC still at their disposal.EDIT: this puts a lower bound to the answer of question 1: "How many Bitcoins in total does "Nakamoto" have?" (assuming "Nakamoto" means "Satoshi and friends"). Answer: at least 1.2 Million. |
|
|
|
Mh...difficulty can't go below 1, but that doesn't mean a block every 10 min always was true.
Maybe back in 2009 hashrate was so low that even at difficulty 1 a block was created like every hour or so...
OPs assumption was that about 1.5 million BTC where mined at end of 2009. That's about true:
+-----------+-----------------+----------------------------+
| block_num | block_height*50 | from_unixtime(block_nTime) |
+-----------+-----------------+----------------------------+
| 32485 | 1624250 | 2009-12-31 23:51:57 |
+-----------+-----------------+----------------------------+
Block 32485 was mined 2009-12-31 23:51:57. 1,624,250 BTC existed then. |
|
|
|
When I use the "gui" command I get this.
Is this error just for me, or is the feature just not implemented yet?
No, gui is not implemented and doesn't have high priority at all. First comes support for other exchanges, then probably some bots. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
