Topic: old Bitcoin addresses as 'NFT' on the Bitcoin blockchain - 'signature chain' - page 2. (Read 1058 times)

'ownership': the owner of the 'signature chain'

The new owner of the 'signature chain' can only transfer the 'signature chain' but has no access to the address of the previous owner.

Same here what's the point ownership when the new owner can have access to the private keys that control the wallet address, I know a lot of development is possible with NFT.

But then as a newbie in Bitcoin technicalities, I will rather watch from afar and I will continue to learn when I gain a good knowledge of how the block transaction works.

Then I will try it out to see how it works if the new owner of the wallet address will have control of the wallet or not, or the 2nd owner will only be able to sign a message and carry out transactions in the wallet since only the first transaction of Bitcoin wallet is count valid.

following. Confused, but still intrigued

Not sure if you're aware but markm on these forums created Devcoin and managed to make the genesis block for Satoshi's coins.

https://block.d.evco.in/tx/e61339a40aa4e90e983fe0d64cf09eed5fa1e6eac227b6761f06ac7af1929baf#inputs

Maybe a reason we merge mine, have ability to use keys on BTC and DVC alike.

Just interesting is all.

This project is open and free, so you don't have to connect a chain of addresses. Join if you like.


No, you don't reveal anything except the signature and a transaction from your address to the new owner's address. For example here:


The owner of address 1H3TAVNZFZfiLUp9o9E93oTVY9WgYZ5knX started a 'signature chain' and sent it to 1Pex1JK5w9VTGwohc3pqjfU72AmTgdi3r5. Can we know who they are? No.

Even addresses from the Patoshi pattern (believed to be Satoshi) could create 'signature chains' and nobody would know who they are if they wished to.
The only thing what 'signature chain' reveals is that someone has the private key of the starting address and that they are participating in that project.


The private key owner of the starting address will remain the sole owner of the key after creating a 'signature chain.' You don't share your private key. So you have the ability to sign a message anytime. 'Signature chain' doesn't change/limit your ability thereafter.


This project is like Bitcoin in 2009. We don't know how the community will accept it. But it is worth trying it as it works technically. When NFT started people said that it is worthless because the hash of a picture is stored on the blockchain instead of the picture file. I would like to own a 'signature chain' that started with block 0 (=Satoshi's address, that would be the most valuable imo) even after 'hopping' from address to address with signatures.

With that new type of NFT these early addresses will become an 'artwork' for coming generations. And this all on the Bitcoin blockchain without an altcoin or altnetwork.

DM me if you like to have a 'signature chain.'


@NotATether: your 'signature chain' is being generated. Will post it then.

What if we don’t want to connect a chain of addresses? That seems somewhat counter to most Bitcoiner ideas. Is there still any reason to start a chain if we only had 1 address we wanted in the chain? What would be the value of that over just having the ability to sign a message with said address? Is there a value proposition to why or how these older addresses will be valuable? The one I use has been in use for more than a decade, but I’m not sure how that makes it’s signature chain worth anything.

@NotATether

You like the project? If you want to own a 'siganture chain' so post an unused/empty legacy address (starting with 1..) and I will send one to you 
The 'signature chains' I'm creating are not with old addresses but they are the first in that project.

Yes that was my first bitcoin address 

It is a pity that i don't stake more bitcoin. Anyway lets to check the development of this project.

Interesting project

albert0bsd provided a 2011 Bitcoin address 1H3TAVNZFZfiLUp9o9E93oTVY9WgYZ5knX to take part in the 'signature chain' project.

first seen transaction was on block 128,482  04/Jun/2011 03:54 AM UTC

signature:

Old address. Good luck!

Hi lasvegas83

Cool that you like that project.

Generated your 'signature chain' with the address 1PiN2bq1xLXt8Jb4XnJRwWfVEmTfcGM8iV

signature:

txid 05d18a44deb06882d83ef999fb5a07ed8e6c6fde6f966fce508dbc2a61043c8d
08/Dec/2022 10:39 PM UTC

Your 'signature chain' started with the address 1PiN2bq1xLXt8Jb4XnJRwWfVEmTfcGM8iV that I generated 2 days ago and you (1CLoAKmgiMrE3nnwvqZNydcsVDVCoLTKzd) are the owner now. Yes, 1PiN2bq1xLXt8Jb4XnJRwWfVEmTfcGM8iV isn't an old address but your 'signature chain' is one of the earliest in that project. 1PiN2bq1xLXt8Jb4XnJRwWfVEmTfcGM8iV could create other 'signature chains' on the Bitcoin blockchain, but these would be void. We can prove that because your address 1CLoAKmgiMrE3nnwvqZNydcsVDVCoLTKzd was the first seen on the blockchain and there can be only one 'signature chain' for one address. That is how it works. You can transfer it whenever you want.

Enjoy the project  

casinotester0001

Seems very interesting! Would be great to be part of this experiment

Here is my empty address:

I know why you didn't understand it. As we said that it is a new sort of 'NFT', it doesn't work like the regular one. There is a 'signature chain' protocol (rules) and one main point in these rules is that one address can generate only one 'signature chain'. Yes, someone who generated one 'signature chain' (in your case dave->jeff) can generate another 'signature chain' (in your case dave->claire) that will be stored on the Bitcoin blockchain. But, another rule says that only the first seen 'signature chain' on the Bitcoin blockchain is the valid one. Very simple rules. But it works. Dave could generate thousands of 'signature chains' after the first one that are stored on the Bitcoin blockchain. But only one 'signature chain' is valid, namely the first one (in your case dave->jeff).



Yes, that's it. You can't stop someone who has generated a 'signature chain' to generate another 'signature chain'. But, it is all stored on the Bitcoin blockchain. And only the first seen on the Bitcoin blockchain is the valid one that will be accepted by the participants of this new sort of 'NFT' -> the 'signature chain'. If someone wanted to give you a 'signature chain', so the Bitcoin blockchain will be checked whether it is a valid one. So simple. It works.

There will be lots of void 'signature chains' on the Bitcoin blockchain, but who would want them. You can check easily if they are valid or not.

I created a void 'signature chain' to explain it:

Yesterday I transferred a 'siganture chain' from address 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV to 14ivWoBRgpfMbyiWqyjuDFnch6sGpsxKTV (user yhiaali3)

We can check the Bitcoin blockchain for address 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV if it is valid or not. We will see that 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV made a valid 'signature transaction' on block 766,199, so the new owner for this 'signature chain' is 14ivWoBRgpfMbyiWqyjuDFnch6sGpsxKTV (user yhiaali3).

Today I generated a new 'signature chain' from address 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV to 1J777xxcpV3kNwdgkU7ckVM4RrSHvYjcrc that is stored on block 766,348. But anyone can check on the Bitcoin blockchian that there is a 'signature chain' for 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV that was done earlier. So, that new 'signature chain' is void. It is there, but we can say exactly what is valid and what is not. Now the new owner of the void 'signature chain' can transfer that void 'signature chain' to someone else. Nothing stops them to do that as you said it. But the new owner would get a void 'signature chain'. Who would pay for it? We can check this. So simple. It works.


Anyone can download Beeple's "Everydays - The First 5000 Days" and make an NFT out of it. Who would buy it? Only the one produced by Beeple's address is valid, that is the NFT rule. And in our case it is the first seen 'signature chain' on the Bitcoin blockchain that is valid.

What if Beeple produced the same "Everydays - The First 5000 Days" NFT and said that this new one is the original / valid NFT? The community wouldn't accept it. This is how it works and this is how 'signature chain' works.  

lets call dave the genesis block(0) of a chain /network involving jeff.. where jeff is block(1)

nothing stops dave from mentioning claire
where claire becomes part of a new network with a dave(0)->claire(1)

where claire can then sign a message to mike(2)
and so on

yes the jeff network wont like claire(1) and reject claire from JEFFS  network chain.. but..
dave is still making a new CHAIN and new network with claire away from jeffs network

and jeff cant stop dave making a new chain. jeff can only stop claire from being seen in jeffs network

GET IT YET
jeff owns nothing to stop dave.
JEFF OWNS NOTHING. thus its not a NFT. its just a love letter chain of taint... where dave can love many people and have many grand kids with many partners .. its not ownership rights nor a system of an enforced monogamist relationship of grandparents parents kids

dave can make claires chain the main chain by doing stuff like putting in a 2010 date. which jeffs network does not

thus the WORLD outside of jeffs chain network will think jeffs chain was not a real network but instead a testnet. thus boom jeffs chain has no value


oh and one last thing. the 2009 address is not a satoshi address. there were in total 7 people mining in that same day as the 2009 was first seen in bitcoin. and that 2009 address was not a satoshi address but one of the other 6 people mining that day.

We don't know, it's the community's decission. There was an idea 'signature chain' and our task is to build 'signature chain' and explain how it works. The good thing is that it works. I remember when NFTs came out, most people said that they're valueless as the picture is not stored on the blockchain (instead a hash). You could mint CryptoPunks for free and they had no value.

It is very important to understand how it works. For example user franky1 thinks that the creator of a 'signature chain' for a certain address can create lots of 'signature chains' for a certain Bitcoin address (in his example, Bitcoin address = names like dave, jimmy, ...)
Yes, the initial address holder/owner of a 'signature chain' will keep control of their private key (that was the intention of 'signatue chain') but they can't make other chains for "dave" (= a certain Bitcoin address). They can make a new 'signature transaction' and it will be stored on the blockchain, but the 'signtature chain' protocol will not accept it as valid. So there will be one 'signature chain' for one given Bitcoin address.

yhiaali3, you experienced it yesterday as I sent a 'signature chain' to a used address that you gave. The transaction is stored on the Bitcoin blockchain, but the 'signature chain' protocol doesn't accept it. After sending it to an unused/empty address, it worked. Now you have one 'signature chain' from the holder/owner of the address 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV and the owner could send it to another user, it would be stored on the blockchain but it wouldn't be valid in the 'signature chain' protocol. So you are the sole owner of the 'signature chain' that started with this address 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV. Nobody can create another one that is valid.

And if now old Bitcoin address owners like that idea and create a 'signature chain' for their old address, it could become an interesting new type of 'NFT'. Some will say that it has no value, but I think that it has value because the owner intentionally starts that 'signature chain' and I would like to own a chain that started with an 2009 or 2010 address or for example from that address that sold 2 pizzas for 10,000 Bitcoin. It will be unique, that means one 'signature chain' for one Bitcoin address.

Great, thank you.


but here is my question: Will the market accept this NFT? I mean, will it have real value? Are there any buyers interested in owning this "signature chain"?

Royse777, we're testing it and if you want to own a 'siganture chain' so post an unused/empty legacy address (starting with 1..) and I will send one to you  


odolvlobo, you too, if you like.

It worked. (It should work because Bitcoin works  )

The transfer to 143NrfsANkM5B2Y3pWeCHNxGQS8kBFceDw is stored on the blockchain, but the 'signature chain' protocol doesn't accept it because the target address was a used address. So the owner 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV was still the owner of the 'signature chain'.

I sent it to the other unused/empty address 14ivWoBRgpfMbyiWqyjuDFnch6sGpsxKTV and now the protocol accepts it.

You have your 'signature chain' on 14ivWoBRgpfMbyiWqyjuDFnch6sGpsxKTV.

txid 387087dddda71c8d48ee1a7ec08652507a32a9a2a2d574884f633065575675c2
block 766,199

signature:

This signature is proof that 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV gives you the right to transfer this 'signature chain' for the Bitcoin address 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV to someone else. 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV is a newly created address to test 'siganture chain' but it could be for example a very old address and the private key holder/owner of that address could transfer the rights to someone else through signing such a message where the address of the new owner is the message and transferring Bitcoin (value is not important/can be dust) to the address of the new owner.

Only you can transfer this 'signature chain' for 1MAP7AKiN5Ddce82VE8eFheFfyQ8iffvmV with the private key of 14ivWoBRgpfMbyiWqyjuDFnch6sGpsxKTV. It is important that you store that signature above. Because there is no 'signature chain' explorer at the moment where you could see that. This signature is like the NFT picture that is not stored on the blockchain.

We are doing all procedures manually at the moment. And it is good as people can understand how it works. At some point it should work automatically through a wallet/explorer.

Now we have to see how the community will accept it. But I have a feeling that it is CryptoPunks in the making.  

Yes, you were twice as fast as me. I didn't notice the editing.
Anyway, thank you, I hope the experiment will be successful. Good luck

I was faster  

You have your 'signature chain' on 143NrfsANkM5B2Y3pWeCHNxGQS8kBFceDw. Keep the private key, the journey begins .. good luck.

Well here's a new blank address that I just created:


You can use either of these two addresses no problem

Cool! It would be better to use a new empty address. Because from 143NrfsANkM5B2Y3pWeCHNxGQS8kBFceDw if you make outgoing transactions and if the output is 1 legacy address, so it would mean that you send/transfer your 'signature chain' to this address. You don't need an old address to receive 'signature chains'.

EDIT:
Ok, I see you don't use it anymore for transactions. Sent the 'signature chain' to 143NrfsANkM5B2Y3pWeCHNxGQS8kBFceDw.