Re: Bitcoin-QT client question

[TheGambler]

Import your wallet.dat, find it in your blockchain export section.

[1715669719]

1715669719

[1715669719]

1715669719

[MineForeman.com]

It is acutely possible.

If your mining and discover a block you can give a null address and *poof* the coins are gone.

I am not sure if that has been fixed yet (It is not a great priority, who would mine coins into oblivion after all).

Neil

[MineForeman.com]

I see...so this is a newly discovered block with basically an invalid address (like 33333 for example)

Something like that (I am eating lunch one handed so I wont go into a long explication, but it is quite complex if someone else wants to dig it up).

But what about already mined coins in an address right now?

As far as I know once they are on the blockchain they are there for good (baring new exploits).

Neil

[franky1]

It is acutely possible.

If your mining and discover a block you can give a null address and *poof* the coins are gone.

I am not sure if that has been fixed yet (It is not a great priority, who would mine coins into oblivion after all).

Neil

I see...so this is a newly discovered block with basically an invalid address (like 33333 for example)
But what about already mined coins in an address right now?

ignoring the fact that people will reply saying that quantum computers 'may' find the privkey of a null address.....

the ability to put funds into a null address now, whether mined or previously hoarded is possible today. much like the guy that never kept a copy of his privkey and his hard drive is now sitting in a landfill... is another option to lose bitcoins from circulation

emphasis on the words lose from circulation. rather than destroyed

[jeffersonairplane]

The IRS would love for that to happen and is trying to do that. They wish to keep putting limitations on it to stomp it out but it wont happen.

[acs267]

I don't think it's possible to destroy them. It's like asking someone if it's possible to destroy the Internet, or thoughts.

[franky1]

The IRS would love for that to happen and is trying to do that. They wish to keep putting limitations on it to stomp it out but it wont happen.

FUD spreader get under your bridge.

the IRS recently classified it as a valid store or value!! they declared it as worthy of people to invest in, make profit to then cash out and give them taxes.

[DannyHamilton]

Miners (or mining pools) receive as their block reward, the sum of the block subsidy (currently 25 BTC) AND the total transaction fees paid by all transactions included in the block.

They do this by creating a special transaction that has no inputs, and assigns outputs that do not exceed this sum to any addresses (or scripts) that they like.

Notice, that I said they assign outputs that do not exceed this sum.

In other words, the protocol is perfectly happy to let a miner assign LESS than the reward that they are due in this transaction.

This has happened in the past accidentally.  It is not likely to happen intentionally, but that doesn't mean it can't.

If they assign between 0.00000001 BTC and 25 BTC less than they are due, then you could just say they are accepting the fees, and reducing the number of new bitcoins created.

If the reward they assign in the transaction falls short of what they are due by more than 25 BTC, then clearly, some of the fees paid have vanished from existence.

The fees were paid by transactions, but they don't show up in any outputs, and no longer exist to be spent or to find in the list of unspent transaction outputs (UTXO).

Also note that transactions can be created that don't pay to an address, but rather pay to a script.  In particular, you can use OP_RETURN to create an output that can never be spent.  This script OP code is used specifically to mark an output as "invalid".  As such, it can immediately be removed from the UTXO, and can be considered "destroyed".

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script

Provably Unspendable/Prunable Outputs
The standard way to mark a transaction as provably unspendable is with a scriptPubKey of the following form:

Code:

scriptPubKey: OP_RETURN {zero or more ops}

OP_RETURN immediately marks the script as invalid, guaranteeing that no scriptSig exists that could possibly spend that output. Thus the output can be immediately pruned from the UTXO set even if it has not been spent.

[twistyfy]

This has probably been discussed before but I want to raise it again...

can bitcoins be destroyed

You can burn fiat currency...so can you destroy a bitcoin? Is it possible? How would you go about it? How would it effect the economy and how would someone find about it if it occurred?

Discuss

It's possible for you to physically lose them, but it can't be DESTROYED completely.

[Tomatocage]

It's a well known fact that 1GG3CLYd36tmU2X73rmHYzsTtaJcNwMcCC is the default address for destroying Bitcoins

*cough*

[Ron~Popeil]

This has probably been discussed before but I want to raise it again...

can bitcoins be destroyed

You can burn fiat currency...so can you destroy a bitcoin? Is it possible? How would you go about it? How would it effect the economy and how would someone find about it if it occurred?

Discuss

It's possible for you to physically lose them, but it can't be DESTROYED completely.

That is the way I understand it. Even if you lose your private keys the coins will always be in the block chain.

[freedomno1]

It's a well known fact that 1GG3CLYd36tmU2X73rmHYzsTtaJcNwMcCC is the default address for destroying Bitcoins

*cough*

I see what you did there
No No its 1EByjy9e4FeGZuTV4Rx5hbf4PnFt7jGh8M

*Cough*

Hmm blockchains not address searching think that was not exodus

[DannyHamilton]

This has probably been discussed before but I want to raise it again...

can bitcoins be destroyed

You can burn fiat currency...so can you destroy a bitcoin? Is it possible? How would you go about it? How would it effect the economy and how would someone find about it if it occurred?

Discuss

It's possible for you to physically lose them, but it can't be DESTROYED completely.

First you have to describe what you mean when you say "destroy bitcoins".

Since bitcoins don't actually exist, there isn't anything there to destroy.

We can, however, permanently reduce the sum of the unspent transaction outputs.  That's about as close as you can get to the "destruction" of something that was never "created" in the first place.

[twiifm]

From what I understand bitcoins cant be destroyed but the keys can be lost

[Beliathon]

Destroying bitcoins (losing keys / forgetting passwords) = giving away your coins to every other bitcoin holder in the exact proportion of their holdings.

So for all you morons out there in the world, let me take this moment to preemptively thank you.

[Kluge]

 In particular, you can use OP_RETURN to create an output that can never be spent.  This script OP code is used specifically to mark an output as "invalid".  As such, it can immediately be removed from the UTXO, and can be considered "destroyed".

Out of curiosity, is there any web service which keeps tabs on how many coins are proved to be destroyed? Compared to the number of "de facto" unspendable coins, it must be insignificant, but it's still something to look at.

[smoothie]

If you lose your unique private-keys and no one else has a copy, your bitcoins are as good as gone...

Not really. The blockchain still records that it resides at such and such address.

I'm not sure there is a way to actually destroy a bitcoin in terms of its recordability on the blockchain.

[DeathAndTaxes]

In particular, you can use OP_RETURN to create an output that can never be spent.  This script OP code is used specifically to mark an output as "invalid".  As such, it can immediately be removed from the UTXO, and can be considered "destroyed".

Out of curiosity, is there any web service which keeps tabs on how many coins are proved to be destroyed? Compared to the number of "de facto" unspendable coins, it must be insignificant, but it's still something to look at.

I don't know of any and it is very small %.  Most are probably due to mistakes they just happen to be mistakes where we can definitively say the output can't be spent.  The "normal" usage of OP RETURN is to encode up to 40 bytes of data in an output with zero value so the output is unspendable but not coins are lost.  As Danny pointed out it could be used to provably destroy coins (and there are a number of other methods) but I don't believe it has been used intentionally that way for anything other than a few tests.

[Ron~Popeil]

In particular, you can use OP_RETURN to create an output that can never be spent.  This script OP code is used specifically to mark an output as "invalid".  As such, it can immediately be removed from the UTXO, and can be considered "destroyed".

Out of curiosity, is there any web service which keeps tabs on how many coins are proved to be destroyed? Compared to the number of "de facto" unspendable coins, it must be insignificant, but it's still something to look at.

I don't know of any and it is very small %.  Most are probably due to mistakes they just happen to be mistakes where we can definitively say the output can't be spent.  The "normal" usage of OP RETURN is to encode up to 40 bytes of data in an output with zero value so the output is unspendable but not coins are lost.  As Danny pointed out it could be used to provably destroy coins (and there are a number of other methods) but I don't believe it has been used intentionally that way for anything other than a few tests.

I wonder if there is a way to return confirmed unspendable coins to circulation. Could they be added to block rewards to do it fairly? I am not proposing we try but my intellectual curiosity gets piqued about things like this.
 

[DannyHamilton]

In particular, you can use OP_RETURN to create an output that can never be spent.  This script OP code is used specifically to mark an output as "invalid".  As such, it can immediately be removed from the UTXO, and can be considered "destroyed".

Out of curiosity, is there any web service which keeps tabs on how many coins are proved to be destroyed? Compared to the number of "de facto" unspendable coins, it must be insignificant, but it's still something to look at.

I don't know of any and it is very small %.  Most are probably due to mistakes they just happen to be mistakes where we can definitively say the output can't be spent.  The "normal" usage of OP RETURN is to encode up to 40 bytes of data in an output with zero value so the output is unspendable but not coins are lost.  As Danny pointed out it could be used to provably destroy coins (and there are a number of other methods) but I don't believe it has been used intentionally that way for anything other than a few tests.

I wonder if there is a way to return confirmed unspendable coins to circulation. Could they be added to block rewards to do it fairly? I am not proposing we try but my intellectual curiosity gets piqued about things like this.
 

Not without making hard fork changes to the protocol that would require the consensus of ALL users.