I see a video today that Craig Wright wants to make something like that in BCHSV.
Of course losting bitcoins is a problem, "centralization", if all people in the world have and use bitcoin the network would have more value, Metcalf Law:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe%27s_law
About deleting old blocks with only address without money there is no difference from a blockchain with more blocks and blockchain with less blocks, the BTC quantity of each address would be the same.
This is in the Satoshis Nakamoto white paper:
"7. Reclaiming Disk Space
Once the latest transaction in a coin is buried under enough blocks, the spent transactions before
it can be discarded to save disk space. To facilitate this without breaking the block's hash,
transactions are hashed in a Merkle Tree [7][2][5], with only the root included in the block's hash.
Old blocks can then be compacted by stubbing off branches of the tree. The interior hashes do
not need to be stored."
This makes sense to me, the coders forgot this and only want to put the car moving even if it dont have breaks !
Topic: A proposed solution for lost Bitcoins... - page 3. (Read 1110 times)
As mocacinno already pointed out it would be perfectly fine to run with just 1 BTC in circulation.
Point being, the units of account are completely arbitrary. For the usability of Bitcoin as a currency it doesn't really matter whether all 21,000,000 coins are in circulations or half the coins are lost. "Recycling" old coins is a solution to a non-problem that would only add unnecessary complexity, which is rarely a good idea.
Point being, the units of account are completely arbitrary. For the usability of Bitcoin as a currency it doesn't really matter whether all 21,000,000 coins are in circulations or half the coins are lost. "Recycling" old coins is a solution to a non-problem that would only add unnecessary complexity, which is rarely a good idea.
"Lost" bitcoins are not a problem so there is no need for a solution. However, the idea of dropping old blocks does have some merit. It would limit the sizes of the UTXO set and the blockchain, and that would reduce the cost of running a node. On the other hand, it's not clear how that could be done.
I've discussed this in the past, but my point of view in this matter is very simple: you can't drop any blocks...
As soon as the complete network dropped the first 100 blocks (for example) nobody would ever be able to re-verify the complete blockchain, so you'd have to start trusting other people instead of being able to verify everything yourself...
As for the OP's question: i agree with odolvlobo, it doesn't matter if people don't give their keys to their heirs... At the moment, the smallest unit is one satoshi (0.00000001 BTC), nothing is stopping the community from implementing even smaller units (for example, one millisatoshi). The more people lose access to their funds (for example by forgetting or dying), the less BTC will be available, the higher the price will be...
It's perfectly possible to run a complete community whith only 1 BTC in circulation... Ofcourse you'll probably be paying in micro-satoshi instead of mBTC.
"Lost" bitcoins are not a problem so there is no need for a solution. However, the idea of dropping old blocks does have some merit. It would limit the sizes of the UTXO set and the blockchain, and that would reduce the cost of running a node. On the other hand, it's not clear how that could be done.
Hi,
I start to try to find here solutions for bitcoin losts and i cant believe something so powerfull as bitcoin dont have solution yet for the case that some person die and that bitcoins get lost in time forever, im sure that happens yet, someone died and dont pass the Private Keys to anybody!
That puts one endpoint in the project its just a matter of time, i find some topic like this:
"A proposed solution to adjust for lost Bitcoins: wallet 'heartbeats'" that is innactive at years.
This is my propose:
I propose that after some time (X years) if that bitcoin address have no moves, the system will collect the money for bitcoin miners rewards.
Of course the X should be a big time, not only 7 years as i read in the other post, one guy can stay in a coma by 7 years and wake up again, look Michael Schumacher, dont die yet, he is fighting. Someone can have amnesia for 7 years, etc.
So i purpose for example 100 years, its a big and round number, after that time the address needs to be cleanned and bitcoins enter again in circulation, how can a project like this dont have solution yet for that ?
With this solution we can create another solution for blockchain size shrink, because Satoshi Nakamoto in whitepaper purpose a solution for blockchain size, "deleting the old blocks", so, everytime the 1st block of the blockchain have only address with 0 BTC, that first block will be deleted, than we test the 2nd block, and 3rd and keep deleting blocks until we have a block with one address with money and moved in less then 100 years, that would be the new genesis block.
For me this is like the foundations of a new house and it seems the project started from the roof, many can tell that in 100 years many things will change, but i remember Y2K !
I start to try to find here solutions for bitcoin losts and i cant believe something so powerfull as bitcoin dont have solution yet for the case that some person die and that bitcoins get lost in time forever, im sure that happens yet, someone died and dont pass the Private Keys to anybody!
That puts one endpoint in the project its just a matter of time, i find some topic like this:
"A proposed solution to adjust for lost Bitcoins: wallet 'heartbeats'" that is innactive at years.
This is my propose:
I propose that after some time (X years) if that bitcoin address have no moves, the system will collect the money for bitcoin miners rewards.
Of course the X should be a big time, not only 7 years as i read in the other post, one guy can stay in a coma by 7 years and wake up again, look Michael Schumacher, dont die yet, he is fighting. Someone can have amnesia for 7 years, etc.
So i purpose for example 100 years, its a big and round number, after that time the address needs to be cleanned and bitcoins enter again in circulation, how can a project like this dont have solution yet for that ?
With this solution we can create another solution for blockchain size shrink, because Satoshi Nakamoto in whitepaper purpose a solution for blockchain size, "deleting the old blocks", so, everytime the 1st block of the blockchain have only address with 0 BTC, that first block will be deleted, than we test the 2nd block, and 3rd and keep deleting blocks until we have a block with one address with money and moved in less then 100 years, that would be the new genesis block.
For me this is like the foundations of a new house and it seems the project started from the roof, many can tell that in 100 years many things will change, but i remember Y2K !
Jump to: