[POLL] Moral dillema. Satoshi's coins. VOTE

[pooya87]

You must read the previous topic about this matter and find "Theymos"'s reply about the matter (it was his proposal in the first place) and see what this is all about and realize that this is for a very far far future that has not yet came.

and by the way it has nothing to do with morality.

[1715091504]

1715091504

[1715091504]

1715091504

[gmaxwell]

The poll text doesn't really jive with the message text.

What does Bitcoin's creator have anything to do with this? For all we know all of Satoshi's coins are happily in regular circulation.

The poll asks, "Is it morally justified to destroy Satoshi's bitcoins to prevent market crash?"

but the text of the message makes it clear the real subject is:

"If ECC is cryptographically broken, is it okay to have a finite deadline for all coins to move to non-ECC keys in order to prevent millions of coins from being stolen including long lost coins?"


These are pretty distinctive discussions... in particular, targeting a specific person is quite different from targeting vulnerable keys generally. And "to destroy" sure doesn't sound like something with ample opportunity to move them first.

[Kakmakr]

The Devil's advocate in me, wants the option where Satoshi is given 1 year to spend his coins or to move it. This will take a lot of uncertainty away, if people knew that these coins are still under the control of someone or a group of people.

The supposed millions of Satoshi coins have been casting a cloud of doubt with many investors, who seem to fear a price collapse, if these coins ever enters back into circulation some day. Possibly causing a Bitcoin market crash as a result.

I am still undecided on the ethics of such a move. It is Satoshi after all. ^hmmmmmm^

[davis196]

Let's do a little rehash of previous discussion about what to do with the risk of Satoshi's coins being stolen. But let's change the narrative a little bit.

Scenario:

The rise of powerful quantum computers is inevitable. All Bitcoin users will have to upgrade to a new quantum-resistant algo, or have their funds stolen.

The question is, what to do with Satoshi's coins:

1 - give Satoshi a 'notice period' (i.e. 1 year time to upgrade) after which, the coins will be destroyed. (vote 'Yes' in the poll)

2 - do nothing, Satoshi's coins are sacred, even if this leads to market crashing to the ground. (vote 'No' in the poll)

3 - there's a third way (describe in reply). (vote '3rd option' in the poll)

This is meant to be a question about ethics, not about likelihood of QC being a threat or what would be the real impact on the market. So let's assume the scenario as real.

Ps. Vote changing allowed.

I don`t know how destroying Satoshi`s bitcoins will prevent a market crash?

I think that he owns about 2% of all bitcoins.

Quantum computers are coming ,but there is still time.

[Senor.Bla]

satoshi would not be the only one in danger. since this move or x would result in a panic, many would just take their money somewhere else. an altcoin.
also giving him one year and hoping that this would mean we are safe for one year is a stupid assumption. since an earlier attack with the quantum computer would be possible. or satoshi could move his coins earlier. you could tell the difference? anyway in both cases a panic would be the result. so the intelligent people would money their money someplace else.
but also they know this is a made up bs scenario. FUD. 

[ObscureBean]

I would go with the first option so yes. Bitcoin has been bigger than Satoshi for a while now and if risk exists, measures should be taken to address them. Satoshi's coins are not only his property but also his responsibility. If we move to a different algo, everyone, including Satoshi, will need to either move their coins or forfeit them for the sake/safety of the network.  

[clickerz]

I would go with the first option so yes. Bitcoin has been bigger than Satoshi for a while now and if risk exists, measures should be taken to address them. Satoshi's coins are not only his property but also his responsibility. If we move to a different algo, everyone, including Satoshi, will need to either move their coins or forfeit them for the sake/safety of the network.  

It seems No. 1 choice is my take. But destroying it, will cause the price of bitcoin to go up maybe. If you  leave it here, its just like a ticking bomb, waiting to be stolen? and dump in the market. Just only my opinion.

[frankmb]

I voted no, simply because I don't think it is up to any of us to decide to destroy someone else's coins.

[gadman2]

Satoshi's coins are his greatest trophy to all of us, and even more so right where they are... They show us how secure Bitcoin is. If it is confirmed that the coins have been compromised then it would be the point where bitcoin becomes insecure and at that moment we, as a community, will address the issue. Until then, they sit.

[yayayo]

There is no moral dilemma. Bitcoin never started with any proposition of stability regarding its fiat valuation. Everyone investing in Bitcoin has the possibility to obtain information regarding Bitcoins alleged holding structure prior to buying a single coin. And even after buying Bitcoin, every investor still has the option to divest. Besides that, no big holder of Bitcoin has any motivation to suddenly sell all his/her coins for fiat trash money - it's just irrational. There are a lot of stock companies out there where big holders have a far more dominant position than it is the case for Bitcoin, yet these holders are not throwing their share packages on the market. 

Anybody voting in favor of destroying Satoshi's coins is demanding to force an interventionist monetary policy upon Bitcoin and is therefore perverting the original idea of its creation. The fact that we have such a high number of enemies of Bitcoin (currently ~18%) in this forum is shocking.

If you ask me, anybody voting in favor of destroying coins of any holder out of "market stability" considerations should be excluded from the Bitcoin community forever and have his/her account banned.

ya.ya.yo!

[pawel7777]

If you ask me, anybody voting in favor of destroying coins of any holder out of "market stability" considerations should be excluded from the Bitcoin community forever and have his/her account banned.

How do you exclude someone from community? Are you talking about banning Bitcointalk accounts? That could be tricky, as the idea of destroying Satoshi's coin came from the owner of this forum.

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

[bitcointank]

No, satoshi never sold one bitcoin for money, why we sell or destroy his coins? And it is a false assuption because he holds the bitcoin, we can't get his coin to destroy

[amacar2]

Apart from genesis block 50 coins and a few known others, u never know for sure, which coins actually belong to Satoshi.

Yes actually we also have to remember this point, is there any list made by satoshi about the bitcoin address he have ever used to store his bitcoins? If no than all the addresses may be just supposed or predicted addresses of satoshi.

[BitcoinHodler]

anybody voting in favor of destroying coins of any holder out of "market stability" considerations should be excluded from the Bitcoin community forever and have his/her account banned.

anybody who doesn't read this topic and doesn't know what is happening should be executed if you ask me
the topic is a misleading one and the subject at hand was discussed not so long ago here and also gmaxwell explained it a couple of comments above and yet this topic keeps getting bumped with people saying to destroy or not to destroy