so the problem is people forgetting the password or simply not backing it up then something happens and they can't find it again. Those problem is all about themselves who are careless I would say. This will only increase the value of our coin a bit despite loss of someone else 
Topic: Bitcoin Black Holes (Read 2149 times)
I was wondering why we have to discuss this at all so the problem is people forgetting the password or simply not backing it up then something happens and they can't find it again. Those problem is all about themselves who are careless I would say. This will only increase the value of our coin a bit despite loss of someone else
so the problem is people forgetting the password or simply not backing it up then something happens and they can't find it again. Those problem is all about themselves who are careless I would say. This will only increase the value of our coin a bit despite loss of someone else 
Meanwhile we forgot about the number of potential paper wallets lost in oblivion because the owner simply does not remember where it was. Or early adopters who simply changed machines and forgot about some "worthless at the time" experiments.
...
RealBitcoin
I don't know how this little piece of information from my own BTC experience would be worth anything in your study , but I have used perhaps 100 different addresses since I started using BTC. For a few reasons (some of which I do not understand), I have not gotten very small amounts of BTC from them, especially my mobile device wallet (blockchain.info on iPhone).
As a guess, I would have some BTC0.0001 on about 15% of my total wallets, so that would be maybe BTC0.0015, or $6.50 or so.
If my experience is typical (and my calculations roughly correct) that might be a start, but I am less skilled in BTC and (of course) not a programmer (etc.).
HTH
RealBitcoin
I don't know how this little piece of information from my own BTC experience would be worth anything in your study , but I have used perhaps 100 different addresses since I started using BTC. For a few reasons (some of which I do not understand), I have not gotten very small amounts of BTC from them, especially my mobile device wallet (blockchain.info on iPhone).
As a guess, I would have some BTC0.0001 on about 15% of my total wallets, so that would be maybe BTC0.0015, or $6.50 or so.
If my experience is typical (and my calculations roughly correct) that might be a start, but I am less skilled in BTC and (of course) not a programmer (etc.).
HTH
This bitcoin black hole is like another term for burning addresses (correct me if im wrong here) , i see users still sending to those address and the only reason i think this is happening is to make bitcoin more valuable than ever.
bitcoin is eventually becoming rarer than ever for sure, yet doesn't matter if you lost it or not, if less bitcoin on demand, the less value of bitcoin.
i don't sure but we should take bitcoin on demand in order to make it as better as you said.
i don't sure but we should take bitcoin on demand in order to make it as better as you said.
as more bitcoin get lost, less people will lose bitcoin.
but yeah, eventually bitcoin will become really rare.
but i still think for the next couple of decades the amount of bitcoins mined will be more than the amount of bitcoins lost.
but yeah, eventually bitcoin will become really rare.
but i still think for the next couple of decades the amount of bitcoins mined will be more than the amount of bitcoins lost.
If there was a way of knowing how many coins were dead, then that might be a factor in possible market conditions. As it is there's no way of knowing and there are enough coins on the sidelines waiting to meet buying pressure elsewhere.
Most people have their price. I guess that might be slightly raised by lost coins but it's something we'll never be able to quantify.
That's kind of the beauty of Bitcoin, you never know what Bitcoins have been lost or have become ghost coins, and thus the price is always representative of the total potential amount of Bitcoin in circulation.Most people have their price. I guess that might be slightly raised by lost coins but it's something we'll never be able to quantify.
At the same time is does technically inflate the market cap of Bitcoin, but no-one really cares about it because it has no effect.
If there was a way of knowing how many coins were dead, then that might be a factor in possible market conditions. As it is there's no way of knowing and there are enough coins on the sidelines waiting to meet buying pressure elsewhere.
Most people have their price. I guess that might be slightly raised by lost coins but it's something we'll never be able to quantify.
Most people have their price. I guess that might be slightly raised by lost coins but it's something we'll never be able to quantify.
An easy example is if there was 10 chickens available and 50 people to buy and then 3 chickens got sold, the remaining 7 chickens are now worth more as there is still alot of demand but less supply.
Well 1 thing is for sure, I cant wait till block halving.
That lets out the cat out of the bag, and if the black hole impact is really that big, we shall be able to detect it much easier after that.
That lets out the cat out of the bag, and if the black hole impact is really that big, we shall be able to detect it much easier after that.
I`m resuming this research, i havent worked on this lately, and maybe do a survey on this to reflect the issue.This project is pretty important from an economic standpoint to analyze and better understand how deflation works in bitcoin.
I`m sure many academics find this issue fascinating too, although i`m not a professional, i`ll try to be as accurate as possible.
Like Satoshi said:
Thats a great thought, so the next person who comes on to the forum crying about lossing their Bitcoin, we need to just say "Thanks for the donation" lol not sure how they might take it.
Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more. Think of it as a donation to everyone.
Thats a great thought, so the next person who comes on to the forum crying about lossing their Bitcoin, we need to just say "Thanks for the donation" lol not sure how they might take it.
Gamblers are the type who would do the most posting (especially when they get themselves into debt they generally start trying to scam others via Ponzi's and the like).
There is another whole side to the Bitcoin user-base which seemingly you know nothing of but I'm not really worried if you only want to pay attention to the gamblers (if you want to refer to the others as the "elite" then fine you are welcome to refer to me as an "elitist" then).
There is another whole side to the Bitcoin user-base which seemingly you know nothing of but I'm not really worried if you only want to pay attention to the gamblers (if you want to refer to the others as the "elite" then fine you are welcome to refer to me as an "elitist" then).
Well to be fair, most of us probably have gambled at one point on some of these sites. Just not with a serious addiction.
And they will do almost anything to get some bitcoin to intially play again at the same site they lost at.
Theres a bunch of those ponzis in the so called investment section that are run by the same operators.
Well 1 thing is for sure, I cant wait till block halving.
That lets out the cat out of the bag, and if the black hole impact is really that big, we shall be able to detect it much easier after that.
That lets out the cat out of the bag, and if the black hole impact is really that big, we shall be able to detect it much easier after that.
Gamblers are the type who would do the most posting (especially when they get themselves into debt they generally start trying to scam others via Ponzi's and the like).
There is another whole side to the Bitcoin user-base which seemingly you know nothing of but I'm not really worried if you only want to pay attention to the gamblers (if you want to refer to the others as the "elite" then fine).
There is another whole side to the Bitcoin user-base which seemingly you know nothing of but I'm not really worried if you only want to pay attention to the gamblers (if you want to refer to the others as the "elite" then fine).
Who cares, they are the majority. Most folks have small bitcoins that's a fact, and they like to gamble or invest in scams.
Then there are traders and speculators.
Then there are shoppers, women who shop online, and the spenders in general.
All these categories are high money velocity, and small bitcoin amount.
I estimate around 1BTC to be the limit but even 0.5BTC to be more conservative.
I saw tons of posts of people spending about 0.5BTC weekly, and then recharging their balance in the weekend from fiat.
So these guys , girls are not savers. Period.
The true savers and HODLERS are those from 5-7BTC and above
Gamblers are the type who would do the most posting (especially when they get themselves into debt they generally start trying to scam others via Ponzi's and the like).
There is another whole side to the Bitcoin user-base which seemingly you know nothing of but I'm not really worried if you only want to pay attention to the gamblers (if you want to refer to the others as the "elite" then fine you are welcome to refer to me as an "elitist" then).
There is another whole side to the Bitcoin user-base which seemingly you know nothing of but I'm not really worried if you only want to pay attention to the gamblers (if you want to refer to the others as the "elite" then fine you are welcome to refer to me as an "elitist" then).
I don't know anyone that uses Bitcoin for gambling for a start (and I know a lot of Bitcoin users with a lot of Bitcoin).
So if you're assuming that all Bitcoin users are gamblers (which it seems you are) then maybe you might have made a mistake.
So if you're assuming that all Bitcoin users are gamblers (which it seems you are) then maybe you might have made a mistake.
Then its you who dont understand the composition of bitcoin users
Just take a look around the forum and sample the distribution, start here and here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=5.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=57.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=56.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=71.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=207.0
These threads alone have more posts than all other forum combined.
High money velocity, money changing hands rapidly, in smaller amounts.
Its pretty safe to say that most people spend some or all of their coins.
It's only the bitcoin elite and rich people that are HODL-ers. And maybe the miners if they dont spend their coins on uppgrade and maintenance.
I don't know anyone that uses Bitcoin for gambling for a start (and I know a lot of Bitcoin users with a lot of Bitcoin).
So if you're assuming that all Bitcoin users are gamblers (which it seems you are) then maybe you might have made a mistake.
But again - it's your theory and you're welcome to it (certainly I am never going to pay it any attention).
So if you're assuming that all Bitcoin users are gamblers (which it seems you are) then maybe you might have made a mistake.
But again - it's your theory and you're welcome to it (certainly I am never going to pay it any attention).
You are of course welcome to use whatever imaginary figures you like - but don't expect anyone else to actually take that seriously.
(as you are seemingly basing your figures upon assumption after assumption that you are making)
(as you are seemingly basing your figures upon assumption after assumption that you are making)
It's not assumption.
Do you deny that coins under 1 BTC are heavily spent??
Because i know for a fact that most people here spend all their coins, mostly gambling, that are held in online or phone wallets.
Most people here dont even know what cold storage is, and i highly doubt anyone under 1 BTC even takes his time to set up one.
Most people use BTC for gambling or shopping and that is a very high money velocity in the lower earner numbers.
But coins with 2 BTC or above may be in cold storages.
Of course there are gamblers with biggers sums too, but those are already filtered out if we only look at the past 2 years of spending.
It's pretty likely that a gambler with 20 BTC will not have his coins inactive for 2 years, he is probably addicted and gambles every day.
So because coins under 1 BTC are heavily spent, those that are not are most likely black holes.
You are of course welcome to use whatever imaginary figures you like - but don't expect anyone else to actually take that seriously.
(as you are seemingly basing your figures upon assumption after assumption that you are making)
(as you are seemingly basing your figures upon assumption after assumption that you are making)
There was a topic a few years back about lost Bitcoins (from memory at least 100K have been likely lost) but even if we inflate this figure to 1M over the next ten years it really isn't such a big deal (we go from a possible 21M down to perhaps 20M).
Yes but we need to measure how much coins are lost /day, an accurate average would be good.
So it's not enough to measure how much coins are lost, but also how frequently they are lost. We need a daily or weekly average.
Also it doesn't really affect the velocity due to the divisibility (something not as easy to do with gold).
Of course it does, the less coins are in circulation the less coins can circulate.
Plus that bitcoin is inherently dis-inflationary, so it's hard to tell what is causing slower money velocity.
I dont think people start cold storage before 1-2 BTC, so inactive small addresses have a high chance of being black holes.
Well - I know for a fact (not just an opinion) that some people create "canary" brain-wallet addresses with a small amount to act as a warning for their more complicated brain-wallet addresses that are based upon the "canary" one.
(and such addresses are quite likely to have under 1 BTC in them)
That's right "some" people create, but not most of them.
We cant have a accurate number here, but an estimate that is as accurate as possible, and for that you use the majority not minority.
Most folks just have 0.01BTC-0.1BTC in blockchain.info that they got from faucets and sig campaings.
Jump to: