Topic: [PAID] Publish result of Days Destroyed calculation (Read 11617 times)
Regarding days destroyed, I have come to the conclusion that it could be useful to have a days destroyed chart that multiplies the days destroyed by the historic bitcoin price at the time of that block. This would show a measure of how much relative value is actually moving on the blockchain, rather then just showing it by number of coins which have a rapidly changing value at this early time. This is essentially similar to how bitcoincharts allows us to look at volume in bitcoins or USD.
Or 49 were spent and 1 moved to wallet. Or they used SendMany and all of it was spent (slim chance I know).
This BitcoinDays Destroyed number still doesn't provide a perfect picture, it is just a much better measure than looking at raw spending totals. Here's an example:
Consider a slight variation on that ... example 5:
5. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends 1 BTC.
In Case 5 only 1 BTC was spent and 49 BTC was returned as change. There would still be 18,250 Bitcoin-days destroyed, even though the coins representing all but 365 of those Bitcoin-days remained in the same wallet.
1. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends them.
Consider a slight variation on that ... example 5:
5. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends 1 BTC.
In Case 5 only 1 BTC was spent and 49 BTC was returned as change. There would still be 18,250 Bitcoin-days destroyed, even though the coins representing all but 365 of those Bitcoin-days remained in the same wallet.
I understood the first 4 examples, but not that example 5 you just explained. Why are all 18250 BTC days destroyed? Why not just 365? Is it because some part of the 50 that was originally minted is finally spent, regardless of how many? If so, why?
If you have 50BTC in one address, and spend 1BTC of it, the remaining unspent currency does not stay at that address, it gets sent to a new generated address in your wallet. This is to enhance anonymity. Although you still have the coins, it looks like you sent them. A transaction would look like:
2010-12-25:
Generate 50 BTC -> address Wallet1
2011-09-25:
Input 50 BTC from address Wallet1 ->
Output 1 BTC -> recipient
Output 49 BTC -> Wallet2
So the coins were unmoved for nine months, and although only 1 BTC was actually spent on 9-25, all of them were sent to new addresses.
Someone was screwing with the network at the time, I would guess.
OK, I am only halfway thru this thread, but I had to comment on this before I read the rest.........
How is it possible for someone to "screwing with the network at the time,"
It probably was referring to how the timestamps do not necessarily have to be in chronological order -- due to having tolerance.
- http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_timestamp
EDIT: putting this quote in to clarify the below part:
As far as I can tell, I'm getting more or less the same results (with little differences here and there for some reason). You can see my full output here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28441300/output.txt
maybe I'm missing something but are there some errors in these numbers for BTC days destroyed? Some blocks have negative values for days destroyed.
For example see block 65711 has -151.03 BTC days destroyed. There are 48 other blocks in this csv file with negative numbers for days destroyed.
Very interesting data and analysis by the way. thanks to all concerned.
Well, looking at the Block Explorer for block 65711, it seems that the previous block 65710, which holds the redeemed output, actually has a timestamp that is later than block 65711. So, apparently the calculation is "correct", but I honestly don't know why the dates are backwards...
good spot on the time stamp inconsistencies. I was looking at the block explorer to try and make sense of the numbers but didn't notice that. Maybe someone else can explain why the time stamps are out of sync with the block numbers
Someone was screwing with the network at the time, I would guess.
Someone was screwing with the network at the time, I would guess.
OK, I am only halfway thru this thread, but I had to comment on this before I read the rest.........
How is it possible for someone to "screwing with the network at the time," ....... This one line has scared me more then any other 'scams, hacks, trolls, stealing, stupidness, goxisms, brucisms"
If someone can "screw with the network" how can I trust the blockchain??
Please someone explain.
As far as I can tell, I'm getting more or less the same results (with little differences here and there for some reason). You can see my full output here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28441300/output.txt
maybe I'm missing something but are there some errors in these numbers for BTC days destroyed? Some blocks have negative values for days destroyed.
For example see block 65711 has -151.03 BTC days destroyed. There are 48 other blocks in this csv file with negative numbers for days destroyed.
Very interesting data and analysis by the way. thanks to all concerned.
Well, looking at the Block Explorer for block 65711, it seems that the previous block 65710, which holds the redeemed output, actually has a timestamp that is later than block 65711. So, apparently the calculation is "correct", but I honestly don't know why the dates are backwards...
good spot on the time stamp inconsistencies. I was looking at the block explorer to try and make sense of the numbers but didn't notice that. Maybe someone else can explain why the time stamps are out of sync with the block numbers
Someone was screwing with the network at the time, I would guess.
Someone was screwing with the network at the time, I would guess.
OK, I am only halfway thru this thread, but I had to comment on this before I read the rest.........
How is it possible for someone to "screwing with the network at the time," ....... This one line has scared me more then any other 'scams, hacks, trolls, stealing, stupidness, goxisms, brucisms"
If someone can "screw with the network" how can I trust the blockchain??
Please someone explain.
I'm in for 3BTC if it tracks BitcoinDays over time and updates with each block. Good for a month.
Not sure if I made 1 month or you paid out already, but ABE now does this. https://github.com/jtobey/bitcoin-abe Here is your query:
select cc.block_height, b.block_nTime, 100 * (1 - b.block_satoshi_seconds / b.block_total_ss) percent_btcdd from chain_candidate cc join block b using (block_id) where cc.chain_id = 1 and cc.in_longest = 1 and b.block_total_ss > 0 order by cc.block_height;
About to be on http://john-edwin-tobey.org:2750/chain/Bitcoin/ as soon as the schema upgrade completes. Though that site is "development" and I know of no "production" ABE site.
I've considered it; I think the existing one is a bit less friendly than it could be.
Incidentally, an open source block explorer variant is now being developed:
- http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=16141.0
What's the current chart for this? Is it available online?
Not that I know of. You'll have to run it yourself (or have someone do it for you and send you the data).
What's the current chart for this? Is it available online?
I've made an update to my script. It now accepts a range of blocks to scan using the --block-start and --block-end options.
Examples:
Scan from a specific block to the end of the block chain (right now):
Scan from the genesis block to a specific block:
Scan a specified range of blocks:
The original code, documentation, download link and Bitcoin donation address can be found earlier in the thread, here.
Examples:
Scan from a specific block to the end of the block chain (right now):
Code:
python bitcoindays.py --block-start=125000
Scan from the genesis block to a specific block:
Code:
python bitcoindays.py --block-end=1000
Scan a specified range of blocks:
Code:
python bitcoindays.py --block-start=125000 --block-end=125999
The original code, documentation, download link and Bitcoin donation address can be found earlier in the thread, here.
sorry Akiron,
just realized that your graph takes into account the 1440 minutes in a day factor that you mentioned in a post above.
the % of cumulative days destroyed/total BTC days at >20% seems quite high to me. does the calculation for days destroyed need to be corrected for the 1440 minutes in a day too?
just realized that your graph takes into account the 1440 minutes in a day factor that you mentioned in a post above.
the % of cumulative days destroyed/total BTC days at >20% seems quite high to me. does the calculation for days destroyed need to be corrected for the 1440 minutes in a day too?
hi Akiron,
is the y-axis scale correct. looks like it's out by a factor of 100 if jerfelix's previous calculations were right.
is the y-axis scale correct. looks like it's out by a factor of 100 if jerfelix's previous calculations were right.
I've started an article on the wiki: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Days_Destroyed.
if I understand it correctly when you receive bitcoins it's like having a "bitcoin note" of the denomination of the amount that you received them. so if you mine 50 BTC you get a 50 "BTC note" say. For simplicity, say you only have that 50 BTC in your wallet. You spend 1 BTC, so that "note" has to be broken - so it's like all 50 are spent, 1 BTC goes to the address you sent it to and the change of 49 BTC is returned to an address you own. So now you have 49 BTC in your wallet that are fresh (i.e. zero days old). For the BTC days destroyed calculation it's like all 50 BTC have been spent (so days destroyed = 50 x # of days you've held them) even though in reality you've sent 1 BTC and still own the other 49.
hope that's right. someone can correct me if I'm wrong.
hope that's right. someone can correct me if I'm wrong.
Since I don't quite get it myself, I can't confirm the accuracy of what you said, but if you are right, I now understand the metric. Thank you for that clear explanation. I truly appreciate it. I finally get it!
Looking at the last block, Block #125393, there have been 50 x 125,393 == 6,269,650 Bitcoins mined since the beginning of time. The first 50 coins mined have been in existence for roughly 125,393 x 10 minutes, while the most recent 50 are brand new. Total BitCoin existence minutes are the 6,269,650 x the average, so 6,269,650 x 125,393 x 5 == 125,393^2 x 50 x 5 == 3.93E+12. Since about 144 Blocks are created per day, this means that since the beginning of BitCoins, there have been 3.93E+12 / 144 == 2.73E+10 Total BitCoin Days ever.
The conversion from Bitcoin minutes to Bitcoin days doesn't make sense to me. Shouldn't you be dividing by the number of minutes in a day (1440)?
Think of the dimensional analysis, currently you have a figure that is Bitcoins * Minutes, and you want a figure that is Bitcoins*Days, thus you need to multiply by 1 Days/ 1440 Minutes giving 3.93E+12 / 1440 == 2.73E+9 Total BitCoin Days ever. Right?
As far as I can tell, I'm getting more or less the same results (with little differences here and there for some reason). You can see my full output here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28441300/output.txt
maybe I'm missing something but are there some errors in these numbers for BTC days destroyed? Some blocks have negative values for days destroyed.
For example see block 65711 has -151.03 BTC days destroyed. There are 48 other blocks in this csv file with negative numbers for days destroyed.
Very interesting data and analysis by the way. thanks to all concerned.
Well, looking at the Block Explorer for block 65711, it seems that the previous block 65710, which holds the redeemed output, actually has a timestamp that is later than block 65711. So, apparently the calculation is "correct", but I honestly don't know why the dates are backwards...
good spot on the time stamp inconsistencies. I was looking at the block explorer to try and make sense of the numbers but didn't notice that. Maybe someone else can explain why the time stamps are out of sync with the block numbers
Someone was screwing with the network at the time, I would guess.
Btw. does this script calculate in "bitcoin time" (=2016 Blocks = 2 weeks) or in "human time" (14 days = 2 weeks)?
With the constant increase of difficulty, the "Bitcoin time" should already be well into summer 2011...
With the constant increase of difficulty, the "Bitcoin time" should already be well into summer 2011...
This BitcoinDays Destroyed number still doesn't provide a perfect picture, it is just a much better measure than looking at raw spending totals. Here's an example:
Consider a slight variation on that ... example 5:
5. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends 1 BTC.
In Case 5 only 1 BTC was spent and 49 BTC was returned as change. There would still be 18,250 Bitcoin-days destroyed, even though the coins representing all but 365 of those Bitcoin-days remained in the same wallet.
1. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends them.
Consider a slight variation on that ... example 5:
5. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends 1 BTC.
In Case 5 only 1 BTC was spent and 49 BTC was returned as change. There would still be 18,250 Bitcoin-days destroyed, even though the coins representing all but 365 of those Bitcoin-days remained in the same wallet.
I understood the first 4 examples, but not that example 5 you just explained. Why are all 18250 BTC days destroyed? Why not just 365? Is it because some part of the 50 that was originally minted is finally spent, regardless of how many? If so, why?
if I understand it correctly when you receive bitcoins it's like having a "bitcoin note" of the denomination of the amount that you received them. so if you mine 50 BTC you get a 50 "BTC note" say. For simplicity, say you only have that 50 BTC in your wallet. You spend 1 BTC, so that "note" has to be broken - so it's like all 50 are spent, 1 BTC goes to the address you sent it to and the change of 49 BTC is returned to an address you own. So now you have 49 BTC in your wallet that are fresh (i.e. zero days old). For the BTC days destroyed calculation it's like all 50 BTC have been spent (so days destroyed = 50 x # of days you've held them) even though in reality you've sent 1 BTC and still own the other 49.
hope that's right. someone can correct me if I'm wrong.
As far as I can tell, I'm getting more or less the same results (with little differences here and there for some reason). You can see my full output here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28441300/output.txt
maybe I'm missing something but are there some errors in these numbers for BTC days destroyed? Some blocks have negative values for days destroyed.
For example see block 65711 has -151.03 BTC days destroyed. There are 48 other blocks in this csv file with negative numbers for days destroyed.
Very interesting data and analysis by the way. thanks to all concerned.
Well, looking at the Block Explorer for block 65711, it seems that the previous block 65710, which holds the redeemed output, actually has a timestamp that is later than block 65711. So, apparently the calculation is "correct", but I honestly don't know why the dates are backwards...
good spot on the time stamp inconsistencies. I was looking at the block explorer to try and make sense of the numbers but didn't notice that. Maybe someone else can explain why the time stamps are out of sync with the block numbers
This BitcoinDays Destroyed number still doesn't provide a perfect picture, it is just a much better measure than looking at raw spending totals. Here's an example:
Consider a slight variation on that ... example 5:
5. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends 1 BTC.
In Case 5 only 1 BTC was spent and 49 BTC was returned as change. There would still be 18,250 Bitcoin-days destroyed, even though the coins representing all but 365 of those Bitcoin-days remained in the same wallet.
1. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends them.
Consider a slight variation on that ... example 5:
5. Someone who mined 50 bitcoins exactly one year ago spends 1 BTC.
In Case 5 only 1 BTC was spent and 49 BTC was returned as change. There would still be 18,250 Bitcoin-days destroyed, even though the coins representing all but 365 of those Bitcoin-days remained in the same wallet.
I understood the first 4 examples, but not that example 5 you just explained. Why are all 18250 BTC days destroyed? Why not just 365? Is it because some part of the 50 that was originally minted is finally spent, regardless of how many? If so, why?
Jump to: