Bitcoin Forum
May 07, 2024, 06:37:21 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: The Well Deserved Fortune of Satoshi Nakamoto, Visionary and Genious  (Read 13239 times)
BTC Books
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 10



View Profile
April 17, 2013, 05:52:18 PM
 #61

Why is there conflict between Sergio, jgarzik, and gmaxwell?

Why?


Because, at the lowest level, there is always conflict between those who create history and the historians who make an effort to document it.

Dankedan: price seems low, time to sell I think...
1715063841
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715063841

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715063841
Reply with quote  #2

1715063841
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
Etlase2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 17, 2013, 06:18:52 PM
 #62


spiccioli
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1378
Merit: 1003

nec sine labore


View Profile
April 17, 2013, 06:23:31 PM
 #63

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.

It seems to me the best explanation so far.

He wrote a proof of concept, bitcoin gui 0.1.0, and then hacked it up to have something generating a block every ten minutes, and maybe throw away faster blocks, just to be able to have transactions happening.

This proof of concept received a lackluster acceptance and there is a quote of him saying that he chose a very low difficulty and he did so, IMHO, to make it easier to have a regular and evenly spaced flow of blocks which were required to give a good experience to those testing it.

Given it was a proof of concept the value of the generated coins was zero and so he could throw away blocks without caring for the minted coins.

spiccioli
hobbes
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 128
Merit: 107



View Profile
April 17, 2013, 07:21:15 PM
 #64

So instead of a hand full of rich cypherpunks there is one filthy rich genius. Valued in dollar at current market price he owns about 0.15% of what Bill Gates owns.

What are the implications of this...

- There exists a single person that most likely has access to ~10% of all coins currently in existence.
- A single guy will potentially spend all those coins slower than several persons.
- Should it really be Satoshi he will be extra careful not to hurt his lifework.
- ?

And if the Bitcoin price should rise much further - I can only imagine what good for the world a genius could do with that kind of dough. What is next after freeing money - freeing education? Freeing voting?

rpietila
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036



View Profile
April 17, 2013, 07:51:22 PM
 #65

If you have bitcoins, you don't need much education or voting any more.

HIM TVA Dragon, AOK-GM, Emperor of the Earth, Creator of the World, King of Crypto Kingdom, Lord of Malla, AOD-GEN, SA-GEN5, Ministry of Plenty (Join NOW!), Professor of Economics and Theology, Ph.D, AM, Chairman, Treasurer, Founder, CEO, 3*MG-2, 82*OHK, NKP, WTF, FFF, etc(x3)
Sergio_Demian_Lerner (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 552
Merit: 625


View Profile WWW
April 17, 2013, 08:30:17 PM
 #66

Why is there conflict between Sergio, jgarzik, and gmaxwell?

Why?


Because, at the lowest level, there is always conflict between those who create history and the historians who make an effort to document it.

I will make it simple. If I did not uncovered this data set yesterday, some else would have done it, surrounded by much worse descriptive words. What I did is not ingenious. Is the most evident method of data mining. The data was there at plain sight.

I put all my effort in my blog post to calm the market showing the truth: that Satoshi or whoever mined them had not used the coins to distort the market, and I succeed, since the BTC price increased afterwards.

Can you imagine how yellow journalism would have handled this information to discredit the coin ?

So please stop blaming me for having uncovered Satoshi or whoever fortune: it was already uncovered.

Remember remember the 5th of November
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1862
Merit: 1011

Reverse engineer from time to time


View Profile
April 17, 2013, 08:35:34 PM
 #67

Why is there conflict between Sergio, jgarzik, and gmaxwell?

Why?


Because, at the lowest level, there is always conflict between those who create history and the historians who make an effort to document it.

I will make it simple. If I did not uncovered this data set yesterday, some else would have done it, surrounded by much worse descriptive words. What I did is not ingenious. Is the most evident method of data mining. The data was there at plain sight.

I put all my effort in my blog post to calm the market showing the truth: that Satoshi or whoever mined them had not used the coins to distort the market, and I succeed, since the BTC price increased afterwards.

Can you imagine how yellow journalism would have handled this information to discredit the coin ?

So please stop blaming me for having uncovered Satoshi or whoever fortune: it was already uncovered.


That's not the impression I got from the blog post, I thought you meant that satoshi DID spend money.

Also, Satoshi's coins may now be valued at 100 million USD, however if Bitcoin hits mainstream where 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000351(and this is very inaccurate example) is your salary, imagine what having a million bitcoins would mean. It would mean he would have money enough to buy a continent and he could control the world.

But by then, the majority of people will agree that at least 75% of Satoshi's coins have to be blocked from being valid in the chain.

BTC:1AiCRMxgf1ptVQwx6hDuKMu4f7F27QmJC2
Sergio_Demian_Lerner (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 552
Merit: 625


View Profile WWW
April 17, 2013, 10:38:47 PM
 #68

How Satoshi mining pattern disappears...

Remember remember the 5th of November
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1862
Merit: 1011

Reverse engineer from time to time


View Profile
April 17, 2013, 10:42:55 PM
 #69

You know, I have a feeling he is reading this thread as we speak.

BTC:1AiCRMxgf1ptVQwx6hDuKMu4f7F27QmJC2
Sergio_Demian_Lerner (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 552
Merit: 625


View Profile WWW
April 17, 2013, 10:44:29 PM
 #70

That's not the impression I got from the blog post, I thought you meant that satoshi DID spend money.
Please point me out where it seems that, maybe my English was not precise enough to express it.

Also, Satoshi's coins may now be valued at 100 million USD, however if Bitcoin hits mainstream where 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000351(and this is very inaccurate example) is your salary, imagine what having a million bitcoins would mean. It would mean he would have money enough to buy a continent and he could control the world.

But by then, the majority of people will agree that at least 75% of Satoshi's coins have to be blocked from being valid in the chain.

I've never thought about this kind of confiscation. But it would be terribly non-equitative, brutal, and not useful, since maybe there is other people holding as much as that coins, but in hundreds of small transaction outputs.
Sergio_Demian_Lerner (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 552
Merit: 625


View Profile WWW
April 17, 2013, 10:46:58 PM
Last edit: April 18, 2013, 04:44:17 AM by Sergio_Demian_Lerner
 #71

You know, I have a feeling he is reading this thread as we speak.

I wish he would just sends us some words... I wonder if he will be grateful or annoyed at my posts. I hope he is well enough not to worry.
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2348


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
April 17, 2013, 10:57:02 PM
 #72

You know, I have a feeling he is reading this thread as we speak.

Satoshi is watching you especially.

... and you and you and all of us, lololol.

Impaler
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826
Merit: 250

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!


View Profile
April 17, 2013, 11:12:07 PM
 #73

deepceleron's theory of a 'auto-mininer' run by Satoshi that existed just to give the network a consistent block interval and which intentionally lost all it's coins seems logical given the total lack of spending on those coins.  But why wouldn't such a detail not have been made public long ago?  Why would such a miner use different addresses rather then not a clearly void address for which no private key could exist, it's trivial to do this and Satoshi would have know how.  If deepceleron's theory is correct it also implies that Satoshi didn't make the slightest effort to inform the community he was destroying a large chunk of the theoretical potential 21M coins?  Did he want people to believe those Million or so coins were liquid and could be sold?

 
                                . ██████████.
                              .████████████████.
                           .██████████████████████.
                        -█████████████████████████████
                     .██████████████████████████████████.
                  -█████████████████████████████████████████
               -███████████████████████████████████████████████
           .-█████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
        .████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
       .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       ..████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████..
       .   .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       .      .████████████████████████████████████████████████.

       .       .██████████████████████████████████████████████
       .    ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████
       .█████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
        .███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
           .█████████████████████████████████████████████████████
              .████████████████████████████████████████████████
                   ████████████████████████████████████████
                      ██████████████████████████████████
                          ██████████████████████████
                             ████████████████████
                               ████████████████
                                   █████████
CryptoTalk.org| 
MAKE POSTS AND EARN BTC!
🏆
deepceleron
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1028



View Profile WWW
April 17, 2013, 11:44:00 PM
Last edit: April 18, 2013, 07:49:38 AM by deepceleron
 #74

deepceleron's theory of a 'auto-mininer' run by Satoshi that existed just to give the network a consistent block interval and which intentionally lost all it's coins seems logical given the total lack of spending on those coins.  But why wouldn't such a detail not have been made public long ago?  Why would such a miner use different addresses rather then not a clearly void address for which no private key could exist, it's trivial to do this and Satoshi would have know how.  If deepceleron's theory is correct it also implies that Satoshi didn't make the slightest effort to inform the community he was destroying a large chunk of the theoretical potential 21M coins?  Did he want people to believe those Million or so coins were liquid and could be sold?
It would be more secure to generate blocks with completely random pubkeys (which is exactly what Bitcoin does when it generates). If all the coinbase public keys had reduced address space or something in common, that could make their funds an attack target of weaker strength than normal addresses. There is no 64 bit public key for which a private key cannot theoretically exist and still be a valid point on the appropriate elliptic curve, which is required for implementation of public key validation.

If they were intended to be obviously discarded, they could claim a 1 base unit reward instead of 50 bitcoins, but this would likely just confuse people more - there wouldn't actually be 21M BTC and you would see other speculation and wild theories.
MysteryMiner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1029


Show middle finger to system and then destroy it!


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 12:01:39 AM
 #75

I think Satoshi is still tripping balls from Silk Road stuff since day he disappeared.

The idea of auto miner is logical but nothing supports it. As the coins were almost zero value and he might just as well fund faucet with them back then. Or he still have the original keys and don't care about spending them to buy yacht or collection of supercars. He probably already have all things he want and what can be purchased with money. Not everybody want to have yachts, private islands and supercars.

bc1q59y5jp2rrwgxuekc8kjk6s8k2es73uawprre4j
Etlase2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 12:10:39 AM
 #76

I think it would be hilarious if a majority of the miners (and I suppose the community would have to agree) decided to set a date where coins still unspent from blocks prior to say 30,000 would become unspendable. Then we could answer the question of satoshi's intentions once and for all.

deepceleron
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1028



View Profile WWW
April 18, 2013, 12:15:55 AM
 #77

I think it would be hilarious if a majority of the miners (and I suppose the community would have to agree) decided to set a date where coins still unspent from blocks prior to say 30,000 would become unspendable. Then we could answer the question of satoshi's intentions once and for all.
That won't happen. That would mean Satoshi only need spend some coins to fork the blockchain. Which you still may find hilarious.
Etlase2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 12:20:22 AM
 #78

Which is why I said the community would have to agree since they'd have to voluntarily use the fork with the change. However, you only need a 75% majority of miners because 49% can power the network while the 26% 51% attack the 25% left.

jl2012
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1792
Merit: 1093


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 12:44:42 AM
 #79

Is it the same time when he disappeared on this forum?

How Satoshi mining pattern disappears...



Donation address: 374iXxS4BuqFHsEwwxUuH3nvJ69Y7Hqur3 (Bitcoin ONLY)
LRDGENPLYrcTRssGoZrsCT1hngaH3BVkM4 (LTC)
PGP: D3CC 1772 8600 5BB8 FF67 3294 C524 2A1A B393 6517
Nancarrow
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 492
Merit: 500


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 01:55:53 AM
 #80

Nice work, Sergio. And please don't let them grind you down - I mean the fuckwits who think ignorance is EVER preferable to knowledge (and especially for markets!).

If I've said anything amusing and/or informative and you're feeling generous:
1GNJq39NYtf7cn2QFZZuP5vmC1mTs63rEW
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »  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!