Proposed solution to "lost coins"

[Tehfiend]

Not sure if this is the best place to post this but I was thinking about all of the lost coins this morning and had an idea that may or may not suck.

What if extremely stale coins got recycled? For example, if an address has not be touched in X years then Y BTC from it gets added to the next block reward. Not sure what a good age and ammount/% would be but perhaps 10 years. Would be trivial to move your coins every few years to keep them "fresh" and wallets could automate this and have warnings as well. With a system like this, no coins would ever be permanently lost and would add some reward to miners down the road. OK now tell me why this is a terrible idea...

[crypTrade]

What value would you suggest for X? Because this only works if people agree on a value.

[DeathAndTaxes]

1) It is theft.  The "lost coins" (including not so lost ones) don't belong to you.

2) It is changing the rules after the fact.  If Bitcoin implemented this from day 1 it would be not quite as bad but there is a "social contract" in Bitcoin.  Here are the rules, the system is volentary, if you don't like them you don't need to use them.  Changing the rules after the fact is a bait and switch.

3) This has been proposed at least a hundred times by a hundred different people going as far back at 2010.  

4) It won't happen.  I am not saying it won't happen because it is a bad idea it simply won't happen.  Bitcoin requires consensus.  Any break from the consensus is a hard fork.  The existing "no coin theft" Bitcoin will still exist.  You can't force it to stop.  The bad news is two different completely incompatible bitcoins both calling themselves "bitcoin" is just a recipe for mass chaos and confusion.  The utility value of both systems declines.

5) If you want to steal coins then make a new crypto-currency, call it "steal-a-coin" or something and see how popular it is.

[Tehfiend]

What value would you suggest for X? Because this only works if people agree on a value.

perhaps 10 years

[Tehfiend]

1) It is theft.  The "lost coins" (including not so lost ones) don't belong to you.

2) It is changing the rules after the fact.  If Bitcoin implemented this from day 1 it would be not quite as bad but there is a "social contract" in Bitcoin.  Here are the rules, the system is volentary, if you don't like them you don't need to use them.  Changing the rules after the fact is a bait and switch.

3) This has been proposed at least a hundred times by a hundred different people going as far back at 2010.  

4) It won't happen.  I am not saying it won't happen because it is a bad idea it simply won't happen.  Bitcoin requires consensus.  Any break from the consensus is a hard fork.  The existing "no coin theft" Bitcoin will still exist.  You can't force it to stop.  The bad news is two different completely incompatible bitcoins both calling themselves "bitcoin" is just a recipe for mass chaos and confusion.  The utility value of both systems declines.

5) If you want to steal coins then make a new crypto-currency, call it "steal-a-coin" or something and see how popular it is.

1) Is it theft when an unclaimed estate is handed over to the state?

2) Technically the rules of bitcoin have already changed after the fact if you were watching the recent fork and changes to client.

3) Sorry I guess I did not look hard enough! My bad.

4) I agree it is unlikely but not impossible. The mining community recently had to come to consensus on the issue of the large blocks breaking older clients. As cryptography progresses it is likely the protocol will have to adopt a new encryption algorithm eventually etc etc.

5) HA. HA. HA. What you call stealing, I call recycling. I honestly think there is a slight chance that lost coins could become an issue in the extremely long term. It's just a matter of fact that coins will continue to be lost shrinking the supply from the intended 21 million.

Some how, some way, we need to teach every noob how to use the search function.  Maybe they should all have to prove they know how to search for a topic before they get out of noob jail?

Moderators, can we make this happen?  Just some sort of test where they have to use the search function once before they are allowed to post "new" topics?

Sorry to be "that guy". I honestly did search but didn't find anything. If you're not too busy hate'n could you point me in the right direction?

[jackjack]

1. Propose a terrible idea and ask people to tell you why it's terrible
2. Be told why it's terrible
3. Get pissed
4. ? ? ?
5. Profit

[Tehfiend]

1. Propose a terrible idea and ask people to tell you why it's terrible
2. Be told why it's terrible
3. Get pissed
4. ? ? ?
5. Profit

Who's pissed? I was expecting the trolls to come out and nobodies explained why it's a terrible idea. Is that all you have?

[Tehfiend]

Not hating, just getting old and tired.  Been around a couple of years and I have seen this thread just too many times.  The 21M cap seems to be the one thing that every new person seems that they need to "fix".  It is not just you.  Stick around a few months and you will get tired of the threads all proposing solutions to the 21M "problem".

Hey you kids - get the hell off my lawn!

I've been mining since 2011 so I'm not new, just never bothered to make an account since I normally avoid participating in the joyful world of Internet forums but like many I have BTC on the brain and couldn't help myself. I agree it's not going to be a problem any time soon but I do see bitcoin's potential to last centuries in which case it could be a possibility way down the road IMO.

[justusranvier]

Your proposed solution has been implemented in at least one alternate cryptocurrency. Go use that one if you think it's a good idea.

[Tehfiend]

Your proposed solution has been implemented in at least one alternate cryptocurrency. Go use that one if you think it's a good idea.

Couldn't be bothered to say which one? I didn't notice that last time I checked out the altcoins but obviously this is not an original (or terrible) idea after all.

What is it that makes a lot of the users on this forum so cranky? Did they sell at $10 or maybe bought a pizza for 10,000BTC? Lost a wallet or decided not to pre-order an Avalon and bought a BFL ASIC miner instead perhaps?

Silly me thinking that there is decent discussion to be found here...

[justusranvier]

What is it that makes a lot of the users on this forum so cranky?

You're posting in the wrong part of the forum. There's an area devoted to alternate cryptocurrencies, and also a search function that you can use to check whether or not somebody has already talked about your idea.

[deathcode]

How do you differentiate between a stale address and someone saving the coins for a long time?
Sorry, but it's a terrible idea. If someone was stupid enough to lose his/her coins he/she didn't deserve them in the first place.
there's absolutely no excuse to lose coins having google drive, skydrive, box, dropbox, mega, private cloud, external disks, $4 flash drives, paper wallet, etc, etc, etc, etc....

[TierNolan]

Unless you are worried that eventually the smallest value (1 Satoshi which is 0.00000001 BTC) will be to large for the economy, then old coins are effectively already recycled.  If 5% of coins are taken out of circulation, then it increases the value of the rest.

Even in that situation, there probably would be some update to the spec to allow even smaller values.  Ofc, that might cause similar discussions as the max block size ones.

[r.willis]

Lost coins are not a problem, so there are no need for "solution".

[Tehfiend]

You're posting in the wrong part of the forum. There's an area devoted to alternate cryptocurrencies, and also a search function that you can use to check whether or not somebody has already talked about your idea.

I'm not talking about cryptocurrencies, somebody else mentioned that. I did a search and could not find a discussion on this particular solution. Care to show me the exact search I should have used?

How do you differentiate between a stale address and someone saving the coins for a long time?
Sorry, but it's a terrible idea. If someone was stupid enough to lose his/her coins he/she didn't deserve them in the first place.
there's absolutely no excuse to lose coins having google drive, skydrive, box, dropbox, mega, private cloud, external disks, $4 flash drives, paper wallet, etc, etc, etc, etc....

I haven't looked into how the altcoin that has implemented this terrible idea has done so but IMO the average person will eventually opt to store their BTC in "banks" so they do not have to worry about securing their BTC themselves. These banks will make sure none of their holdings are stale as you only have to transfer them once every decade to avoid problems. People storing their BTC privately will be savvy enough to know they also need to transfer their BTC once per decade to keep them from going stale. Yes there is no excuse but that will not stop it from happening.

Unless you are worried that eventually the smallest value (1 Satoshi which is 0.00000001 BTC) will be to large for the economy, then old coins are effectively already recycled.  If 5% of coins are taken out of circulation, then it increases the value of the rest.

Even in that situation, there probably would be some update to the spec to allow even smaller values.  Ofc, that might cause similar discussions as the max block size ones.

I'm not worried per say but I do think there could be a supply problem way down the road. For example right now there are around 1.18 trillion USD in circulation world wide. That is 118 trillion pennies. There is a maximum of 2,100 trillion satoshies. That's less than 1800% of current pennies. USD circulation has increased by around 170% in the last decade. That means it is possible in 100+ years we will not have enough satoshies to go around. I do agree recycling coins is not a solution but will help a little. I just like to think and talk about bitcoins, please forgive me for thinking that was the purpose of these forums.

Lost coins are not a problem, so there are no need for "solution".

"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man."

[deathcode]

You're posting in the wrong part of the forum. There's an area devoted to alternate cryptocurrencies, and also a search function that you can use to check whether or not somebody has already talked about your idea.

I'm not talking about cryptocurrencies, somebody else mentioned that. I did a search and could not find a discussion on this particular solution. Care to show me the exact search I should have used?

How do you differentiate between a stale address and someone saving the coins for a long time?
Sorry, but it's a terrible idea. If someone was stupid enough to lose his/her coins he/she didn't deserve them in the first place.
there's absolutely no excuse to lose coins having google drive, skydrive, box, dropbox, mega, private cloud, external disks, $4 flash drives, paper wallet, etc, etc, etc, etc....

I haven't looked into how the altcoin that has implemented this terrible idea has done so but IMO the average person will eventually opt to store their BTC in "banks" so they do not have to worry about securing their BTC themselves. These banks will make sure none of their holdings are stale as you only have to transfer them once every decade to avoid problems. People storing their BTC privately will be savvy enough to know they also need to transfer their BTC once per decade to keep them from going stale. Yes there is no excuse but that will not stop it from happening.

Unless you are worried that eventually the smallest value (1 Satoshi which is 0.00000001 BTC) will be to large for the economy, then old coins are effectively already recycled.  If 5% of coins are taken out of circulation, then it increases the value of the rest.

Even in that situation, there probably would be some update to the spec to allow even smaller values.  Ofc, that might cause similar discussions as the max block size ones.

I'm not worried per say but I do think there could be a supply problem way down the road. For example right now there are around 1.18 trillion USD in circulation world wide. That is 118 trillion pennies. There is a maximum of 2,100 trillion satoshies. That's less than 1800% of current pennies. USD circulation has increased by around 170% in the last decade. That means it is possible in 100+ years we will not have enough satoshies to go around. I do agree recycling coins is not a solution but will help a little. I just like to think and talk about bitcoins, please forgive me for thinking that was the purpose of these forums.

Lost coins are not a problem, so there are no need for "solution".

"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man."

We understand and I think we all respect your opinion.
That being said, I can tell you a couple of things:
1) It won't happen
2) it's not a viable idea.
3) The bank concept is what every bitcoin lover HATES! so you're trying to centralize a coin that has decentralization as its main attraction!!! :/ NO NO in my book and pretty much everyone's book here
4) it's a terrible idea, but that's just my opinion...

Regards.

[Tehfiend]

We understand and I think we all respect your opinion.
That being said, I can tell you a couple of things:
1) It won't happen
2) it's not a viable idea.
3) The bank concept is what every bitcoin lover HATES! so you're trying to centralize a coin that has decentralization as its main attraction!!! :/ NO NO in my book and pretty much everyone's book here
4) it's a terrible idea, but that's just my opinion...

Regards.

I wouldn't say all but thank you .

1) Why not? If bitcoin lasts for centuries then major changes will have to be made at some point because supply will run out and hardware/cryptography will advance beyond SHA256.
2) Why not? Apparently an altcoin has implemented it.
3) Yes yes I was prepared for that reaction. The great thing about bitcoins is it will give users MANY different options. You will never HAVE to use a bank. Banks are not 100% evil and flawed providing ZERO value or they would have never come into existence. Many novice users will not want the responsibility of securing their BTC just like I don't want to keep my cash under my mattress. People will want buyer protection that cash and BTC does not offer but banks and credit cards do. The nature of BTC will keep banks in check because it will be much easier to operate without them and I imagine a new breed of bank emerging down the road that is nothing like what we see today. The revolution has barely begun...
4) Yes yes I know that's many peoples opinion but I am curious about the basis that opinion is formed on exactly.

[aceat64]

If you think this is a good idea (it isn't) why not just use Freicoin?

[Tehfiend]

If you think this is a good idea (it isn't) why not just use Freicoin?

I don't think that it's a good idea, just an idea. Lots of people think it's a bad idea but won't explain why exactly.

Thanks for pointing me to the altcoin that has implemented this so I can take a closer look.

[aceat64]

If you think this is a good idea (it isn't) why not just use Freicoin?

I don't think that it's a good idea, just an idea. Lots of people think it's a bad idea but won't explain why exactly.

Thanks for pointing me to the altcoin that has implemented this so I can take a closer look.

I think they've done a good job explaining that what you are proposing is outright theft. Since the beginning we have told people, as long as you hold the private keys your bitcoins are safe. Your proposal would make that a lie. When I dropped out of the bitcoin community in 2010, I still had some bitcoins left in my wallet. I expected that when/if I returned, my coins would be there. When I came back, they were there, if they were gone I would assume they had been stolen.

Telling people something is their property and then taking it away later, is theft.