Bitcoins Lost

[FatherMcGruder]

I think communities will most likely determine the status of a thing, as someone's property or something up for grabs, on a case by case basis. Of course, their determination will respect gains through work and not gains through exploitation.

[1715099634]

1715099634

[1715099634]

1715099634

[1715099634]

1715099634

[Anonymous]

Is this a debate about the stickiness of property?

I supposed a property abandoned for really long period of time will be free to homestead.

FatherMcGruder's view seems to be that if a piece of land or machinery is not in use, it is nobody's property and may be used by anyone. I just don't see this extremely short term property ownership working for everybody. Who determines when property is abandoned for long enough to be claimed? Can you, noticing that I haven't used my tractor in days (I'm in the hospital), take my tractor to your farm?

In the end, property is only achieved when its ownership can truly be enforced, whatever the means. Tack on whatever you like but it really means nothing.

[FatherMcGruder]

In the end, property is only achieved when its ownership can truly be enforced, whatever the means. Tack on whatever you like but it really means nothing.

So, if I successfully take something that you produced, you won't mind?

[Anonymous]

In the end, property is only achieved when its ownership can truly be enforced, whatever the means. Tack on whatever you like but it really means nothing.

So, if I successfully take something that you produced, you won't mind?

I prefer you wouldn't and I will use all available means to prevent such acquisition. If I fail, I fail.

[BitterTea]

So, if I successfully take something that you produced, you won't mind?

He's not making a value judgement. Any claim to ownership is worthless without the ability to protect that claim.

[wb3]

So, if I successfully take something that you produced, you won't mind?

He's not making a value judgement. Any claim to ownership is worthless without the ability to protect that claim.

Ah the old cliche, "The only rights you have, are the ones you can defend"   A truism.

[FatherMcGruder]

Ah the old cliche, "The only rights you have, are the ones you can defend"   A truism.

Without a government, a capitalist might have a hard time defending frivolous land claims. What's to stop him from reforming a government to help him defend such claims?

[wb3]

Ah the old cliche, "The only rights you have, are the ones you can defend"   A truism.

Without a government, a capitalist might have a hard time defending frivolous land claims. What's to stop him from reforming a government to help him defend such claims?

A capitalist and/or socialist has nothing to do with it.

Without a government, I would bet many conservatives would be able to "defend" themselves. The whole second amendment and all. The true conservatives don't trust their government, they don't "expect" help to come, they question decisions, they are leery when rights are stripped from them for the "public" good.

[ChupacabraHunter]

Adam's fair interest is that which Bob intends to accomplish with the $100. Demanding any more, beyond external transaction fees, is exploitation.

Nefario is paying me to develop the software for his bitcoin corporation. I know he will try to make a profit off of it. Meanwhile, I will get paid 120 BTC a week. That's an actual agreement in real life.

Is that exploitation? No. I like the arrangement in question.

This is after all, an amicable agreement between two moral agents. You, the outsider, is just an observer, who have nothing to do with the exchange. Whatever you think is exploitation is completely irrelevant to what I thought is a good deal, or what is moral.

I wholeheartedly have to agree!

[Clarithium]

But what if it really wasn't a good deal and you just didn't know it wasn't?

Isn't that still exploitation?

[Prze_koles]

wtf? this is like uber-off-topic thread. I think about 10% bitcoins could be lost in early stages of bitcoin creation.

[eMansipater]

Every single discussion like this should be forked and go in off-topic.  These forums are getting cluttered enough as it is, and the problem will only get worse as BitCoin continues to grow.

[BitterTea]

I don't know, this thread has been "off topic" for most of its existence:

first derailment

second derailment

Since the first page, the topic of discussion has been wage exploitation.

[ChupacabraHunter]

hehehe

I am new here, just reading all the "off topic" messages, and they're fun, and a good read.

just my 0.02 BTC

[ribuck]

"The Times" newspaper today claimed that approximately 2% of all the gold that has ever been mined is lost. That's less than I would have thought. Sorry, no link because I read the dead-tree version at the coffee shop.

[ThaMunsta]

Not sure if this 90% off topic thread will get me any answers but...
Is there even anyway to detect abandoned bitcoins? If we could some how round them up and redistribute them evenly...
Could we "mine" abandoned coins? Haha

[dserrano5]

Is there even anyway to detect abandoned bitcoins?

Old, not redeemed coins *could* be considered to be lost. But no one can get them, they have an owner and they could actually live in a wallet right now.

[TheVirus]

Is there even anyway to detect abandoned bitcoins?

Old, not redeemed coins *could* be considered to be lost. But no one can get them, they have an owner and they could actually live in a wallet right now.

If they are active in the block chain, then aren't they 100% in someone's wallet? How can coins exist without an owner (meaning, the coins were, at one time, owned, regardless to whether or not they are currently owned or lost)? In my eyes, it's impossible to determine if coins are lost and I think that's by design. I guess you can find an address that has had coins in them for years and has never sent a payment anywhere and one can consider those 'lost', but there's no way to tell if they are truly lost or if the owner just has them stored in a safe place somewhere.

[dserrano5]

In my eyes, it's impossible to determine if coins are lost

That's why I said "could".