Topic: Gavin Andresen prediction for Bitcoin in 2061 (Read 335 times)
Gavin Anderson is crazy he/she has stated or predicted that in 2061 this is a prediction and anyone can say so because here it is speculation. Regardless of whether that's true or not, we'll see it 40 years from now. Regarding the price of 2061, there are only 2 possibilities in the speculation neither right nor wrong, but no matter what research I think it is still far from happening because 40 years is a period of time. long-term things can't be correct all just speculation. Gavin Andresen is just a market amateur who just speculates on prices and what isn't and I don't care about this, it's completely unrealistic.
I don’t think he’s gone to the dark side. I think that many of us early Bitcoiners had a vision for Bitcoin that was suddenly railroaded by unnecessary man-implemented limits that turned Bitcoin from something that could free the world from financial oppression, into a get rich quick scheme to assimilate into the existing system. If satoshi were still alive, I think he would be more aligned with Gavin’s desire for Bitcoin’s future than Blockstream’s.
I didn't know you are one of those Faketoshi supporters like Gavin Andresen, and Satoshi would never be aligned with Gavin's thinking about Bitcoin future, in the same way like he didn't agree with him when he went to talk with government agencies... Satoshi disappeared soon after that.Handing over stuff to Gavin was probably one of the biggest mistake Satoshi did and I think he realized that quickly.
Maybe I don't like what Blockstream is doing but I don't have to pick sides in this case, and it's totally unrelated with this topic.
If there are two things I can pick out of this whole rubbish or soi choose to believe that Gavin Anderson stated or predicted is that, he specifically called his prediction 'a piece of science fiction and beckoned on is to 'Imagine in the year 2061'.
Apparently, any one can come up with any prediction, predictions that could even suggest the crashing of the world, how its to happen and even propose a solution to it but, does that mean, that's what is to happen or the solutionn is the way to go about it, certainly a yes or a no.
It would be a good thing to take advice form one who has made several mistakes but not one who even continues to wallow in mistakes still and claims that aren't verifiable like Gavin Anderson. Let him have his say and lets have even more fun still!
People cannot even predict what is going to happen in the markets tomorrow so it is completely impossible that anyone is going to be able to accurately predict what is going to happen in 40 years, so what we really need to think about is why he will go through the trouble of writing something like that? And to me he's just trying to bring attention to himself because as we know early on he was an important figure in the world of bitcoin and now he has lost relevance to the point that we do not even care about any prediction that he may make.Apparently, any one can come up with any prediction, predictions that could even suggest the crashing of the world, how its to happen and even propose a solution to it but, does that mean, that's what is to happen or the solutionn is the way to go about it, certainly a yes or a no.
It would be a good thing to take advice form one who has made several mistakes but not one who even continues to wallow in mistakes still and claims that aren't verifiable like Gavin Anderson. Let him have his say and lets have even more fun still!
Although, of course, forecasts for such a long period as forty years are a thankless task and have little to do with actual reality. Also, I think that on planet Earth and on nearby planets there is hardly a reasonable being whose forecasts are worth looking at and will really listen for such a long time 
Therefore, I agree with Andresen that this is from the field of near-scientific fiction and the scenario of an expensive half-dead bitcoin is quite real. But the specific details of this already completely depend on the degree of imagination of the author of such fantastic inventions. 
If there are two things I can pick out of this whole rubbish or soi choose to believe that Gavin Anderson stated or predicted is that, he specifically called his prediction 'a piece of science fiction and beckoned on is to 'Imagine in the year 2061'.
Apparently, any one can come up with any prediction, predictions that could even suggest the crashing of the world, how its to happen and even propose a solution to it but, does that mean, that's what is to happen or the solutionn is the way to go about it, certainly a yes or a no.
It would be a good thing to take advice form one who has made several mistakes but not one who even continues to wallow in mistakes still and claims that aren't verifiable like Gavin Anderson. Let him have his say and lets have even more fun still!
People cannot even predict what is going to happen in the markets tomorrow so it is completely impossible that anyone is going to be able to accurately predict what is going to happen in 40 years, so what we really need to think about is why he will go through the trouble of writing something like that? And to me he's just trying to bring attention to himself because as we know early on he was an important figure in the world of bitcoin and now he has lost relevance to the point that we do not even care about any prediction that he may make. Apparently, any one can come up with any prediction, predictions that could even suggest the crashing of the world, how its to happen and even propose a solution to it but, does that mean, that's what is to happen or the solutionn is the way to go about it, certainly a yes or a no.
It would be a good thing to take advice form one who has made several mistakes but not one who even continues to wallow in mistakes still and claims that aren't verifiable like Gavin Anderson. Let him have his say and lets have even more fun still!
What is clear is that this news is very annoying if it really will happen in the coming year. I don't really know how this is actually used as a benchmark when everyone adopts Bitcoin and then eventually it will be given control to one particular person who claims that without him Bitcoin is nothing.
We must be able to think positively that hopefully before the time comes, maybe Gavin Andresen will die first. Isn't it much more rational for us to bet on the future of Bitcoin?
I believe it will be fine and Bitcoin will be preserved.
We must be able to think positively that hopefully before the time comes, maybe Gavin Andresen will die first. Isn't it much more rational for us to bet on the future of Bitcoin?
I believe it will be fine and Bitcoin will be preserved.
Arguably one of the biggest mistakes Satoshi Nakamoto made was transferring things over to Gavin Andresen, the guy who worked with agencies, than with Craig Wright, and now he writes some grim sci-fi future for Bitcoin on his blog.
This guy become so irrelevant in Bitcoin crypto space that maybe his only fun in life now is writing stuff like this, claiming Bitcoin will be worth 6 Million USD in 2061, but most transaction won't happen on BTC network but on multisignature and other network tokens.
Andresen claims that only whales, big holders, exchanges and banks will hold this tokens, and in year 2100 network will shutdown after closing down bridges for this tokens and fees becoming unsustainable.
This guy become so irrelevant in Bitcoin crypto space that maybe his only fun in life now is writing stuff like this, claiming Bitcoin will be worth 6 Million USD in 2061, but most transaction won't happen on BTC network but on multisignature and other network tokens.
Andresen claims that only whales, big holders, exchanges and banks will hold this tokens, and in year 2100 network will shutdown after closing down bridges for this tokens and fees becoming unsustainable.
Price predictions 40 years away are invariably worthless, as people can't accurately predict what the price will be tomorrow and the longer the time horizon the more inaccurate the price predictions are. However the logic he's using to predict the btc blockchain slowly dying is quite sound. It is abundantly evident that bitcoin has major systemic problems that are only going to become more evident as fewer newer bitcoins are produced. Fees will become exorbitant, therefore transactions will fall, therefore the mining incentive will fall, therefore miners will drop out, therefore the network will become far less secure. It will be a death spiral, and without major structural changes to how the network operates, I believe he's more right than wrong about his prediction for eventual demise. The timing element is irrelevant.
Well, I know that since it is a free world, people are always going to say a lot of things, even the ones you are not going to like at all. Our levels of understanding differs and the way we all see things. But all these speculations are getting too much; every time people are always looking for something to say about Bitcoin, especially influencers who are seeking for attention, they would just say anything and get people talking and giving them the attention they desperately seek. 6 million USD in 2061? Alright, I have nothing to say about that, but him assuming that it will get to an extent where the network would shut down is what I never really liked.
it is true that there are people who have had enough of their lives and think money is not everything, for example, like certain religious leaders who only think about spiritual things without thinking about anything else.but apart from that, there are still many who still prioritize money compared to other things, even when we see now a lot of bloodshed and wars are going on, the end of which is to get excess wealth both from finances on the other side and resources that can be sold. .
and until whenever something like this will not be able to be changed because it is human nature that incidentally is greedy and always feels that it is not enough with what they currently have.
Well, I know that since it is a free world, people are always going to say a lot of things, even the ones you are not going to like at all. Our levels of understanding differs and the way we all see things. But all these speculations are getting too much; every time people are always looking for something to say about Bitcoin, especially influencers who are seeking for attention, they would just say anything and get people talking and giving them the attention they desperately seek. 6 million USD in 2061? Alright, I have nothing to say about that, but him assuming that it will get to an extent where the network would shut down is what I never really liked.
Gavin is certainly a bit of a puzzling man. I like to read some of the old posts here on the forum and of course I've come across many from Gavin Andresen and there are so many great things/ideas that Gavin brought to the table back then. He seemed like a genuinely nice guy as well which makes it all the more difficult to dislike him but you are right he has certainly turned to the "dark side" as time has gone on. Sad to see.
I don’t think he’s gone to the dark side. I think that many of us early Bitcoiners had a vision for Bitcoin that was suddenly railroaded by unnecessary man-implemented limits that turned Bitcoin from something that could free the world from financial oppression, into a get rich quick scheme to assimilate into the existing system. If satoshi were still alive, I think he would be more aligned with Gavin’s desire for Bitcoin’s future than Blockstream’s.
I gave my opinion on Gavin's text already in another thread about that topic, having not seen this one here.
Short version: If the whales/miners really shut down the main BTC chain, then we will have a network of one-way-pegged "stablecoins" without a reference. It's only a matter of time when speculation against the peg will begin, as these tokens aren't really fungible with each other. The whole system is likely to collapse, i.e. the pegs will break, confidence will be lost, and likely another coin or monetary system could take the lead.
Some additional thoughts:
In theory, there could be another chain - or better: a token on that chain - being used as a reference. Let's say RSK-BTC or Elements-BTC (one of the oldest sidechains, even if they're currently centralized) convert into the new "reference". One could imagine a sophisticated network of 2-way pegs between all these tokens on different chains (although technically this is far from being solved at the moment!). But even in this case a lot can go wrong, e.g. the base chains could be attacked because they've lower security than the old main Bitcoin chain.
I guess there would also be a lot of speculation from the altcoin sector in such an event; imagine one altcoin offering a "reboot" of Bitcoin via an airdrop for BTC holders who burn their coins, in the style of Counterparty (XCP). But there would be likely many copycats, which will create confusion and maybe dilution if the Proof-of-burn thing isn't done right (i.e. if you could use one "burn" for several reboot chains).
Short version: If the whales/miners really shut down the main BTC chain, then we will have a network of one-way-pegged "stablecoins" without a reference. It's only a matter of time when speculation against the peg will begin, as these tokens aren't really fungible with each other. The whole system is likely to collapse, i.e. the pegs will break, confidence will be lost, and likely another coin or monetary system could take the lead.
Some additional thoughts:
In theory, there could be another chain - or better: a token on that chain - being used as a reference. Let's say RSK-BTC or Elements-BTC (one of the oldest sidechains, even if they're currently centralized) convert into the new "reference". One could imagine a sophisticated network of 2-way pegs between all these tokens on different chains (although technically this is far from being solved at the moment!). But even in this case a lot can go wrong, e.g. the base chains could be attacked because they've lower security than the old main Bitcoin chain.
I guess there would also be a lot of speculation from the altcoin sector in such an event; imagine one altcoin offering a "reboot" of Bitcoin via an airdrop for BTC holders who burn their coins, in the style of Counterparty (XCP). But there would be likely many copycats, which will create confusion and maybe dilution if the Proof-of-burn thing isn't done right (i.e. if you could use one "burn" for several reboot chains).
I doubt that the blockchain would stop because the fee's would reach to a level where we can't pay, the technological development doesn't stop and there are too many projects that managed to make blockchains that are both safe and secure while making it a lot cheaper as well. Which means that it all depends on bitcoin managing to develop something that would be similar. Look at SOL, they have like 65k transactions per block and they do not get anything close to that, while still keeping it safe for something so quick and so much.
I would assume that one day bitcoin would have some improvement. If you doubt that it would ever happen, look at what segwit is, it wasn't like this and right now it is "cheap" compared to what it could be because we moved to segwit, we could move to something like Lightning Network or something similar that is better in the future and make it cheaper again.
I would assume that one day bitcoin would have some improvement. If you doubt that it would ever happen, look at what segwit is, it wasn't like this and right now it is "cheap" compared to what it could be because we moved to segwit, we could move to something like Lightning Network or something similar that is better in the future and make it cheaper again.
and that is 27 years from now I will be 91 and most likely not care about btc.
With your age, which is no longer young, I appreciate you because you are still in this realm.
and this should be a reference for young people so that they do not lose in their role in adopting btc.
what btc will be in the future is what it will be like later because we can't be sure whether what gavin said is true or false because again it's just speculation.
despite all that before btc lost its glory why don't we maximize it for profit.
I really respect you
From my short time in economics, all that I can tell is that predicting what the economy of a specific ecosystem will look like is the same a predicting a weather forecast, the only accurate one is when you look out of your window, everything else is pure speculation. So thinking that anyone can have anything close to a ''prediction'' is laughable at best. The closest we can have is an educated guess, but in the lines that I estimate Bitcoin will not turn into a big rubber duck and sit on top of the Burj khalifa. Anything more than that is highly debatlabe.
Seems possible to me. But frankly I am 64 and will be 104 in 2061 so I won't give a fuck.
what do we do? and that is 27 years from now I will be 91 and most likely not care about btc.
what do we do? and that is 27 years from now I will be 91 and most likely not care about btc.
I thought I was quite old but it seems we have a true veteran and a real boomer in our midst
I always say my decision about Bitcoin is based purely on 2 factors, and whichever factor is hit first, is when I end my association. The first is price which is not likely (1 million dollars?) Since I estimate I maybe can save up 0.5 BTC and retire on half a million dollars which makes sure I can live well and contribute happily to my society until my death at 80 (if even that long). This is over 40 years away.
The other is if I become 55 which is almost 20 years away. Because I want to go back to my farming and live with my animals and my family. Probably no time for internet or even to check BTC price
Seems possible to me. But frankly I am 64 and will be 104 in 2061 so I won't give a fuck.
BTC has long term issues lets see
3.125 btc in 2024
1.5625 btc in 2028
0.78125 btc in 2032
0.390625 btc in 2036
0.1953125 btc in 2040
0.09765625 btc in 2044
0.048828125 btc in 2048 and we are not equipped to do this since we stop at 8 digits
so do we fight and fork to cut the last number off .
what do we do? and that is 27 years from now I will be 91 and most likely not care about btc.
BTC has long term issues lets see
3.125 btc in 2024
1.5625 btc in 2028
0.78125 btc in 2032
0.390625 btc in 2036
0.1953125 btc in 2040
0.09765625 btc in 2044
0.048828125 btc in 2048 and we are not equipped to do this since we stop at 8 digits
so do we fight and fork to cut the last number off .
what do we do? and that is 27 years from now I will be 91 and most likely not care about btc.
You are 64? You probably discovered Bitcoin 10 years ago when you were 54? Bitcoin must be a very good retirement hobby for you, and as a financial retirement insurance/back up plan. Satoshi picked a perfect year to develop, and build Bitcoin.
Plus of course you never give a fuck. Discovering and HODLing Bitcoin since under a dollar?
Interesting...
His take mostly revolves around privacy and fees which is understandable.
I do wonder if BTC is going to support completely private transactions similar to monero in the future. I do remember theymos saying something about monero being one of the only altcoins that BTC can learn from a few years back.
His take mostly revolves around privacy and fees which is understandable.
I do wonder if BTC is going to support completely private transactions similar to monero in the future. I do remember theymos saying something about monero being one of the only altcoins that BTC can learn from a few years back.
Seems possible to me. But frankly I am 64 and will be 104 in 2061 so I won't give a fuck.
BTC has long term issues lets see
3.125 btc in 2024
1.5625 btc in 2028
0.78125 btc in 2032
0.390625 btc in 2036
0.1953125 btc in 2040
0.09765625 btc in 2044
0.048828125 btc in 2048 and we are not equipped to do this since we stop at 8 digits
so do we fight and fork to cut the last number off .
what do we do? and that is 27 years from now I will be 91 and most likely not care about btc.
BTC has long term issues lets see
3.125 btc in 2024
1.5625 btc in 2028
0.78125 btc in 2032
0.390625 btc in 2036
0.1953125 btc in 2040
0.09765625 btc in 2044
0.048828125 btc in 2048 and we are not equipped to do this since we stop at 8 digits
so do we fight and fork to cut the last number off .
what do we do? and that is 27 years from now I will be 91 and most likely not care about btc.
It is easy for anyone to come up with predictions and speculations about the movement of prices so far in the future, because by the time that date comes if they are wrong nobody will even remember that they said so, but if they are right they will 100% tell that they did, i think that some of these people that give these kind of statements are just crazy and they are doing it just for social justification and not to add anything of value.
hard to say Gavin is an idiot when he talks about his predictions on bitcoin future, anyway I respect his opinion. some of the predictions that Gavin used to say might be wrong but at least it will get there. I hope bitcoin will be $6 million dollars in 2061 because I plan to pass my bitcoins to my children for their retirement funds..
Of course, in this case we can't regulate and direct other people's opinions because we know that everyone is free to express their own opinions.regardless of whether or not the opinion is of course only time can prove it.
and what Gavin did can't be said to be wrong either, because he was only speculating about what would happen in the future. even though we don't really know what it's for. he could have made it so that bitcoin fud continues so that there are whales who buy at lower prices or maybe it's pure that he doesn't like bitcoin. we don't know about it.
but for sure when it happens I will follow your way by buying as many bitcoins as possible if it really happens and if I am still alive.
hard to say Gavin is an idiot when he talks about his predictions on bitcoin future, anyway I respect his opinion. some of the predictions that Gavin used to say might be wrong but at least it will get there. I hope bitcoin will be $6 million dollars in 2061 because I plan to pass my bitcoins to my children for their retirement funds..
Well, we'll only get to know it once we're there. But honestly, i think Gavin Andresen has his own way of thinking that is quite unique from us. Who would have thought that in the end, all of these coins and tokens we have seen right now will only end up in the hands of whales, exchanges and banks. I know we are free to create our own predictions and speculations but i just can't believe that in the end, based on Gavin Andresen, we are left with nothing. Well, i respect his post, its just that its not giving me a positive vibes. 
hard to say Gavin is an idiot when he talks about his predictions on bitcoin future, anyway I respect his opinion. some of the predictions that Gavin used to say might be wrong but at least it will get there. I hope bitcoin will be $6 million dollars in 2061 because I plan to pass my bitcoins to my children for their retirement funds..
A prediction for 2061, really? It sounds really weird when people make predictions for a year that is too far away from now. Because we have no data that can support our prediction for a that far year. We can't even know that what is going to happen in the next year. But let's say this prediction really happened, then it would be really great to see Bitcoin price at a very high level like this. It has no upper limit in the end.
Gavin is certainly a bit of a puzzling man. I like to read some of the old posts here on the forum and of course I've come across many from Gavin Andresen and there are so many great things/ideas that Gavin brought to the table back then. He seemed like a genuinely nice guy as well which makes it all the more difficult to dislike him but you are right he has certainly turned to the "dark side" as time has gone on. Sad to see.
Almost interesting but for such a supposedly smart guy he does not seem to be able to make it much more complex, which I am sure will happen even in 10 years not 40 years. Imagine in the past 11 years how things massively changed. Of course it will be very different in 2031, not even to talk about 2061.
"Zero-privacy" Bitcoin hmm?
"Zero-privacy" Bitcoin hmm?
I believe Gavin Andresen is a smart guy, but let's get real. I don't know anyone who can make a valid prediction about BTC in 2022. So making predictions about what's going to happen in 40 years is just crazy. It would be more useful trying to make predictions about the risks BTC is going to face in the next few years.
He's not smart. He just think that others are stupid and he is smarter than him. Personally I don't know why we should take BS predictions like these seriously. Anyone can pull out a number from their hat. But where is the justification? The arguments put forward by him is not 100% convincing. Although his arguments sounded much better than that loser McAfee, who predicted $1 million in 2020 without any supporting statement at all. When someone makes statements like these, it is only for publicity. In real life, who cares about 2061? Are you going to hold your coins until 2061?
I believe Gavin Andresen is a smart guy, but let's get real. I don't know anyone who can make a valid prediction about BTC in 2022. So making predictions about what's going to happen in 40 years is just crazy. It would be more useful trying to make predictions about the risks BTC is going to face in the next few years.
Quote
In the year 2100 the whales notice that the mining reward is basically zero, and there are fewer and fewer transactions happening on the slow, expensive, zero-privacy BTC network. So they decide to simplify and save money by shutting it down.
One by one, they shutdown the “bridges” that move BTC between chains. Then they burn any BTC locked on the BTC chain by sending it to the 0x000… address, to make sure nobody can ever spend it on the BTC network.
Eventually, there are zero new BTC being produced on the BTC network, and zero BTC circulating on the BTC network. There is nothing left to secure, and the chain stops.
But 20-or-so million BTC live on, circulating on other blockchains, valuable because there are a limited number of them and because BTC was the first scarce digital asset.
One by one, they shutdown the “bridges” that move BTC between chains. Then they burn any BTC locked on the BTC chain by sending it to the 0x000… address, to make sure nobody can ever spend it on the BTC network.
Eventually, there are zero new BTC being produced on the BTC network, and zero BTC circulating on the BTC network. There is nothing left to secure, and the chain stops.
But 20-or-so million BTC live on, circulating on other blockchains, valuable because there are a limited number of them and because BTC was the first scarce digital asset.
I have to start saving, 1000 satoshi for each address.
That's hardly grim news that 20 out of a possible 21 million bitcoin are still in use some eighty years hence along with off-chain systems such as the Lightning Network taking over the day-to-day transactions.
It is grim when his prediction is saying that main chain will stop, and other shit chains will continue.More likely predictions is that all those centralized chains with fake bitcoin tokens will die long before Bitcoin chain stops, and something new and better will show up by year 2100 that is totally unrelated with Bitcoin or shitcoins.
Andresen have zero imagination.
Quote
But 20-or-so million BTC live on, circulating on other blockchains,
That's hardly grim news that 20 out of a possible 21 million bitcoin are still in use some eighty years hence along with off-chain systems such as the Lightning Network taking over the day-to-day transactions.
With the price of bitcoin ever on the increase, it's already apparent that "Mom and Dad investors" will be forced out of the market and only those with increasingly deep pockets will remain. Already stock markets see shares in the hundreds of dollars PER-SHARE and no one bats an eyelid.
claiming Bitcoin will be worth 6 Million USD in 2061, but most transaction won't happen on BTC network but on multisignature and other network tokens.
Andresen claims that only whales, big holders, exchanges and banks will hold this tokens, and in year 2100 network will shutdown after closing down bridges for this tokens and fees becoming unsustainable.
I never cared about anyone saying anything regarding bitcoin before. That is the beauty of bitcoin, anyone can say anything they want and it will not have any impact in the future of it. You could try to drop the price or increase the price by saying stuff, I mean Biden could come up and say "bitcoin is a great product and I own some" and price would be 50k+ in a single minute, be 70k+ in a day.Andresen claims that only whales, big holders, exchanges and banks will hold this tokens, and in year 2100 network will shutdown after closing down bridges for this tokens and fees becoming unsustainable.
However he could also say something bad and drop the price as well. None of this is a long term deal, it will not be good or bad forever just because someone said something. Fiat is not like that, politicians keep ruining fiat all over the world constantly. This is decentralization, stop caring what someone says, we will always be fine in the long run.
I remember the days when Gavin Andresen was treated like a God of Bitcoin, but his poor decisions have pushed him to the curb in the Crypto currency world. The guy could not handle the heat in the kitchen and then decided to bail.... after that he joined Mike Hearn to compete against Bitcoin...and that exploded in his face... 
FakeToshi (CW) was his ultimate demise... fooling him to believe that he was the real Satoshi Nakamoto.. and making him look like an idiot.
I actually feel sorry for the guy... his Bitcoin faucet helped a lot of people in the beginning. 
FakeToshi (CW) was his ultimate demise... fooling him to believe that he was the real Satoshi Nakamoto.. and making him look like an idiot.
I actually feel sorry for the guy... his Bitcoin faucet helped a lot of people in the beginning. 
Looks like even his old buddy Craig Wright rejected him so he is left only with Vitalik now 
And this may be the main reason for these... fantasies.
He may want to get people follow his moves again. He may be trying to earn some more awareness for his person.
And for this he has to get something "news worthy", no matter how far from reality it is. And science fiction about Bitcoin's future is easy: it can be anything, as long as it's shocking/impressive and it doesn't matter if it won't ever turn to be true.
He's still a big blocker, I think he's even one of the first big blockers, so he will always be salty that the community rejected his naive vision in favor of more technically sound solution.
Yes it looks like he is a big blocker, I think he is also against the idea of people running their own full Bitcoin nodes, and this two come hand in hand together.Interesting thing that he made this post but disabled any comments on his blog or on his twitter post, and then he claimed he was censored on reddit, so I had to post his entire post in bitcointalk for open discussion.
And he makes such unrealistic assumptions like thinking that the block size won't change in 40 years or that no new solutions will be presented. When Satoshi created Bitcoin, he didn't imagine that someone would come up with Lightning Network, similarly in the future someone can come up with a new breakthrough that would dramatically increase Bitcoin's capacity. Gavin is like those people that said that machines heavier than air can not fly.
If you look his other posts you can see that he is also against coin mixing saying it is bad, and he is talking more and more about ethereum, so no wonder he is pushing for ''tokens'' instead of Bitcoin.Looks like even his old buddy Craig Wright rejected him so he is left only with Vitalik now
Predicting Bitcoin in 2061? This guy is more delusional than I thought. This is another prediction statement without any guarantees that it would be true or not. There are so many so-called experts and analysts out there who are making their own predictions. Although a handful of them got it right, but for most of the time it won't happen. Cryptocurrency is unpredictable and they can't control that, not even Gavin Andersen.
Hard to believe what this guy says, I think it's a good idea to just ignore although that grim future is just scary, hopefully it's going to stay in fiction because I can see what's going to happen if the government controls everything, people are definitely going to suffer the most there. That's a really big number to be honest, and I don't see how it's going to go up to that point not to mention that even a 100k is still a pipe dream.
I don't even get the sense of predicting the price that far ahead really. Maybe after a decade is reasonable, but that's probably the max. A lot of things could change in 40 years, if he pretty much takes into account those and presented them in his prediction, well I'll be damned why hasn't he ascended yet. Pretty sure saying it's a piece of science fiction still isn't enough of an excuse to do so. Pretty sure the community would have multiple breakthroughs to resolve problems that would inevitably let it develop to a more suitable form of currency for all.
Predictions so far ahead are usually wrong. Andersen knows well the Bitcoin, its environment and its evolution, so he can make a prediction like this that may seem plausible, but from here to there to know if instead of multisig wallets something else has been invented that we cannot conceive now, or if the Bitcoin has disappeared and we live under a world dictatorship with a centralized monetary system, etc.
I do hope we arent relying on one person for the future of BTC or constrained in any way resembling that, I presume not as it should be decided in a more organic way. Something like market supply and demand vs efficient processes determining the best route is best. I doubt he meant to imply it would be solely resting on his singular vision just an imagining of what might be one possible scenario which is fair enough if people dont take it too seriously.
That's okay, we don't. Not everyone believes what this guy's saying so we don't have to worry that the bitcoin community would rally under one banner, I think the Elon incident is a good reminder as to why we don't have to believe what this people are saying. It is an interesting post in the sense that it gives some stuff to think about. I am not too interested in knowing who is Satoshi nor in the ego quarrels of the people that supposedly worked in proximity to him, however the predictions about having bitcoin falling into a few hands is kind of a warning for us hoddlers and aligns with something that people do not seem to understand clearly and is very simple: once you sell something, you no longer own it. You have something that most times is far less valuable and goes away easily with no trace: money.
True. Maybe he did consider the true hodler when he says "Most BTC (not all) is locked in multisig".This may well be the future because people are willing to use Wrapped BTC to access DeFi and other kind of interest-yielding products on smart-contract enables blockchains.
There are two scenarios when this cannot happen:
1. If smart-contracts become native to BTC making all of this "token-bridging" a redundant service.
2. If people continue to hold majority of their BTC with their own keys in their personal wallets. (the way its meant to be).
Gavin's hypothesis is more a reflection of his bitterness about losing the blocksize debate than anything else. The biggest organizations running miner can be a scenario but that doesn't mean that that they'll send everything to 0x000...(which is just an asinine jump of imagination, btw); the rest of the ACTUAL users can always fork away their own blockchain separate from the so-called corporate blockchain which doesn't even have any bitcoins now.
As soon as miners go offline, the bitcoin network can run with even just 2 computers running the chain which users (Full nodes) agree is the Bitcoin chain. All they'll need is a coordinated update to their full nodes. Now in Gavin's dystopian future, if the corporations even end up owning Open Source Software to the extent that only THEIR chain can run, then well, there is no point arguing this extreme case.
TLDR; This is a pretty amateur argument and I would seriously expect better from an OG. He never really fails to show his lack of conviction and understanding when it comes to Bitcoin.
I can see that this loser (Gavin Andresen) has learnt a thing or two from what happened to John McAfee. Back in 2017 or 2018, McAfee made a prediction that Bitcoin will be worth $1 million per coin by 2021. And not surprisingly, that target was not achieved and McAfee was left with an egg in his face. Now coming to Andresen, he has given a target date of 2061. See how intelligent he is. Because even if the target is not achieved, no one is going to badmouth him. Because no one will remember Andresen and his stupid prediction by then.
He's still a big blocker, I think he's even one of the first big blockers, so he will always be salty that the community rejected his naive vision in favor of more technically sound solution. And he makes such unrealistic assumptions like thinking that the block size won't change in 40 years or that no new solutions will be presented. When Satoshi created Bitcoin, he didn't imagine that someone would come up with Lightning Network, similarly in the future someone can come up with a new breakthrough that would dramatically increase Bitcoin's capacity. Gavin is like those people that said that machines heavier than air can not fly.
I just hope he doesn't show up sometime on the day he made that prediction because he had contact with some machine from the future or with someone who came from the future and talked to him. I don't know why anyone cares about 2061, it's not even 2022 is it already in 2061?
I doubt it
and maybe for the next 40 years he will forget that he said that in 2021
I doubt it
I do hope we arent relying on one person for the future of BTC or constrained in any way resembling that, I presume not as it should be decided in a more organic way. Something like market supply and demand vs efficient processes determining the best route is best. I doubt he meant to imply it would be solely resting on his singular vision just an imagining of what might be one possible scenario which is fair enough if people dont take it too seriously.
maybe it is a good reminder because indeed it is a very certain thing when there is an increase there will be a decrease and that is a natural thing because bitcoin will not last forever and its era will surely end, although for now it will not be like that but slowly bitcoin will surely lose its glory because nothing lasts forever here.
As for the price in 2061, there are only two possibilities if it's not true, it's false, but whatever it is, even if you say research or whatever, I think it's still very far from happening because 40 years is a long time and I'm very sure at least for myself personally. , I wouldn't invest that long
and it is just speculation and things like this have often happened where a lot of people speculate about it but until now there is no proof.
so why bother with what will happen decades after today.
As for the price in 2061, there are only two possibilities if it's not true, it's false, but whatever it is, even if you say research or whatever, I think it's still very far from happening because 40 years is a long time and I'm very sure at least for myself personally. , I wouldn't invest that long
and it is just speculation and things like this have often happened where a lot of people speculate about it but until now there is no proof.
so why bother with what will happen decades after today.
again this is a prediction and anyone can say the same because here it is in a speculative direction.
regardless of true or not we will see it at least 40 years from now
I can only imagine one thing at the moment, basically when someone says something like this now they will probably say the opposite in months or years to come.
such as China's policy of going back and forth for and prohibiting bitcoin and Elon and Tesla who are fickle about bitcoin adoption.
actually it's the same here.
and maybe for the next 40 years he will forget that he said that in 2021
regardless of true or not we will see it at least 40 years from now
I can only imagine one thing at the moment, basically when someone says something like this now they will probably say the opposite in months or years to come.
such as China's policy of going back and forth for and prohibiting bitcoin and Elon and Tesla who are fickle about bitcoin adoption.
actually it's the same here.
and maybe for the next 40 years he will forget that he said that in 2021
It is an interesting post in the sense that it gives some stuff to think about. I am not too interested in knowing who is Satoshi nor in the ego quarrels of the people that supposedly worked in proximity to him, however the predictions about having bitcoin falling into a few hands is kind of a warning for us hoddlers and aligns with something that people do not seem to understand clearly and is very simple: once you sell something, you no longer own it. You have something that most times is far less valuable and goes away easily with no trace: money.
If there are two things I can pick out of this whole rubbish or soi choose to believe that Gavin Anderson stated or predicted is that, he specifically called his prediction 'a piece of science fiction and beckoned on is to 'Imagine in the year 2061'.
Apparently, any one can come up with any prediction, predictions that could even suggest the crashing of the world, how its to happen and even propose a solution to it but, does that mean, that's what is to happen or the solutionn is the way to go about it, certainly a yes or a no.
It would be a good thing to take advice form one who has made several mistakes but not one who even continues to wallow in mistakes still and claims that aren't verifiable like Gavin Anderson. Let him have his say and lets have even more fun still!
Apparently, any one can come up with any prediction, predictions that could even suggest the crashing of the world, how its to happen and even propose a solution to it but, does that mean, that's what is to happen or the solutionn is the way to go about it, certainly a yes or a no.
It would be a good thing to take advice form one who has made several mistakes but not one who even continues to wallow in mistakes still and claims that aren't verifiable like Gavin Anderson. Let him have his say and lets have even more fun still!
Arguably one of the biggest mistakes Satoshi Nakamoto made was transferring things over to Gavin Andresen, the guy who worked with agencies, than with Craig Wright, and now he writes some grim sci-fi future for Bitcoin on his blog.
This guy become so irrelevant in Bitcoin crypto space that maybe his only fun in life now is writing stuff like this, claiming Bitcoin will be worth 6 Million USD in 2061, but most transaction won't happen on BTC network but on multisignature and other network tokens.
Andresen claims that only whales, big holders, exchanges and banks will hold this tokens, and in year 2100 network will shutdown after closing down bridges for this tokens and fees becoming unsustainable.
Now lets remember big mistakes Gavin Andresen made in past, like the time when he claimed that Craig Wright is Satoshi, or how he ''visited'' three letter government agency back in 2011, shortly after Satoshi left the Bitcoin project.
Andresen's full fantasy story:
Archive: https://archive.ph/ca3An
This guy become so irrelevant in Bitcoin crypto space that maybe his only fun in life now is writing stuff like this, claiming Bitcoin will be worth 6 Million USD in 2061, but most transaction won't happen on BTC network but on multisignature and other network tokens.
Andresen claims that only whales, big holders, exchanges and banks will hold this tokens, and in year 2100 network will shutdown after closing down bridges for this tokens and fees becoming unsustainable.
Now lets remember big mistakes Gavin Andresen made in past, like the time when he claimed that Craig Wright is Satoshi, or how he ''visited'' three letter government agency back in 2011, shortly after Satoshi left the Bitcoin project.
Quote
Gavin Andresen: Um... I haven't had email from satoshi in a couple months actually. The last email I sent him I actually told him I was going to talk at the CIA. So it's possible , that.... that may have um had something to with his deciding
Quote
Gavin Andresen: It Was a Mistake to Blog Claiming Craig Wright Is Satoshi
Andresen's full fantasy story:
Quote
Take this as a little piece of science fiction; the chances the future looks like this are small, but of all the possible futures I think this has as good a chance of any of happening:
Imagine: it is the year 2061.
The BTC price is six million US dollars– equal to about a million 2021 dollars because of inflation.
Miners are being rewarded 0.006103515625 BTC per block, plus transaction fees of about 5 BTC for 4,000 or so transactions ($7,500 per transaction).
But most BTC transactions don’t happen on the BTC network. Most BTC is locked up in multisignature outputs secured using multiparty computation and mirrored on another chain as “wrapped” tokens. People moved their BTC either because they want faster transactions, lower fees, more privacy, or want to invest their BTC in decentralized financial stuff. Or maybe all of the above.
The transactions that do occur on the main BTC network are high-value, mostly between super-whale-size holders (centralized exchanges, central banks, and the decentralized multiparty computation addresses that hold all the wrapped coins).
These whales maintain the BTC network forever. They are the miners and the transaction creators; they don’t care how high transaction fees go, because they receive as many fees as they pay.
In the year 2100 the whales notice that the mining reward is basically zero, and there are fewer and fewer transactions happening on the slow, expensive, zero-privacy BTC network. So they decide to simplify and save money by shutting it down.
One by one, they shutdown the “bridges” that move BTC between chains. Then they burn any BTC locked on the BTC chain by sending it to the 0x000… address, to make sure nobody can ever spend it on the BTC network.
Eventually, there are zero new BTC being produced on the BTC network, and zero BTC circulating on the BTC network. There is nothing left to secure, and the chain stops.
But 20-or-so million BTC live on, circulating on other blockchains, valuable because there are a limited number of them and because BTC was the first scarce digital asset.
http://gavinandresen.ninja/a-possible-btc-futureImagine: it is the year 2061.
The BTC price is six million US dollars– equal to about a million 2021 dollars because of inflation.
Miners are being rewarded 0.006103515625 BTC per block, plus transaction fees of about 5 BTC for 4,000 or so transactions ($7,500 per transaction).
But most BTC transactions don’t happen on the BTC network. Most BTC is locked up in multisignature outputs secured using multiparty computation and mirrored on another chain as “wrapped” tokens. People moved their BTC either because they want faster transactions, lower fees, more privacy, or want to invest their BTC in decentralized financial stuff. Or maybe all of the above.
The transactions that do occur on the main BTC network are high-value, mostly between super-whale-size holders (centralized exchanges, central banks, and the decentralized multiparty computation addresses that hold all the wrapped coins).
These whales maintain the BTC network forever. They are the miners and the transaction creators; they don’t care how high transaction fees go, because they receive as many fees as they pay.
In the year 2100 the whales notice that the mining reward is basically zero, and there are fewer and fewer transactions happening on the slow, expensive, zero-privacy BTC network. So they decide to simplify and save money by shutting it down.
One by one, they shutdown the “bridges” that move BTC between chains. Then they burn any BTC locked on the BTC chain by sending it to the 0x000… address, to make sure nobody can ever spend it on the BTC network.
Eventually, there are zero new BTC being produced on the BTC network, and zero BTC circulating on the BTC network. There is nothing left to secure, and the chain stops.
But 20-or-so million BTC live on, circulating on other blockchains, valuable because there are a limited number of them and because BTC was the first scarce digital asset.
Archive: https://archive.ph/ca3An
Jump to: