Theymos: “Bitcoins Belonging to Satoshi Should Be Destroyed”

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Satoshi has the right of his coins if he is still alive if he's no longer on the scene or not alive then they should burn them but as long as he wants them no point burning them.

Exactly.

The Holy Stash is the ultimate dog food feast; if Bitcoin is to serve as a radically deflationary store of value, it will do so primarily for its Creator.

We can't change the social contract to screw Satoshi without destroying Bitcoin for everyone.   

Solid point.

[1714633523]

1714633523

[1714633523]

1714633523

[Amph]

those coins are effectively useless if the key is lost if satoshi is dead or any other combination

the simple fact that those coins are still there, somehow prove it

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

those coins are effectively useless if the key is lost if satoshi is dead or any other combination

the simple fact that those coins are still there, somehow prove it

How does the fact he hasn't cashed out yet lead you to inevitably conclude that he won't or can't or is dead? Those coins are all conceivably the personal property of one (or a few) living men. This economy is built on blind faith.

[AGD]

Theymos forgot one important thing: IF someone could hack these coins, Bitcoin would be worthless, not because of the inflation, but because somebody was able to hack it.

edit: "Theymos is this you?"

[Amph]

those coins are effectively useless if the key is lost if satoshi is dead or any other combination

the simple fact that those coins are still there, somehow prove it

How does the fact he hasn't cashed out yet lead you to inevitably conclude that he won't or can't or is dead? Those coins are all conceivably the personal property of one (or a few) living men. This economy is built on blind faith.

why cashing now, when there was a better opportunity at 1200? no sense, at worst he could still cash out when the price will skyrocket above 1200

but remeber that this si true for anyone else mining tons of coins back then, you think that only satoshi has a fortune out there?

i remember artfroz having more than 50% of the network, because he was the first to do gpu mining back then

being the first with gpu is not much different than being the first with cpu

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

those coins are effectively useless if the key is lost if satoshi is dead or any other combination

the simple fact that those coins are still there, somehow prove it

How does the fact he hasn't cashed out yet lead you to inevitably conclude that he won't or can't or is dead? Those coins are all conceivably the personal property of one (or a few) living men. This economy is built on blind faith.

why cashing now, when there was a better opportunity at 1200? no sense, at worst he could still cash out when the price will skyrocket above 1200

but remeber that this si true for anyone else mining tons of coins back then, you think that only satoshi has a fortune out there?

i remember artfroz having more than 50% of the network, because he was the first to do gpu mining back then

being the first with gpu is not much different than being the first with cpu

I don't remember this. Link?

[Quickseller]

why cashing now, when there was a better opportunity at 1200? no sense, at worst he could still cash out when the price will skyrocket above 1200

his personal situation may have changed, his outlook on the future of bitcoin may have changed (he may be unhappy on how the block size debate is panning out, among other things), the price of bitcoin may be higher by the time he wishes to cash out, the total supply of bitcoin would be higher now then previously, the liquidity of the bitcoin markets may be higher when he cashes out then what it was previously

[iCEBREAKER]

Thats a no no no no no no no no no no move. Whats the point of Bitcoin when someone can destroy some coins which are sitting in some dude wallet since 5 years ago? Like the above reply I agree bitcoin shouldn't have existed at all if some dude can just go and destroy someone else's bitcoin. Security is 0 this way. No no no no this should not happen.

Satoshi's Holy Hoard isn't useless.  To the contrary, it exemplifies Bitcoin's utility as a successful, radically deflationary store of value with a strictly enforced/upheld social contract.

It also serves as a canary in case of a successful exploit, because that prize is first in line to be stolen.

As a bug finding bounty they are the ultimate incentive, and so their continued security and value demonstrate Bitcoin's bespoke resiliency and longevity.

When Satoshi's coins are priceless, perhaps He will use them to fund a long term space colonization program, including life extension and nanotech....

[Amadues]

I think that only satoshi could decide what he want to do with his bitcoin.
Maybe he want move them in a specific way and in a certain time....

[Foxpup]

edit: "Theymos is this you?"

I'll thank you to read the entire thread before replying.

I never said any such thing. bitcoin.com again proves that it is absolutely worthless by completely fabricating that quote.

[Amph]

those coins are effectively useless if the key is lost if satoshi is dead or any other combination

the simple fact that those coins are still there, somehow prove it

How does the fact he hasn't cashed out yet lead you to inevitably conclude that he won't or can't or is dead? Those coins are all conceivably the personal property of one (or a few) living men. This economy is built on blind faith.

why cashing now, when there was a better opportunity at 1200? no sense, at worst he could still cash out when the price will skyrocket above 1200

but remeber that this si true for anyone else mining tons of coins back then, you think that only satoshi has a fortune out there?

i remember artfroz having more than 50% of the network, because he was the first to do gpu mining back then

being the first with gpu is not much different than being the first with cpu

I don't remember this. Link?

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/ArtForz, apaprently he had only 25% of the network, still huge, equal to 1800 coins per day, now multiply this even for 1 month only and it's already 54k coins

[alani123]

Saying that Satoshi doesn't hold the private keys to access his coins is an assumption that shouldn't be made unless the hypothetical scenario of Quantum computing threatening bitcoin's cryptography become plausible.
If that's the case, I'm pretty sure that the majority of people would agree with what theymos says and seek to protect bitcoin. It's sad that people are misinterpreting what theymos said, if QC started posing a thread every party holding bitcoin would seek to save his coins.

[Cyaren]

That is a pretty bad idea. So he's basically saying that anyone with old coins can expect them gone in a couple of years?

It's basically preventing bitcoin from working as a savings system.

Inflation is not a problem with bitcoin. Even with 1 million bitcoins pumped into the system that only represents less than 5% of the entire bitcoin supply - which is less inflation yearly than most of the countries on earth.

[alyssa85]

those coins are effectively useless if the key is lost if satoshi is dead or any other combination

the simple fact that those coins are still there, somehow prove it

How does the fact he hasn't cashed out yet lead you to inevitably conclude that he won't or can't or is dead? Those coins are all conceivably the personal property of one (or a few) living men. This economy is built on blind faith.

why cashing now, when there was a better opportunity at 1200? no sense, at worst he could still cash out when the price will skyrocket above 1200

but remeber that this si true for anyone else mining tons of coins back then, you think that only satoshi has a fortune out there?

i remember artfroz having more than 50% of the network, because he was the first to do gpu mining back then

being the first with gpu is not much different than being the first with cpu

Hindsight is 20/20. When the price was $1000, people thought it would keep going up. Some excited people thought it would be $10,000 within five years. Which might still happen, who knows? But if devs start arbitrarily destroying people's coins, there will be a rush to sell before your coins are destroyed as well, and bitcoin's price will  plummet to nothing.

[The00Dustin]

This comment really isn't much different than the "Bill Gates 640K" debacle:

I also believe that there will not ever be any "personal" uses for QCs

This comment certainly doesn't have history on its side:

which will increase the friction associated with trying to do something malicious with a QC

I'm sure plenty of people always have and always will misuse public/employer property, but we will only know about the ones who get caught.

[BurtW]

can anyone give a quick explanation or a link to help me understand what exactly is QC and QC resistant address that i keep hearing about this subject?

QC = Quantum Computing or Quantum Computer

Hypothetically if QC ever becomes a threat to the current signature algorithm used by Bitcoin (elliptical curve) then a different signature algorithm could be phased in to hypothetically create new addresses types that would be more resistant to being hacked by QC, hence "QC resistant addresses".  Everyone would then be encourage to move their coins from their current addresses (type 1xxxx and 3xxxxx) to these hypothetically created new addresses and then their coins would be safe from being hacked by a QC.

Current generation of QC can do only very menial things like factor a two digit number.  In other words QC is barely in its infancy.  It is extremely difficult to do and will take years if not decades to create a machines capable of cracking elliptical curve signatures.

Just google "bitcoin quantum computing" either here on this forum or on the internet in general.  There are dozens of thread on this subject here on this forum.

[Laniakea]

“This issue has been discussed for several years,” he said. “I think that the very-rough consensus is that old coins should be destroyed before they are stolen to prevent disastrous monetary inflation. People joined Bitcoin with the understanding that coins would be permanently lost at some low rate, leading to long-term monetary deflation. Allowing lost coins to be recovered violates this assumption, and is a systemic security issue.”

https://news.bitcoin.com/theymos-bitcoins-satoshi-destroyed/



In my view, the moment Bitcoin devs or anyone start dictating what to do with bitcoin of others, censorship resistance of bitcoin will be lost. Satoshi would be proud for sure.

So you agree with thymos or not? Should the coins be destroyed or not?

Why should we be able to decide what to do with satoshis coins?
Its not our property. In fact, as we're spearking, its not anyone's property as we don't even know Satoshi is a person, a collective, the FBI or even me. No one should be able to decide.

[2c0de]

It would be better solution to move the Satoshi's coins to a designated address, where anybody understands who is the actual owner.


This would mean that once Satoshi Nakamoto actually moves the coins, all the market participants would be aware of the fact.

This could serve as an important alert mechanism, to make sure once Bitcoin is faced with a serious threat, a Satoshi moving the coins
would make the  alarm bells set off and issue a powerful signal to the network.

This is especially important given that in the latest Bitcoin Core release, the old alert mechanism is removed.

[tiggytomb]

I think that these coins and everyone's coins should be left as they are, if people want to store them away for 20 years then they should have that choice.

[Ultrafinery]

With all the drama raging, everyone already at each other's throats, why would someone bring up quantum computers breaking Bitcoin and start talking about destroying Satoshi's coins?
Help me out with this