A transaction of 1432.92 btc happened today https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/1E6nViR5Xv1wyNXg87SamvtLJ5TyXuksLC .

The odd thing about this address is it ( almost ) contains block rewards from early days , specifically first reward is from block #2718 which is less than a month since launch . Only 2 transactions are not block rewards , a 0.01 btc and a 32.91 btc . All the other are coinbase rewards of 50 btc .

Did satoshi came back to spend his coins ? A very early miner or an early OTC buyer decided to take profits ?

Time will tell . I'll try to dig more to see if i can find anything . Any opinions or findings are appreciated .

 

Look at the definition of spam , you can't call spam a transaction that pays more fees than normal . Try to find another term .
 If you had a store and someone was willing to pay you more than your asked price would you deny him your services ? On the contrary , you would leave the other customers and try to please him the most you could . You asked for a fee market , you made it and now people want to pay more to have their transactions validated . Why you call something an attack when it doesn't fit your narratives ?

Nope , you are wrong . If someone has enough liquidity can transact infinitely in LN without closing it's channel/s . In what way that person supports the miners ? On the contrary , with a very small investment , LN nodes work like parasites that suck fees from the true backbone of the system , that has cost billions of investment . Imagine if all transactions move to LN , and miners just wait to be paid from opening and closing channel fees . How would that be sustainable ?

Really ? History proves you wrong https://cirosantilli.com/cool-data-embedded-in-the-bitcoin-blockchain#illegal-content-of-block-229k
Not to mention that satoshi himself used blockchain as a "cloud storage" for his timestamp message .

On the contrary , ordinals increase the security of the network by increasing the income of miners so the security overall , while LN "steal" fees from miners . Your problem is not to invest a couple hundred dollars to buy some TB disks while miners invest millions . That's insane , guys that want to spend nothing trying to control people that invest much money . Tired of hearing that apples and oranges comparison .

You are trying to twist my words , but i didn't expect something different from you , let's don't forget that you have ask banning people from a free speech forum .
As i have read in many of your posts you are not a fan of 1 MB blocks either , so why are you mention that i'm in favor of big blocks ? Also i said that every one that can do bussiness on bitcoin has interest to run a full node . Bitcoin is about building services and value , not hodling to buy lambos .  Guys like you want to cripple bitcoin so that people turn to L2 solutions that don't work .
If we follow your logic about everyone having the right/ability to run a node , than we should have Kb blocks and 56k modems as a prerequisite to participate in the network , as some people in 3rd world countries can't afford even to have a rapspi or a Mbit connection . And you dream of btc global adoption , so funny .
As you might understand someday " Δε βαφονται με πορδες τα αυγα" .
https://www.slang.gr/lemma/6318-me-pordes-den-bafontai-auga
Cheers .

PS. Apologies to every other member for derailing but i had to respond .

I agree , there's no spam . As long as fees are paid there can't be considered as such . But if you have have to define something as spam , you definitely can't name the transaction that pays more fees a spam .

Edit . But if a part of the community has a problem with the congested mempool i'd suggest to them to either raise fees for their transactions or stop transacting and let mempool decrease in size .

I really can't grasp the spam term . As long as they pay the fees their transactions are valid . As spam is considered a free/cheap method to achieve a goal , i would consider as spam the transactions that get into blocks with a low fee .  Those that transmit transactions with fees under the current low ( 20 sats/vB ) are the spammers in current situation .

Bitcoin was destined for micropayments , high fees are just nonsense .

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=287.msg7687#msg7687

"Forgot to add the good part about micropayments.  While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall.  If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time.  Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms.  Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical.  I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial."

Storage and bandwidth are at extremely low costs and btc has insane fees . So either satoshi was wrong or core . I tend to think that satoshi knew better .

DeFi is around the corner for btc , sooner or later someone will find a way to make it real , then the real pain will kick in . If that happens i expect insane fee prices , what happened so far in mempool will look like a fart compared to a nuke . Anyway , it's an interesting time to see how things will evolve .

On the contrary , ordinals began on 14-12-2022 , at that time btc was at 17k . So , in some people's view ordinals might pumped fees but also price . No one seemed to have a problem when price was moving up . Now that we are start to see a distribution cycle , complains begin .

How this would affect miners ? Pre ordinals price was much lower , blocks were almost empty and hashrate was making new ATH's . I see no problem . Fee market works as it was suppose to work . Supply and demand rules .

Prediction 2: 23960
bech32 address: bc1q4ldap2wxl4xp949f0td7fcyfkgg6g4dv9kz0jr

Dude , do you make things up just to continue argument? In what way splitting my money has to do with a mixing service ? At what point did i say that splitting is bad for bitcoin users ?

Maybe you don't understand the meaning of what tou have quoted . I'm not good in english , but i think the meaning is easy to comprehend ( if you try to ) .
So before accusing me that i din't read your attached document , try to understand what it says and how what i've said so far ensures that you can't be accused if you have the proof of your transactions . Also try to think how you can prove that you're not a part of ML/TF by taking part into an anonymous ring .
In case you don't get it you are proving my point . Could my address pose risk ? Not if i have proofs . Can my address potentially be used to avoid AML/CFT ? Not if i have proofs .

No rational(?) home miner might do what you say . But home miners are only a small portion of the current hashrate . Should i explain why big mining facilities can easily be forced to follow regulations or do you get it by yourself ?
What you fail to understand is that miners are interested mostly for their income . Politics are for a part of users that have nothing to lose . 

You said something and i showed that untraceability doesn't apply in all cases . I agree that in small sums paper money is untraceable . If you were getting millions of dollars per day from illegal activity would you try to spend them in such small quantities ? Why do you think money laundering is hard in real life ? 

Because i'm not getting involved with other peoples funds , duh . I can prove that i'm the sole owner of the adresses that funds were split .
"A cryptocurrency tumbler or cryptocurrency mixing service is a service that mixes potentially identifiable or "tainted" cryptocurrency funds with others, so as to obscure the trail back to the fund's original source.This is usually done by pooling together source funds from multiple inputs for a large and random period of time, and then spitting them back out to destination addresses. As all the funds are lumped together and then distributed at random times, it is very difficult to trace exact coins ."
That's the definition of a mixer , a pool that mixes users money . And getting paid to do that . So it is a money laundering service ( mixes legal with illegal money ) and a money transmitter ( gets a fee to send funds from a user to another ) .
What problem causes to me that lie ? I don't get it . That's exactly what i say , i'm not lying , i'm not exposing the owner of those funds . If there's a need to prove that i'm the owner i can do it . That's privacy .

Do you understand what's money laundering ? A mixer is a combination of a money laundering service and a money transmitter . Stop trying to defend mixers and try to understand the basics . I know it's hard as you're biased , but your bias doesn'nt change reality .

As i have explained in previous posts , regulators should do their work , without regulations you have anarchy . Bitcoin specifically gives you the ability to prove that your activity is not suspicious . If you don't understand what regulators are trying to do try to study it and understand it better . Can you point me to a spot in their report that says self custody is prohibited ?

Nope , PoW consensus doesn't work that way . You just need the majority and pools can reject a block that comes from a non compliant pool that's outside of their ruleset . Look at how much concentrated is the hashrate today ( which will become more concentrated in the future ) and you can easily see that enforcing freezing addresses gets easier day by day .

Can you prove that chain analytics companies have the personal data of exchange customers ? Exchanges have that data by default as they need to do KYC . That doesn't mean that every company associated with them have the customers identity data . Don't try to make a point out of nothing .
Privacy violation fines don't necessarily mean that they are selling customers identity data . For example GDPR fines https://www.enforcementtracker.com/
I do agree though that KYC procedures should change ( and bitcoin can help with that ) so you can prove your identity without the company knows detailed data about you . And that's what we should aim as community , not try to make things worst by acting outside of law because privacy rules are not applied 100% . To do so , we need to understand what privacy is and at which spot our privacy is not applicable .

Paper money is not untraceable . Have you heard of cases that police did arrest someone by using marked banknotes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marked_bill ?
As for the prosperous societies , you have to understand that we are reaching a key point . In these past societies the interaction was mostly physical and it was based on trust . We are turning our interaction to mostly electronic . If anonymity prevails that would be the time that we can see disastrous results . Without trust a society can't work . Without identities a society can't work .
Look at the mess that happens in the social media . As most people tend to act anonymously ( and not pseudonymously ) the whole section is a f**k up . Imagine if that happened to the real world , total anarchy or fascism would prevail . Look at the paradigm of TAY https://www.cbsnews.com/news/microsoft-shuts-down-ai-chatbot-after-it-turned-into-racist-nazi/ . Imagine if we raise our childrens in such manner , by teaching them that they can do whatever they want and have no consequences . Will the upcoming society become prosperous ?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5445038.msg61921520#msg61921520

No need for that , just enforce pools to freeze addresses .

Financial bond is the same as selling personal data ?

I stand for the right to privacy . Governements by definition must have access to our privacy when it is provably needed , otherwise there can't be any form of civilised society . The problem is that big companies don't respect our privacy . And i think that there should be draconian laws for anyone ( private entities ) that violates it .
But that doesn't mean that we should move to the other side which is anonymity . Imagine a society where everyone is anonymous . That means there can't be any trust , anyone can lie or do harm and have no consequences . Where that would lead ?   

Seems that you got the whole concept of privacy and anonymity wrong . Privacy has to do with protecting your actions while your identity is known to the parties you want to be known . Anonymity has to do with your identity and not necessarily with your actions . Someone can see what you do but he has no ability to know who is doing it , including authorities . That's why the law protects your privacy but not your anonymity ( except special occasions like whistleblowers etc ) .
Quote from proton ( https://proton.me/blog/anonymity-vs-privacy ) :

"What the law says

The right to privacy is a common legal concept enshrined in over 150 constitutions worldwide. It is, for example, incorporated into:

    The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights(new window) (Article 12)
    The European Convention on Human Rights(new window) (Article
    The Swiss Federal Constitution (Article 13)
    Various amendments to the Constitution of the United States

The “right to anonymity”, on the other hand, is not so clearly defined and does not enjoy the same legal protections (if any at all)."

By using anonymity you abandon all your rights , because you are nobody ( anonymous = he who has no name , no identity ) . You can't go to a court as an anonymous , because courts are for cases between entities , and an anonymous is not an entity .
So your saying that anonymity is full privacy is totally wrong as privacy and anonymity are two terms that overlap only by a little . Of course , privacy and anonymity is a philoshophical and legal concept and unfortunately most technical students can't grasp it . And the most important , they can't understand the consequences to the society when they are advocating for anonymity .

A perfect example of the consequences of anonymity on this video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlT5SdLeXtM  

It's safer to trust someone else with your money ? Do you think that the people who lost their coins still think that it's safer to use mixers ?
And from what i recall you are a proponent of don't trust , verify . Why trusting someone in this case ?
And the most important . Is it safer to use an illegal way with anonymity that can lead to the loss of your coins ( even if you are not seeking anonymity but privacy ) , or a legal way that has privacy and you have the control of your coins ?


Nope . That's childish . Do you live in this world or in a fantasy world ?
How many users do you know that were not part of illegal actions and had their coins confiscated ? You are trying to prove that when authorities are able to freeze addresses they will do it for everyone . No , it's the same as with banking accounts . They are not freezing every bank account just because they can . There has to be a reason .


They are doing due dilligence which is legal , not selling personal information , try to read what i write . That's from where the argument started , you still prove my point .
" And if you can prove to me that someone can connect my identity to all of my addresses than i'll say i'm wrong and i have misunderstood what privacy is . "
Does any of what you quoted means that i don't have privacy anymore ? They have managed to de anonymize one of my addresses . What happens with all the rest ? I really don't see your point , maybe because there's no point .
Blockchain analysis is a useful tool that the people that have to hide something hate and affraid . These are the ones that they don't want to have even one address de anonymized because it will point to their real identity .
I don't have such a problem .

Because they want anonymity , not privacy . They need to be lost in the crowd . The bigger the crowd the more the chances of getting lost .

There are more chances to happen what i say than what you say . Bitcoin is a clever invention that solves the problem of traceability and forgery . We can both follow our paths and time will tell .

kindly provide cases . I might be wrong .

I don't have have a problem if the authorities have info about me , on the contrary i want them to have info so i have proof in case that something goes wrong . For example if a murder or a rape happens and i can prove that at that time i was not present at that spot that's a plus not a minus . Proving a negative is one of the most difficult things if you don't have proofs .
If a paedophile can be arrested i want that to happen , even if have to give away a small portion of my right to privacy . A society can't work if each one of us is looking only his own prosperity and good .
I agree on the big tech companies part , and the only thing that can save humanity by these vultures is bitcoin . The problem with these companies is that we are the product . They are "selling" us to the advertising companies . If the model changes they will fall apart . If the advertising companies can pay you directly ( if you want to ) their role is finished . That's why satoshi wanted micropayments and electronic cash . To solve the 402 payment required problem https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/402 .

We see things differently . I believe that authorities should have access to my information in some cases . I want full privacy from interactions with anyone except authorities .


If an AI matches me with a criminal i will have proof by my phone carrier that probably i wasn't there during a crime . The odds of two identical persons being at a spot at the same time are close to zero . Stop oversimplifying things just to prove something . I need surveillance cameras to have my photo and my phone carrier to prove my position during that time . As i said proving a negative without evidence is one of the hardest things .
As for the coded bias , it's the perfect example of why code shouldn't be law that's been promoted by cypherpunks .
And for supporting mixers , be my guest and provide liquidity to criminals . It's your choice as you will face the consequences . We have reach a point that regulators are getting mad . I will support people that act inside law , not those acting against it . The orwellian future has to do only by little with surveillance , it has to do mostly with the change of history , destruction of language and education , and the will of people to "nail" even their own family members . Have you ever thought that 1984 could be mentioned to Stalin's Russia ?

You oversimplify things . Imagine what you have said for 50 addresses and not for 5 . These 50 addresses are getting funds in a period of time , let's say 1 week . You have to understand that i'm talking for everyday use money ( not an easy task with btc ) .
The only known factor so far is that binance knows i got my money . No one can be certain if the split money belongs to me .
If i start using each address for specific purposes , eg real life use ( super market , groceries , gas etc ) chain analysis knows i live in a town and someone gets paid , but so do tens of thousands of people with me . I might have paid merchants directly , maybe not . So anyone in my town can have the split funds . I'm not obligated to show an identity , right ? So do most of the costumers that live in my city . The more i create addresses and split the money the more i increase the chances that i'm not the owner .
In your example you used 4 out of 5 examples with internet stores . Out of those 4 the 2 are companies that require KYC . The other 2 can't reveal my identity . In your real life , how many times you buy things and show your identity ? Should i assume close to zero ? Try to make a drawing with the example i gave you and you will understand how hard it becomes to have undeniable facts that all the addresses i own are not private .
Someone can be certain that i am the owner of an address only after i have spend the money , not before . So , bitcoin protects my privacy by itself and it doesn't need any mixer .
On the opposite side , most people that want to money launder will use a mixer and are looking for people to provide them liquidity . You can consider yourself each time you use a mixer as the exit liquidity of scammers , traffickers , thieves etc . And the fun part is that you don't even get paid more for your risk of providing liquidity .
Also , something to consider for the future . If things change and regulations get really hard ( pools level ) , your coins that are a result of illegal action might get frozen . How would you prove then that you were only looking to protect yourself and you were not a part of the anon ring ?

 

Have you heard of GPDR ? Do you think it's so easy for a company to start selling your personal information ? Any proof that centralised exchanges give their data ? Or just an illusion to justify your actions ?

Because you provide exit liquidity to crime

I think that's the base of the problem , you consider privacy only as a financial concept . Privacy is much more than that .

---

Privacy for me is to be able to let people know the things i want them to know about me . There's not a single picture of me on the internet . I have never shared a specific location of my travels , where i drink cofee , which beach i visited etc . The people i want to know where i am and what i do are specific and i don't have to share it with the whole world .

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

Exactly , you don't know what to say because you have nothing to say . And if you can prove to me that someone can connect my identity to all of my addresses than i'll say i'm wrong and i have misunderstood what privacy is . If not , read what privacy and identiity is .
Identity is protected , as long as you respect your privacy and not taking part into illegal actions . What a chain analysis company can see is coins moving between addresses . They can't be 100% certain which one belongs to a specific owner . If i split my coins between 50 addresses how can you be certain that these are not donations , buys or anything else ?
The owner on the other hand can prove how he got the coins , that's exactly the point of using a blockchain , traceability . By using a mixer all you accomplish is to take away from yourself the privilege of proving that your transactions are legitimate .
I'm tired of listening people ( especialy young ) that try tο justify their actions in the name of privacy ( and consider everyone on the opposite side a fool ) while they don't have a clue of what privacy is . You see kids taking out their whole lives on social media and on the other crying about being watched by the "Big Brother" .
 
 

Seems that you live in a fantasy world that everyone is after you . I'm protecting my privacy , staying away from illegal activities and i have nothing to fear . If i decide to mix my money with drug dealers and traffickers to "protect my privacy" then probably i'm asking for trouble .
Bitcoin is the perfect tool for privacy , split your coins into many addresses , no one can be certain that you are the owner . You are messing privacy with anonymity . By using anonymity you are throwing away all the proofs that you are innocent . If you want to follow that route , good for you , no one can stop you . Just don't be a cry baby if shit hits the fan .

It's funny that this community has turned into a leftist/woke community where everyone that express a different view/opinion is a troll and doesn't understand x,y,z .
What you don't understand is that by using such services , in the quest for privacy some will be on the target of authorities . When they face jail time they will be cry babies and ask for support because they were fighting for privacy . Some of them will be innocent . But it's not so easy to prove that you're not an elephant if you are a part of an anonymous ring .