Topic: Satoshi Nakamoto - 1,5 million Bitcoins - We need answers - page 3. (Read 52546 times)
This thread is 1,5 years old. !
ridiculous
+1, brother
ridiculous
Probably just sent it to his email, thought it be a neat trap to set; I mean would you touch it if you were Satoshi? Thats like a historical transaction a monumental moment.
and then forgot the password to his e-mail. lol.
This may have come up. But as I have understood it, Satoshi left a lot of wallets with 50BTC in each. He/they probably don't even have the wallet.dat to go with them.
My take on this is that they might lie there as "bait", either to show vulnerability if there suddently is activity in that area of the blockchain, or to work as a faucet/mining blocks when BTC's have become more scarse and computer-power a lot better than today.
It would not suprise me too much if there is some message beeing sent out from some old university-computer some time in the future.
My take on this is that they might lie there as "bait", either to show vulnerability if there suddently is activity in that area of the blockchain, or to work as a faucet/mining blocks when BTC's have become more scarse and computer-power a lot better than today.
It would not suprise me too much if there is some message beeing sent out from some old university-computer some time in the future.
so the original 50BTC in the genesis block are untouched then? This would be an excellent strategy, Old bitcoins could be brought back into the market when the block chain gets cut and stored, it will be easier to crack those codes secretly... creating a secret sepage of coins into the general market.
but Your right I also think that if those coins got touched, the entire network would become aware of it within nanoseconds, it would tell the network that the SHA256 encryption has been broken. Those blocks will be easier to crack than modern ones.
lol! Necrothread.
This may have come up. But as I have understood it, Satoshi left a lot of wallets with 50BTC in each. He/they probably don't even have the wallet.dat to go with them.
My take on this is that they might lie there as "bait", either to show vulnerability if there suddently is activity in that area of the blockchain, or to work as a faucet/mining blocks when BTC's have become more scarse and computer-power a lot better than today.
It would not suprise me too much if there is some message beeing sent out from some old university-computer some time in the future.
My take on this is that they might lie there as "bait", either to show vulnerability if there suddently is activity in that area of the blockchain, or to work as a faucet/mining blocks when BTC's have become more scarse and computer-power a lot better than today.
It would not suprise me too much if there is some message beeing sent out from some old university-computer some time in the future.
legendary
Activity: 1862
Merit: 1011
Reverse engineer from time to time
Necrothread.
Until this questions are not answered, and I am pretty sure the person/group behind this project can read this, we should really reconsider buying in until we get some answers. If this is going to get big, this questions will always hunt us until they are answered.
Got someone in your pocket?
probally owns a supercomputer that puts out a few PetaFLOPs
I'm pretty sure he doesn't. When you own >5% of any given currency, you don't need more. Also: Satoshi seems to be a sensible guy and one that knows when to retreat and let others take over. He's done his share well and got rewarded. Let's hope he changed the world with this.
This step Satoshi took, i believe he did it for us. If you read the paper, it is clear satoshi looked for an answer that would share the wealth with everyone, Satoshi He or she wanted to change the world, and I bet my ass Satoshi would never have taken a single Bitcoin, Satoshi wanted it to go to the real Satoshi, You see Satoshi is everyone of us that believes in a better world, and is willing to prove it by learning, sharing, collaborating, creating, mining for the good of the collective.
Satoshi the founder stepped away when their brilliance was spent and only the combined insights/intelligence/knowledge/integrity and wisdom of the people could make Satoshis creation truly brilliant, Satoshi could not hold back the potential of what they had created... that is how dictatorships are made; Satoshi believed in p2p/distribution networks, why would he have become it's central authority?
In my opinion, only simple bartering remains the solution to all currency issues. It places importance primarily on the process of exchange, not on the products or a currency and thus facilitates healthy person-to-person communication. I think civilization had it right to begin with and then currency came along and jacked the whole thing up (e.g. paper money is not important to me, but it's important to everyone else, so THEN it becomes important to me and displaces my values. Bitcoin is no different).
And, it is also my opinion that the theory behind Bitcoin isn't that brilliant. The brilliance came from putting the pieces together (i.e. taking the theory, creating a mathematical analogue of it, representing that analogue in a computer program, and marketing it) and having the motivation to actually do it without knowing if it would catch on. I, along with many of you, also have many brilliant ideas but we simply don't try to fulfill them to their ends because we think they might fail. If they fail, it's a waste of our damn time. And I have objections to Bitcoin because I think it is weak in theory, but strong enough to 1.) Be better than traditional fiat currencies and 2.) Gain the respect of a significant number of people. It's a currency for the at-least moderately wealthy and computer literate. It is not a currency for the poor or the uneducated (I use uneducated in a very general sense here to represent those who will have trouble understanding it and would need to dedicate a very significant amount of time to do so).
And, it is also my opinion that the theory behind Bitcoin isn't that brilliant. The brilliance came from putting the pieces together (i.e. taking the theory, creating a mathematical analogue of it, representing that analogue in a computer program, and marketing it) and having the motivation to actually do it without knowing if it would catch on. I, along with many of you, also have many brilliant ideas but we simply don't try to fulfill them to their ends because we think they might fail. If they fail, it's a waste of our damn time. And I have objections to Bitcoin because I think it is weak in theory, but strong enough to 1.) Be better than traditional fiat currencies and 2.) Gain the respect of a significant number of people. It's a currency for the at-least moderately wealthy and computer literate. It is not a currency for the poor or the uneducated (I use uneducated in a very general sense here to represent those who will have trouble understanding it and would need to dedicate a very significant amount of time to do so).
that's copy-pasted from post above by "The Joint": https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.462367
why are you doing this?
Perhaps it was by chance that both posts are identical? Creationism and Pseudomathematics: http://ncse.com/book/export/html/3010
In my opinion, only simple bartering remains the solution to all currency issues. It places importance primarily on the process of exchange, not on the products or a currency and thus facilitates healthy person-to-person communication. I think civilization had it right to begin with and then currency came along and jacked the whole thing up (e.g. paper money is not important to me, but it's important to everyone else, so THEN it becomes important to me and displaces my values. Bitcoin is no different).
And, it is also my opinion that the theory behind Bitcoin isn't that brilliant. The brilliance came from putting the pieces together (i.e. taking the theory, creating a mathematical analogue of it, representing that analogue in a computer program, and marketing it) and having the motivation to actually do it without knowing if it would catch on. I, along with many of you, also have many brilliant ideas but we simply don't try to fulfill them to their ends because we think they might fail. If they fail, it's a waste of our damn time. And I have objections to Bitcoin because I think it is weak in theory, but strong enough to 1.) Be better than traditional fiat currencies and 2.) Gain the respect of a significant number of people. It's a currency for the at-least moderately wealthy and computer literate. It is not a currency for the poor or the uneducated (I use uneducated in a very general sense here to represent those who will have trouble understanding it and would need to dedicate a very significant amount of time to do so).
And, it is also my opinion that the theory behind Bitcoin isn't that brilliant. The brilliance came from putting the pieces together (i.e. taking the theory, creating a mathematical analogue of it, representing that analogue in a computer program, and marketing it) and having the motivation to actually do it without knowing if it would catch on. I, along with many of you, also have many brilliant ideas but we simply don't try to fulfill them to their ends because we think they might fail. If they fail, it's a waste of our damn time. And I have objections to Bitcoin because I think it is weak in theory, but strong enough to 1.) Be better than traditional fiat currencies and 2.) Gain the respect of a significant number of people. It's a currency for the at-least moderately wealthy and computer literate. It is not a currency for the poor or the uneducated (I use uneducated in a very general sense here to represent those who will have trouble understanding it and would need to dedicate a very significant amount of time to do so).
that's copy-pasted from post above by "The Joint": https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.462367
why are you doing this?
In my opinion, only simple bartering remains the solution to all currency issues. It places importance primarily on the process of exchange, not on the products or a currency and thus facilitates healthy person-to-person communication. I think civilization had it right to begin with and then currency came along and jacked the whole thing up (e.g. paper money is not important to me, but it's important to everyone else, so THEN it becomes important to me and displaces my values. Bitcoin is no different).
And, it is also my opinion that the theory behind Bitcoin isn't that brilliant. The brilliance came from putting the pieces together (i.e. taking the theory, creating a mathematical analogue of it, representing that analogue in a computer program, and marketing it) and having the motivation to actually do it without knowing if it would catch on. I, along with many of you, also have many brilliant ideas but we simply don't try to fulfill them to their ends because we think they might fail. If they fail, it's a waste of our damn time. And I have objections to Bitcoin because I think it is weak in theory, but strong enough to 1.) Be better than traditional fiat currencies and 2.) Gain the respect of a significant number of people. It's a currency for the at-least moderately wealthy and computer literate. It is not a currency for the poor or the uneducated (I use uneducated in a very general sense here to represent those who will have trouble understanding it and would need to dedicate a very significant amount of time to do so).
-DiamondPlus
And, it is also my opinion that the theory behind Bitcoin isn't that brilliant. The brilliance came from putting the pieces together (i.e. taking the theory, creating a mathematical analogue of it, representing that analogue in a computer program, and marketing it) and having the motivation to actually do it without knowing if it would catch on. I, along with many of you, also have many brilliant ideas but we simply don't try to fulfill them to their ends because we think they might fail. If they fail, it's a waste of our damn time. And I have objections to Bitcoin because I think it is weak in theory, but strong enough to 1.) Be better than traditional fiat currencies and 2.) Gain the respect of a significant number of people. It's a currency for the at-least moderately wealthy and computer literate. It is not a currency for the poor or the uneducated (I use uneducated in a very general sense here to represent those who will have trouble understanding it and would need to dedicate a very significant amount of time to do so).
-DiamondPlus
I remember someone saying on this forum Satoshi himself would not have that many coins.
there is information burried on this forum to break up that 1.5MBTC somewhat further:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--564
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-richest-users-on-the-bitcoin-forum-24346
there is information burried on this forum to break up that 1.5MBTC somewhat further:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--564
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-richest-users-on-the-bitcoin-forum-24346
this makes me think, maby we should start over.
later, some real issues could come along if an early adopter decided or simply gets compromised and the market gets flooded.
however this should not be done now, we should wait a few more months.
later, some real issues could come along if an early adopter decided or simply gets compromised and the market gets flooded.
however this should not be done now, we should wait a few more months.
If you do create a new fork, why not just make a mechanism which allows for the destruction of coins as well?
Then just mine & destroy the first few million easy coins in a way which can be publically proven & seen to have taken place.
After that, release it to the public.
Or start at a higher difficulty right away.
Then just mine & destroy the first few million easy coins in a way which can be publically proven & seen to have taken place.
After that, release it to the public.
Or start at a higher difficulty right away.
Oh, MMFG! Does anybody else realized what could have been released here? Nothing would stop an individual from doing what Jack of Diamonds just divulged. Somewhere down the road there possibly could be an all out virtual currency war--one chain (rhymes with gang) taking out another chain, all in the name of increasing its worth.
This just in here at CNNNN&N! Although full details are not yet available, sources from the net confirm that users of BieberCoin have destroyed another million Bitcoin. Bitcoin, the granddaddy of virtual currency, is currently fighting a 17 front war. As you recall, yesterday we reported that it was way to quiet over at the Bieber camp, and that an attack seemed imminent. Today, our suspicion proved correct. We're joined now with Hash Newman, over at the AnonLulzCoin camp. Howdy, Hash. Nice outfit you're wearing. You seem to blend right in...
Hmmm... except with each bitcoin destroyed, the value of all other bitcoins will just go up... it'd be like shooting yourself in the foot.
I had a nice little war ready to start here, until you brought logic into the equation.
So what?
Even if Satoshi holds all these Bitcoins, at current market prices he would only have $15 million.
Compare this to Bill Gates who also created a revolutionary type of software and who now owns something like $50 billion, that's 3000 times more
Yet Satoshi could more permanent damage to Bitcoin than Gates could do to USD. That's the concern for most people.Even if Satoshi holds all these Bitcoins, at current market prices he would only have $15 million.
Compare this to Bill Gates who also created a revolutionary type of software and who now owns something like $50 billion, that's 3000 times more
And the fed can and is doing permanent damage to the dollar, people don't seem to care so much about that. The design of bitcoin is absolute genius, santioshi deserves how ever many coins he has , simply because they would never have existed without him. The chain was public from day one, people just did not know it existed.
So what?
Even if Satoshi holds all these Bitcoins, at current market prices he would only have $15 million.
Compare this to Bill Gates who also created a revolutionary type of software and who now owns something like $50 billion, that's 3000 times more.
Even if Satoshi holds all these Bitcoins, at current market prices he would only have $15 million.
Compare this to Bill Gates who also created a revolutionary type of software and who now owns something like $50 billion, that's 3000 times more.
Yet Satoshi could more permanent damage to Bitcoin than Gates could do to USD. That's the concern for most people.
So what?
Even if Satoshi holds all these Bitcoins, at current market prices he would only have $15 million.
Compare this to Bill Gates who also created a revolutionary type of software and who now owns something like $50 billion, that's 3000 times more.
Even if Satoshi holds all these Bitcoins, at current market prices he would only have $15 million.
Compare this to Bill Gates who also created a revolutionary type of software and who now owns something like $50 billion, that's 3000 times more.
If you do create a new fork, why not just make a mechanism which allows for the destruction of coins as well?
Then just mine & destroy the first few million easy coins in a way which can be publically proven & seen to have taken place.
After that, release it to the public.
Or start at a higher difficulty right away.
Then just mine & destroy the first few million easy coins in a way which can be publically proven & seen to have taken place.
After that, release it to the public.
Or start at a higher difficulty right away.
Oh, MMFG! Does anybody else realized what could have been released here? Nothing would stop an individual from doing what Jack of Diamonds just divulged. Somewhere down the road there possibly could be an all out virtual currency war--one chain (rhymes with gang) taking out another chain, all in the name of increasing its worth.
This just in here at CNNNN&N! Although full details are not yet available, sources from the net confirm that users of BieberCoin have destroyed another million Bitcoin. Bitcoin, the granddaddy of virtual currency, is currently fighting a 17 front war. As you recall, yesterday we reported that it was way to quiet over at the Bieber camp, and that an attack seemed imminent. Today, our suspicion proved correct. We're joined now with Hash Newman, over at the AnonLulzCoin camp. Howdy, Hash. Nice outfit you're wearing. You seem to blend right in...
Hmmm... except with each bitcoin destroyed, the value of all other bitcoins will just go up... it'd be like shooting yourself in the foot.
Jump to: