For wallets with more than 5 years of inactivity, we can charge a 4% per year fee.
Go start your own altcoin. There is none of that nonsense in bitcoin.
Topic: Using bitcoinrichlist to see when the big players prepare for selling (Read 3280 times)
December 04, 2013, 10:38:51 PM
Go start your own altcoin. There is none of that nonsense in bitcoin.
December 04, 2013, 10:31:59 PM
e.g more than 10 yrs inactivity 50% can be mined again 50% put in escrow for future claims.
Perhaps I have not made myself clear. What you propose is simple theft. If I want to save my XBT, and bequeath them to my great-great-grandchildren, it's none of your damn business.
Agreed 100%.
December 04, 2013, 09:09:59 PM
Edit: Also how could they miss this address https://blockchain.info/address/1F4TKLa8ioAiZSE4T47ihXY1RK3jp9dNkz it has over 90000 btc and it's not on their list.
That is a new wallet, created only a few hours ago. I think the Bitcoinrichlist is updated in the beginning of every month.
December 04, 2013, 04:13:25 PM
What are you even talking about? 
The amount of lost bitcoins is an estimation. You can't just purge coins based on estimations.
The amount of lost bitcoins is an estimation. You can't just purge coins based on estimations. December 04, 2013, 01:49:03 PM
Take a look at this address. It used to host most bitcoins, they were moved some time ago.
https://blockchain.info/address/12sENwECeRSmTeDwyLNqwh47JistZqFmW8
Edit: Also how could they miss this address https://blockchain.info/address/1F4TKLa8ioAiZSE4T47ihXY1RK3jp9dNkz it has over 90000 btc and it's not on their list.
https://blockchain.info/address/12sENwECeRSmTeDwyLNqwh47JistZqFmW8
Edit: Also how could they miss this address https://blockchain.info/address/1F4TKLa8ioAiZSE4T47ihXY1RK3jp9dNkz it has over 90000 btc and it's not on their list.
December 04, 2013, 01:22:50 PM
even if there's just 1 bitcoin left, it doesn't matter, we don't need to re-mine lost coins.
if only 1 bitcoin is left, it will be a very expensive bitcoin, but we'll just pay our everyday transactions by using nano-bitcoins or femto-bitcoins
if only 1 bitcoin is left, it will be a very expensive bitcoin, but we'll just pay our everyday transactions by using nano-bitcoins or femto-bitcoins
December 04, 2013, 07:58:43 AM
To counter this problem, I propose a very simple solution. Once it is confirmed that over 10.00% of the BTCs are "lost", then the earliest 2% should be purged and put available to mine.
What you propose is simple theft. If I want to save my XBT, and bequeath them to my great-great-grandchilluns, it's none of your damnable bidnez.
The idea to purge the earliest 2% (or however many) needs refinement. As jbreher points out it could be in store for grandchildren (however unlikely after 10yrs inactivity)
A mechanism could be discussed to deal with that issue.
e.g more than 10 yrs inactivity 50% can be mined again 50% put in escrow for future claims.
In the UK there is a legal mechanism and rules for inactive Bank accounts after 15 yrs.Also, Banks already got wise to the problem and now charge fees for inactivity (as early as 1yr) This effectively lets them take ALL the money over time.
http://www.moneysupermarket.com/savings/dormant-account-guide/
The comparison is not exactly the same as the total useable supply of fiat is not affected as it just goes somewhere else eventually. Unlike bitcoin where the total supply is affected if it can never be used (recovered/replaced) again
All i can say is WTF!!!!!!!!!! Quit trying to play banker! Let people keep whats theres. If they lost them then they lost them.... You probably want me to give you my coins if you lose yours too!
December 04, 2013, 07:29:27 AM
Here is one of bitcoins major flaws.. NO method of identifying and replacing lost coins which is unstable and potentially inflationary.
Yes... one of the biggest flaws. We assume that the number of Bitcoins in circulation will slowly increase from 2009 to 2140 and that they will stabilize by 2140. If such large numbers of BTCs are "lost", then the currency will be extremely vulnerable to deflation.
Something should be done to maintain the total number of BTCs available.
thats not a problem. you can also have just 10 mio of BTC and everything would be the same, except the price of one BTC.
bitcoin should not lead the fiat currencys rules. this amazing technology was invented to prevent inflation.
December 04, 2013, 06:38:31 AM
In the UK there is a legal mechanism and rules for inactive Bank accounts after 15 yrs.Also, Banks already got wise to the problem and now charge fees for inactivity (as early as 1yr) This effectively lets them take ALL the money over time.
This is a good idea. For wallets with more than 5 years of inactivity, we can charge a 4% per year fee.
December 04, 2013, 01:48:20 AM
I apologize. It is I that did not understand upon first reading. If you can envision a workable scheme, I am willing to listen to it.
Though I might be surprised if I did not find it to be violative of some other principle which I hold to be sacrosanct.
We might start with 'who are the deciders'?
Though I might be surprised if I did not find it to be violative of some other principle which I hold to be sacrosanct.
We might start with 'who are the deciders'?
An extremely pertinent point. WHO are the deciders? Is there anyone with the power invested in them to change things? Is there a process which they have to follow or can they make unilateral decisions. The ultimate test to any change is market demand particularly if another crypto emerges with the known "flaws" solved.
Time will tell but for sure Bitcoin is the market leader and will be for the near future.
If we can identify who can change things we can ask them what they think about such issues.
December 04, 2013, 01:38:00 AM
I apologize. It is I that did not understand upon first reading. If you can envision a workable scheme, I am willing to listen to it.
Though I might be surprised if I did not find it to be violative of some other principle which I hold to be sacrosanct.
We might start with 'who are the deciders'?
Though I might be surprised if I did not find it to be violative of some other principle which I hold to be sacrosanct.
We might start with 'who are the deciders'?
December 04, 2013, 01:34:13 AM
e.g more than 10 yrs inactivity 50% can be mined again 50% put in escrow for future claims.
Perhaps I have not made myself clear. What you propose is simple theft. If I want to save my XBT, and bequeath them to my great-great-grandchildren, it's none of your damn business.
I did understand and you have the unquestionable right to bequeath many years in the future. That right should be protected and the mechanism suggested is that your right would be protected from the 50% in escrow which would be used to pay any similar circumstance. At the same time it addresses the problem of those accounts that are really lost for ever.
I am not saying this is the solution but is a point of discussion to solve the problem of coins in lost wallets affecting supply substantially over many years.
December 04, 2013, 01:28:04 AM
e.g more than 10 yrs inactivity 50% can be mined again 50% put in escrow for future claims.
Perhaps I have not made myself clear. What you propose is simple theft. If I want to save my XBT, and bequeath them to my great-great-grandchildren, it's none of your damn business.
December 04, 2013, 01:21:03 AM
To counter this problem, I propose a very simple solution. Once it is confirmed that over 10.00% of the BTCs are "lost", then the earliest 2% should be purged and put available to mine.
What you propose is simple theft. If I want to save my XBT, and bequeath them to my great-great-grandchilluns, it's none of your damnable bidnez.
The idea to purge the earliest 2% (or however many) needs refinement. As jbreher points out it could be in store for grandchildren (however unlikely after 10yrs inactivity)
A mechanism could be discussed to deal with that issue.
e.g more than 10 yrs inactivity 50% can be mined again 50% put in escrow for future claims.
In the UK there is a legal mechanism and rules for inactive Bank accounts after 15 yrs.Also, Banks already got wise to the problem and now charge fees for inactivity (as early as 1yr) This effectively lets them take ALL the money over time.
http://www.moneysupermarket.com/savings/dormant-account-guide/
The comparison is not exactly the same as the total useable supply of fiat is not affected as it just goes somewhere else eventually. Unlike bitcoin where the total supply is affected if it can never be used (recovered/replaced) again
December 04, 2013, 12:14:42 AM
To counter this problem, I propose a very simple solution. Once it is confirmed that over 10.00% of the BTCs are "lost", then the earliest 2% should be purged and put available to mine.
What you propose is simple theft. If I want to save my XBT, and bequeath them to my great-great-grandchilluns, it's none of your damnable bidnez.
December 03, 2013, 09:24:43 AM
Thats 12M divided by .463476= 5.5617% of bitcoin potentially dead in lost wallet addresses. Now add .5% a year (average loss of currency through death (sudden or otherwise) NOT including lost wallet addresses for other reasons and in 20 yrs from today 15% of bitcoins lost 40yrs 25% + 80 yrs 45% + approx. Here is one of bitcoins major flaws.. NO method of identifying and replacing lost coins which is unstable and potentially inflationary.
As bitcoin value keeps on rising i don't think that this trend will continue. People were losing and forgetting about their coins back when they worth nothing. Today if you have 100 bitcoins normally you 'll have 100 different backups and failsafes in case that something happens to you
December 03, 2013, 09:08:37 AM
What's so bad about deflation due to lost BTC?
It is bad. BTC is supposed to be an ideal currency, which is guarded against both inflation and deflation. We neither want inflation nor deflation. Both will do harm to the financial viability of the BTC.
It should be less of a problem as time goes on and people get more and more careful with their BTCs.
I guess over the long run at some point as time approaches infinity it would have to by defn kill he system..
I guess over the long run at some point as time approaches infinity it would have to by defn kill he system..
To counter this problem, I propose a very simple solution. Once it is confirmed that over 10.00% of the BTCs are "lost", then the earliest 2% should be purged and put available to mine. That means that 420,000 BTCs will be available to be mined. This cycle can be repeated, to maintain the total number of available BTCs stable.
December 03, 2013, 07:23:15 AM
Here is one of bitcoins major flaws.. NO method of identifying and replacing lost coins which is unstable and potentially inflationary.
Yes... one of the biggest flaws. We assume that the number of Bitcoins in circulation will slowly increase from 2009 to 2140 and that they will stabilize by 2140. If such large numbers of BTCs are "lost", then the currency will be extremely vulnerable to deflation.
Something should be done to maintain the total number of BTCs available.
It should be less of a problem as time goes on and people get more and more careful with their BTCs.
I guess over the long run at some point as time approaches infinity it would have to by defn kill he system..
December 03, 2013, 07:05:17 AM
Here is one of bitcoins major flaws.. NO method of identifying and replacing lost coins which is unstable and potentially inflationary.
Yes... one of the biggest flaws. We assume that the number of Bitcoins in circulation will slowly increase from 2009 to 2140 and that they will stabilize by 2140. If such large numbers of BTCs are "lost", then the currency will be extremely vulnerable to deflation.
Something should be done to maintain the total number of BTCs available.
December 03, 2013, 06:43:47 AM
By switching to the top 500 address list there are a number of wallets with no activity since 2010 and 2011. The probability that these are LOST addresses is high as is the value.
Anyone want to work out the % of coins involved?
Anyone want to work out the % of coins involved?
That is disturbing.
I noticed one BTC wallet, which is not active ever since 2009! (198aMn6ZYAczwrE5NvNTUMyJ5qkfy4g3Hi)
This is the number of BTCs trapped in the top 500 wallets, by the year of last activity:
Year 2009: 1 wallet & 8,000 BTC
Year 2010: 10 wallets & 47,466.93 BTC
Year 2011: 104 wallets & 408,009.50 BTC
All together, 115 wallets with 463,476.43 BTC in them.
GOOD JOB!
Thats 12M divided by .463476= 5.5617% of bitcoin potentially dead in lost wallet addresses. Now add .5% a year (average loss of currency through death (sudden or otherwise) NOT including lost wallet addresses for other reasons and in 20 yrs from today 15% of bitcoins lost 40yrs 25% + 80 yrs 45% + approx. Here is one of bitcoins major flaws.. NO method of identifying and replacing lost coins which is unstable and potentially inflationary.
EDIT
Wrong maths
Revised % is actually 3.8% ...... 12M divided by 463476 = 25.9..100 divided by 25.9 = 3.8% slightly lower but the principal is the same and does not count any losses from the other 11M wallets not in the Top 500 against the same number of coins.
Jump to: