Bitcoin Forum
June 26, 2024, 12:24:37 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Satoshis stash is not as large as some think  (Read 1417 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
franky1 (OP)
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 4256
Merit: 4533



View Profile
January 28, 2016, 11:38:02 PM
 #21

I don't really think it really matters how much he has.
I doubt he will dump them all at a time as that would crash bitcoin

not crash bitcoin.. the protocol wont be affected miners will still mine.. it would just be a temporary price drama, and effectively a great oppertunity for people to buy cheap coin..

but with that said im more concerned with the mtgox stash and the mintpal stash and the cryptsy stash, and not so much the early miner stashes

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
stoat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 270


FREEDOM RESERVE


View Profile WWW
January 28, 2016, 11:40:21 PM
 #22

Well, seeing that my post that satoshi nakamoto is nick szabo just got deleted by the forum mods then I can only assume there is a conspiracy of silence around the fact that satoshi nakamoto is nick szabo.


It's veen confirmed satoshi is nick azabo and forum mods are trying to cover up the truth.


Satoshi nakamoto is nick szabo its obvious now.

FREEDOMRESERVEFree currency for the British Isles
Visit our website for more info

<-- Click here!
FREEDOMRESERVE By the People and for the People
lumeire
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1009


Next-Gen Trade Racing Metaverse


View Profile
January 28, 2016, 11:40:29 PM
 #23

I don't really think it really matters how much he has.
I doubt he will dump them all at a time as that would crash bitcoin

Well quite frankly I think if he's still out there he doesn't have access to those wallets anymore.

        ▄▄████████▄▄           ▄▄████████▄▄
    ▄▄████████████████▄▄   ▄▄████████████████▄▄
  ▄███████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█████  ▄███████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀███████▄
 ▄█████▀            ▀█  ▄█████▀            ▀█████▄
▄█████▀                ▄█████▀    ▄▄        ▀█████▄
█████▌                 █████▌     ████▄▄     ▐█████
█████▌                 █████▌     ████▀▀     ▐█████
▀█████▄      ▄▄▄      █████▀      ▀▀        ▄█████▀
 ▀█████▄▄   █████    █████▀  █▄            ▄█████▀
  ▀██████████████ ██████▀▀  █████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████▀
    ▀▀███████████ ████▀    ▀▀████████████████▀▀
        ▀▀███████ ▀▀           ▀▀████████▀▀
            ▀███▀
|
..NEXT-GEN TRADE RACING METAVERSE..
|   WEBSITE   |   TELEGRAM   |   TWITTER   |   MEDIUM   |
►►  Powered by
BOUNTY
DETECTIVE
stoat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 270


FREEDOM RESERVE


View Profile WWW
January 28, 2016, 11:41:36 PM
 #24

Why are you denying the obvious facts in front of your faces?

Satoshi Nakamoto is Nick Szabo.

Think about it, why would "Satoshi" reference Hal Finney and Wei Dai but not the main key player out of the three people Hal Nick and Wei?

Why would he not reference arguably the most important out of those three people?

It doesn't take Hercule Poirot to see that Satoshi is Nick Szabo.

FREEDOMRESERVEFree currency for the British Isles
Visit our website for more info

<-- Click here!
FREEDOMRESERVE By the People and for the People
AgentofCoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
January 29, 2016, 12:56:09 AM
 #25

Think about it, why would "Satoshi" reference Hal Finney and Wei Dai but not the main key player out of the three people Hal Nick and Wei?

Why would he not reference arguably the most important out of those three people?
...

Once again, can you please post the quote that you are referencing?

I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
stoat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 270


FREEDOM RESERVE


View Profile WWW
January 29, 2016, 01:09:14 AM
 #26

Think about it, why would "Satoshi" reference Hal Finney and Wei Dai but not the main key player out of the three people Hal Nick and Wei?

Why would he not reference arguably the most important out of those three people?
...

Once again, can you please post the quote that you are referencing?

Read the references on the bitcoin white paper.

FREEDOMRESERVEFree currency for the British Isles
Visit our website for more info

<-- Click here!
FREEDOMRESERVE By the People and for the People
deepceleron
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1032



View Profile WWW
January 29, 2016, 01:14:29 AM
 #27

Here's a link to the thread that franky1 is talking about:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=507458.0

Take a look at the entire thread and the discussions about which bitcoins Satoshi is likely to own and why.  Then make your own decision as to which assumptions are probably right, and which aren't.  Add up the coins from the decisions you agree with and you can have your own personal estimate of how many bitcoins Satoshi is likely yo have control over.

That is actually a rehash of Sergio Damien Lerner's analysis and a recreation of his graphics from April 2013.

Black = unspent

There was no released version of Bitcoin that "used up" or "wasted" nonces required to create the steep slope. My analysis is that Satoshi did mine them with a special version of Bitcoin as a "heartbeat" miner to keep blocks rolling for testing, but perhaps discarded them, as no generated coins that fit the profile were ever spent.

You can revisit the thread through the link:

Interesting, I was thinking of code to analyze this, who knew miners would pop out like this when graphed! I also am pulling my own stats out with bitcointools, but at a block a second, it takes a while. My stats add nonce, time, a spent status, and # of transactions to the table of extranonces, but I don't thing I will bother with writing my own analysis code.

http://bitslog.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/all10-5.jpg (image is wacky so just a link)

I see an interesting aspect, that the extranonce of the non-spending satoshi miner (if it is correct that red=spent and black=unspent) is increasing about four times as fast as others - it's steeper block finding slope indicates that it is significantly lower at block finding than it should be. Remember, computers are not competing against each other during this whole run, they are competing against the difficulty.

I believe this is because this miner is using different code than the released Bitcoin. It may have a getwork-style mining, where multiple CPUs are mining through it, and part of this increases the nonce faster than the block finding rate of the released Bitcoin. The nonce may increase faster if Satoshi was discarding fast block finds to make the block rate more regular (which they are statistically - pull out and analyse one series of increasing extranonces). Something that we see at about 1/10th, and again at 5/8ths of the chart, that the slope changes (along with a daily block rate change), I think that there was some change made in its code or the number of miners configured, maybe Satoshi added something that made the miner inefficient for few weeks and fixed it, or tweaked code to discard any blocks faster than a "heartbeat".

There is one scenario where I think this makes sense: Satoshi created a special "network-supporting" miner. This special always-on miner with it's own code base may have never created permanent keys or had a wallet - in that NOTHING appears spent from it's mining.

Without an always-on miner for people to try out the currency and keep confirmations rolling (and another node for them to connect to), the money would just plain not work. This miner runs different code than the release others are running, evidenced by the identical slopes of everyone else. This may be the "x" IRC username connecting over Tor - it would listen for IP addresses to connect to but normal bitcoins couldn't get it's IP address from IRC.


Another thing interesting is that you can see other black lines in the graph, other people mined for a while with release code and have never spent their generates. We know some people have early 50BTCs, but we can also surmise a few of these lines may be lost coins.

What you see are different THREADS of the same PC. Possibly two or four threads were running concurrently.
Each thread has it own ExtraNonce, but all threads are started almost at the same time.
There is no evidence to support this. In fact this disagrees with your discovery that most mining was done by one rolling extranonce. It may have been Bitcoin #1 + xMiner, as referenced in my previous posting thread. Remember, Bitcoin 0.1.0 doesn't mine unless it has a node connected to it - it counts the nodes, and if the number is 0 or has changed to 0, mining is disabled.

The Satoshi super miner might not have started until Satoshi's normal Bitcoin or another regular Bitcoin user was also connected. Satoshi may have a wallet with his own coins, but never will use the backbone miner's coins. New miner at #64 may be Hal getting Bitcoin working.
AgentofCoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001



View Profile
January 29, 2016, 02:09:38 AM
 #28

Think about it, why would "Satoshi" reference Hal Finney and Wei Dai but not the main key player out of the three people Hal Nick and Wei?

Why would he not reference arguably the most important out of those three people?
...

Once again, can you please post the quote that you are referencing?

Read the references on the bitcoin white paper.

I just did, I don't see Hal Finney mentioned in the references.
There are many other people referenced other than Dai, why couldn't any of them be Satoshi?

What in the Bitcoin White Paper did Satoshi Nakamoto take from Nick Szabo, that he didn't cite him for?
Which is your reasoning to think that Nick Szabo wrote the White paper.

I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
Blind Legs Parker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 721



View Profile
January 29, 2016, 04:01:03 AM
 #29

it is fair enough to assume whomever does isn't going to dump them at a high point or they would have at 1000$.
Because everyone knew back then what everyone knows now: of course $1000 is and will forever be the all-time high and all the people who bought at that price or during the dump are dumbasses because hey, $1000 is the absolute top and it shall never be exceeded whatsoever  Roll Eyes.

Any evidence for this prediction or are you just talking outa your ass like alot of dickheads on this forum.....Huh
Sorry, it was sarcasm.


Or is it because saying that Satoshi should have sold at $1000 (admitting that it was his intention to sell at high price, which I'm not implying, only listing amidst all the existing possibilities) when there was no reason to think that the bubble would explode as well as no evidence that bitcoin wouldn't be higher on the graph 6 months later makes more sense to you than admitting that we don't have a clue?

kingcolex seems pretty good at reading the past. Is he at guessing the future now? (Careful: this is another sarcasm).

Vous pouvez maintenant refermer ce topic et reprendre une activité normale. À ciao bonsoir.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!