z

[FreeMoney]

Satoshi's a patient guy.

Satoshi's dead.  There is no other explanation.  Why else would he disappear so suddenly, and without saying fair well to the community.   It was a sudden death like being hit by a bus, or drowning, or a heart attack.  If it was cancer or something that takes its time, he would have told us, and he would have transferred his coin to a successor.

RIP Satoshi Nakamoto
??  -   2011

Interesting theory...did no one really know _anything_ about him? Surely someone knew something...if no one really knew anything, then I doubt he's dead...he was always planning to disappear.

Naw, he got Gavin to agree to take the lead before he left. I mean it is possible that he knew he was dying or something, but it's clear that he didn't just get hit by a bus one day.

[rjk]

Smart enough to invent a new currency whose production runs out within the creator's lifetime, but too naive to think that they could ever be worth something? Unlikely.

Try again. The last reward reduction from 0.00000001 down to 0.00000000 is slated to be in about 100 years from now.

[bg002h]

Satoshi's a patient guy.

Satoshi's dead.  There is no other explanation.  Why else would he disappear so suddenly, and without saying fair well to the community.   It was a sudden death like being hit by a bus, or drowning, or a heart attack.  If it was cancer or something that takes its time, he would have told us, and he would have transferred his coin to a successor.

RIP Satoshi Nakamoto
??  -   2011

Interesting theory...did no one really know _anything_ about him? Surely someone knew something...if no one really knew anything, then I doubt he's dead...he was always planning to disappear.

Naw, he got Gavin to agree to take the lead before he left. I mean it is possible that he knew he was dying or something, but it's clear that he didn't just get hit by a bus one day.

Did he say why he was leaving? Glad the dude didn't (presumably) die suddenly.

[bg002h]

Smart enough to invent a new currency whose production runs out within the creator's lifetime, but too naive to think that they could ever be worth something? Unlikely.

Try again. The last reward reduction from 0.00000001 down to 0.00000000 is slated to be in about 100 years from now.

Ok, whose production effectively runs out in the creators lifetime...but let's not argue the trivial. Etlase2 is right.

[rjk]

Smart enough to invent a new currency whose production runs out within the creator's lifetime, but too naive to think that they could ever be worth something? Unlikely.

Try again. The last reward reduction from 0.00000001 down to 0.00000000 is slated to be in about 100 years from now.

Ok, whose production effectively runs out in the creators lifetime...but let's not argue the trivial. Etlase2 is right.

Are you attempting to assume that the future value of 0.00000001 will be equal to or less than its current value? For all we know, in years 2108-2112 such a denomination could be worth quite a lot.

But then of course by then they could have invented lifespan-extending drugs or something. So what do I know.

[bg002h]

Smart enough to invent a new currency whose production runs out within the creator's lifetime, but too naive to think that they could ever be worth something? Unlikely.

Try again. The last reward reduction from 0.00000001 down to 0.00000000 is slated to be in about 100 years from now.

Ok, whose production effectively runs out in the creators lifetime...but let's not argue the trivial. Etlase2 is right.

Are you attempting to assume that the future value of 0.00000001 will be equal to or less than its current value? For all we know, in years 2108-2112 such a denomination could be worth quite a lot.

But then of course by then they could have invented lifespan-extending drugs or something. So what do I know.

1 Satoshi probably won't matter to someone who has 10^5 Bitcoins...but I doubt I'll live to see the day where a Satoshi actually could buy something common. I'd love to be wrong, but I think the math is on my side.

[niko]

I made a quick-and-dirty plot showing the fraction of unspent coins (from Znort's data), Gox price (from bitcoincharts.com), and difficulty (roughly estimated from plots on bitcoin.sipa.be):



Several interpretations (some contradictory, some compatible with others) come to mind:

• Early miners didn't care much about then-worthless coins, and many of early coins are lost
• Early miners hoarded their coins as they didn't have to sell them to make up for the production cost; mining was dirt cheap (but so were the coins)
• Miners generally hoard about 30% of their coins, however with the advent of pooled mining block rewards had to be spent first (even if earned fraction is then hoarded by individual miners) - and this shows as drop in hoarding
• The nature of mining changed with the advent of SR: many newcomers set up mining operations specifically for SR purchases (freshly minted coins are significantly more anonymous then exchanged)

Any other thoughts?

[Jutarul]

I made a quick-and-dirty plot showing the fraction of unspent coins (from Znort's data), Gox price (from bitcoincharts.com), and difficulty (roughly estimated from plots on bitcoin.sipa.be):



Several interpretations (some contradictory, some compatible with others) come to mind:

• Early miners didn't care much about then-worthless coins, and many of early coins are lost
• Early miners hoarded their coins as they didn't have to sell them to make up for the production cost; mining was dirt cheap (but so were the coins)
• Miners generally hoard about 30% of their coins, however with the advent of pooled mining block rewards had to be spent first (even if earned fraction is then hoarded by individual miners) - and this shows as drop in hoarding
• The nature of mining changed with the advent of SR: many newcomers set up mining operations specifically for SR purchases (freshly minted coins are significantly more anonymous then exchanged)

Any other thoughts?

I think your interpretation that the nature of mining operations changed is spot on. Only a few people can afford doing single mining, where they can keep the block reward locked into an address.

[bg002h]

It's interesting that when most coins were spent, the low in price was about a buck (or 2)...currently the price is rising as the percent unspent goes up...but if 2million coins were sold, the price would be about a buck again.

[byronbb]

2 million Bitcoins get invested into a future economy by Satoshi. Wealth is produced.

God help us all.

...or imagine 2 million Bitcoins being sold into hands that actually want them at prices they are willing to pay over others. Let's try not to think what would happen if the market allocated the resources to better hands at proper prices.

Those 2 million Bitcoins should go to hobos to spend on dirt.

Incomprehensible post is incomprehensible.

That was my impression.

[rjk]

Interesting that someone mentioned pooled mining, since I didn't think of that. Wonder if you can tell how many blocks have been spent exactly one times and then haven't moved after that?

[niko]

Interesting that someone mentioned pooled mining, since I didn't think of that. Wonder if you can tell how many blocks have been spent exactly one times and then haven't moved after that?

Not sure how pool operators do it - with payout thresholds and all. I suspect it's more than a single move from the block reward to the miner's payout.

[bg002h]

Interesting that someone mentioned pooled mining, since I didn't think of that. Wonder if you can tell how many blocks have been spent exactly one times and then haven't moved after that?

Not sure how pool operators do it - with payout thresholds and all. I suspect it's more than a single move from the block reward to the miner's payout.

It would be neat to have code that could query the block chain and plot the number of bitcoins unspent (or spent a certain number of times or less) within a certain time frame (ie, since generation, last 6 months, etc). A 3-D generalized version of this would be very informative.

[mc_lovin]

Satoshi's a patient guy.

Satoshi's dead.  There is no other explanation.  Why else would he disappear so suddenly, and without saying fair well to the community.   It was a sudden death like being hit by a bus, or drowning, or a heart attack.  If it was cancer or something that takes its time, he would have told us, and he would have transferred his coin to a successor.

RIP Satoshi Nakamoto
??  -   2011

Interesting theory...did no one really know _anything_ about him? Surely someone knew something...if no one really knew anything, then I doubt he's dead...he was always planning to disappear.

I think the theory that satoshi felt violated by Gavin going to the CIA only a week or so after satoshi gave him the bitcoin "master key" makes the most sense.

http://forums.microcash.org/topic/529-did-gavin-andresen-push-satoshi-out-of-bitcoin/

[Bitcoin Oz]

Satoshi's a patient guy.

Satoshi's dead.  There is no other explanation.  Why else would he disappear so suddenly, and without saying fair well to the community.   It was a sudden death like being hit by a bus, or drowning, or a heart attack.  If it was cancer or something that takes its time, he would have told us, and he would have transferred his coin to a successor.

RIP Satoshi Nakamoto
??  -   2011

Interesting theory...did no one really know _anything_ about him? Surely someone knew something...if no one really knew anything, then I doubt he's dead...he was always planning to disappear.

Naw, he got Gavin to agree to take the lead before he left. I mean it is possible that he knew he was dying or something, but it's clear that he didn't just get hit by a bus one day.

Did he say why he was leaving? Glad the dude didn't (presumably) die suddenly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Sassaman  there is one theory that he was satoshi.

[myrkul]

I think the theory that satoshi felt violated by Gavin going to the CIA only a week or so after satoshi gave him the bitcoin "master key" makes the most sense.

http://forums.microcash.org/topic/529-did-gavin-andresen-push-satoshi-out-of-bitcoin/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Sassaman  there is one theory that he was satoshi.

Interesting.... [tinfoil]

OK, So here's a wild-ass theory:
~April 25th 2011: Sassaman (Satoshi) sends Gavin the "alert key" to Bitcoin.

April 27th 2011: Gavin publicly announces CIA visit in June. Satoshi ceases communicating with Gavin. (on the run?)

June 15th 2011: Gavin speaks @ CIA

July 3, 2011: Sassaman dies, in an apparent suicide. His wife was in Texas at the time. (twitter status)

Did the CIA assassinate Satoshi?
[/tinfoil]

[bg002h]

Satoshi's a patient guy.

Satoshi's dead.  There is no other explanation.  Why else would he disappear so suddenly, and without saying fair well to the community.   It was a sudden death like being hit by a bus, or drowning, or a heart attack.  If it was cancer or something that takes its time, he would have told us, and he would have transferred his coin to a successor.

RIP Satoshi Nakamoto
??  -   2011

Interesting theory...did no one really know _anything_ about him? Surely someone knew something...if no one really knew anything, then I doubt he's dead...he was always planning to disappear.

Naw, he got Gavin to agree to take the lead before he left. I mean it is possible that he knew he was dying or something, but it's clear that he didn't just get hit by a bus one day.

Did he say why he was leaving? Glad the dude didn't (presumably) die suddenly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Sassaman  there is one theory that he was satoshi.

I'm not thinking he was Satoshi -- he had a lot of negative things to say about Bitcoin -- albeit in a dispassionate, factual manner.

http://twitter.com/lensassaman/status/81084436518674433
http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com/2011/07/len-sassaman-on-bitcoin.html

[bg002h]

Satoshi's a patient guy.

Satoshi's dead.  There is no other explanation.  Why else would he disappear so suddenly, and without saying fair well to the community.   It was a sudden death like being hit by a bus, or drowning, or a heart attack.  If it was cancer or something that takes its time, he would have told us, and he would have transferred his coin to a successor.

RIP Satoshi Nakamoto
??  -   2011

Interesting theory...did no one really know _anything_ about him? Surely someone knew something...if no one really knew anything, then I doubt he's dead...he was always planning to disappear.

Naw, he got Gavin to agree to take the lead before he left. I mean it is possible that he knew he was dying or something, but it's clear that he didn't just get hit by a bus one day.

Did he say why he was leaving? Glad the dude didn't (presumably) die suddenly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Sassaman  there is one theory that he was satoshi.

I'm not thinking he was Satoshi -- he had a lot of negative things to say about Bitcoin -- albeit in a dispassionate, factual manner.

http://twitter.com/lensassaman/status/81084436518674433
http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com/2011/07/len-sassaman-on-bitcoin.html

These weren't particularly negative comments, but rather fairly
accurate analyses of the system's lack of built-in anonymity.

Sure doesn't sound like a proud father talking about his baby, that's for sure. No one would design Bitcoin the way it is if he knew the kinds of things Sassaman did.

[molecular]

Either the guy's a modern times Michelangelo that has been steeped in
very many different disciplines or bitcoin was designed by a pluridisciplinary
team.

Not to downplay Satoshis achievement, ingenuity and balls to pull it off, but many of the things bitcoin is made up of have been invented before by other people (sha, public key crypto, ecdsa, proof-of-work, ownership tracking using transactions).

I think he did it himself. I'm sure he talked about it with some crypto-friends or colleagues who probably understood how it worked but said either: "That's not new, dude, look at my stuff, it's much more interesting" or "this will never catch on". So he grew a pair and pulled it off. Kudos!

[molecular]

Interesting that someone mentioned pooled mining, since I didn't think of that. Wonder if you can tell how many blocks have been spent exactly one times and then haven't moved after that?

Not sure how pool operators do it - with payout thresholds and all. I suspect it's more than a single move from the block reward to the miner's payout.

eligius pays out using the generating TX in mined blocks. Dont' know wether these show up in znorts analysis?