Satoshi's spare change?

[gmaxwell]

http://blockexplorer.com/tx/3387418aaddb4927209c5032f515aa442a6587d6e54677f08a03b8fa7789e688#o1

(This looks like change from a send from an active address being sent to the address which was paid by the genesis block)

Did older client software not generate random addresses to receive change and instead pick a random address in the wallet?

[1713513268]

1713513268

[1713513268]

1713513268

[1713513268]

1713513268

[xf2_org]

Somebody sent satoshi a tip...

[error]

Somebody sent satoshi a tip...

I wonder if he will ever notice.

[mcdett]

Is anyone else concerned about Satoshi (or whomever was in the original group) having control of almost 20% of the btc economy?  This isn't the perfect place to post this question, but it was something that got me thinking.  The original group is estimated to have about 20% of the current currency in circulation.  For me this raises many questions about what could happen with so much power in such a anonymous (read NOT transparent) group.

[edd]

The original group is estimated to have about 20% of the current currency in circulation.

If they have it and they're not spending it, it's not in circulation.

[FreeMoney]

Is anyone else concerned about Satoshi (or whomever was in the original group) having control of almost 20% of the btc economy?  This isn't the perfect place to post this question, but it was something that got me thinking.  The original group is estimated to have about 20% of the current currency in circulation.  For me this raises many questions about what could happen with so much power in such a anonymous (read NOT transparent) group.

Do we know he's got that much? There isn't a single other person I'd rather have that much, anyway.

[Garrett Burgwardt]

Is anyone else concerned about Satoshi (or whomever was in the original group) having control of almost 20% of the btc economy?  This isn't the perfect place to post this question, but it was something that got me thinking.  The original group is estimated to have about 20% of the current currency in circulation.  For me this raises many questions about what could happen with so much power in such a anonymous (read NOT transparent) group.

My guess is that Satoshi existed on a virtual machine (possibly inside another virtual machine), and the whole disk was scrubbed once he decided to move on.

[mcdett]

Is anyone else concerned about Satoshi (or whomever was in the original group) having control of almost 20% of the btc economy?  This isn't the perfect place to post this question, but it was something that got me thinking.  The original group is estimated to have about 20% of the current currency in circulation.  For me this raises many questions about what could happen with so much power in such a anonymous (read NOT transparent) group.

My guess is that Satoshi existed on a virtual machine (possibly inside another virtual machine), and the whole disk was scrubbed once he decided to move on.

The problem (or possible risk) is that this can't be proven.  If I'm going to invest in this currency I need to know there is some security (read predictability) with 20% of the total value.  Let's say that the original group is composed of two dorky guys out of Seattle, and if some major govt. gets to them (which they will if this is ultimately successful) what could happen with 20% of the total btc economy?  There are many other scenarios to think of with one secret entity having 20% of the economy.

Think of it.  If btc becomes something large there is a anonymous, hidden, secret group that controls 20% of it.  That does not play out well with large organizations trying to gauge risk <-- which will be one of the biggest foundations to grow btc.

[Garrett Burgwardt]

Even if someone did dump a massive amount of coins into the market, it's just a chance to get cheap coins. The price would adjust but overall things would continue as is.

[kjj]

The problem (or possible risk) is that this can't be proven.  If I'm going to invest in this currency I need to know there is some security (read predictability) with 20% of the total value.  Let's say that the original group is composed of two dorky guys out of Seattle, and if some major govt. gets to them (which they will if this is ultimately successful) what could happen with 20% of the total btc economy?  There are many other scenarios to think of with one secret entity having 20% of the economy.

Think of it.  If btc becomes something large there is a anonymous, hidden, secret group that controls 20% of it.  That does not play out well with large organizations trying to gauge risk <-- which will be one of the biggest foundations to grow btc.

A major government already controls 100% (and more!) of the world's primary reserve currency.  Lose any sleep over that recently?

[mcdett]

A major government already controls 100% (and more!) of the world's primary reserve currency.  Lose any sleep over that recently?

yes, but the current structure has served me well.  I work hard, pay my taxes, and expanding my family.

The current system provides much maturity and predictability.  The current system doesn't provide a reasonable possibility of some unknown entity with no transparency holding 20% of the market.

btc has documented prof of almost 20% of the early generated btc being held by a hidden entity (Satoshi or whatever it is)

This mandates this currency to an amount of unpredictability that many people will not buy into.  People may ask for a schism of the block over this.

[shackra]

A major government already controls 100% (and more!) of the world's primary reserve currency.  Lose any sleep over that recently?

yes, but the current structure has served me well.  I work hard, pay my taxes, and expanding my family.

The current system provides much maturity and predictability.  The current system doesn't provide a reasonable possibility of some unknown entity with no transparency holding 20% of the market.

btc has documented prof of almost 20% of the early generated btc being held by a hidden entity (Satoshi or whatever it is)

This mandates this currency to an amount of unpredictability that many people will not buy into.  People may ask for a schism of the block over this.

there isn't any danger about how have that 20% of BTCs, what is your point exactly? :-|

[mcdett]

Even if someone did dump a massive amount of coins into the market, it's just a chance to get cheap coins. The price would adjust but overall things would continue as is.

I'm not too worried of someone hurting the market by dumping all of their holdings (the market would shift (I'd buy a shit ton of btc at a low price) and we would recover).  I actually think this may be the best possible thing for the future of btc.  If the original holders used their btc to invest heavily in the community (dump their holdings in 24 months) then this would solve the problem.

Until then, a market that has 20% of it's value in a underworld-crypto unknown, will pay a heavy price to insure (READ PREDICTABILITY), which could negatively effect an adoption of btc for anything of large value.

[kjj]

A major government already controls 100% (and more!) of the world's primary reserve currency.  Lose any sleep over that recently?

yes, but the current structure has served me well.  I work hard, pay my taxes, and expanding my family.

The current system provides much maturity and predictability.  The current system doesn't provide a reasonable possibility of some unknown entity with no transparency holding 20% of the market.

btc has documented prof of almost 20% of the early generated btc being held by a hidden entity (Satoshi or whatever it is)

This mandates this currency to an amount of unpredictability that many people will not buy into.  People may ask for a schism of the block over this.

I can't think of a better definition of the US Congress than "some unknown entity with no transparency".  At least the holder of 20% of the early bitcoins can only spend them once.  Congress has been inflating away 20% of our currency every few years.

I wish the dollar was unpredictable.  Always going down is very easy to predict.  However, it isn't desirable or useful.

[Mike Hearn]

My guess is that Satoshi existed on a virtual machine (possibly inside another virtual machine), and the whole disk was scrubbed once he decided to move on.

Satoshi once said, why would anyone ever delete a wallet? I doubt he'd delete the genesis keys, there are too many cases where that'd be useful to have.

Besides, I doubt his identity is that bulletproof. In the early days Bitcoin didn't work over Tor at all. By the definition of a P2P network the first node has to be able to receive connections. So whilst he always sent email over Tor I guess at some point he must have been exposing at least one IP address linkable to him.

Who knows. Maybe one day when the whole thing is over and the world has moved on, he will pop up, sign a message with the genesis key and say, here I am. Thanks for taking part everyone.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Even if someone did dump a massive amount of coins into the market, it's just a chance to get cheap coins. The price would adjust but overall things would continue as is.

I'm not too worried of someone hurting the market by dumping all of their holdings (the market would shift (I'd buy a shit ton of btc at a low price) and we would recover).  I actually think this may be the best possible thing for the future of btc.  If the original holders used their btc to invest heavily in the community (dump their holdings in 24 months) then this would solve the problem.

Until then, a market that has 20% of it's value in a underworld-crypto unknown, will pay a heavy price to insure (READ PREDICTABILITY), which could negatively effect an adoption of btc for anything of large value.

In 18 months time, that'll be less than 12.5% of the economy and decreasing ... assuming that they don't spend any of it into "circulation".

Edit: I think that was me who sent a hat-tip 0.01 to satoshi's genesis block address but I can't remember for sure if I actually did it ... thought it would be neat thing to point at in block chain ... there's my bitcoin sitting in the first ever address ... can't see that he will ever move it ... or will he?

Edit2: Nup, wasn't me, weird someone had exactly the same idea and actually did it ...

[smooth]

Besides, I doubt his identity is that bulletproof. In the early days Bitcoin didn't work over Tor at all. By the definition of a P2P network the first node has to be able to receive connections. So whilst he always sent email over Tor I guess at some point he must have been exposing at least one IP address linkable to him.

If he wanted to be careful he could have used a public WiFi or some such.

[BitterTea]

Who knows. Maybe one day when the whole thing is over and the world has moved on, he will pop up, sign a message with the genesis key and say, here I am. Thanks for taking part everyone.

I've heard the the singularity disparagingly called "nerd rapture", though I quite like the term.

I hereby proclaim the prophecy of the Mikehearn to be "crypto-rapture", and I eagerly await the return of satoshi, the One True Hacker.

[doublec]

Who knows. Maybe one day when the whole thing is over and the world has moved on, he will pop up, sign a message with the genesis key and say, here I am. Thanks for taking part everyone.

Does Satoshi still have the capability to send an alert out to clients to shut them down in case of a network emergency? Or have clients changed that?

[sirius]

I think I saw Bitcoin connect to tor nodes even in the early days.