I found this story fascinating:
Apparently, there was a 'bug" (or rather technically undefined area) in the original bitcoin code that would produce ANOTHER 21 mil btc starting in the year 256 from the get-go.
The "bug" was eradicated in BIP-42, which was done post-Satoshi.
Without BIP-42, rewards of 50BTC would restart in 256 years, then halvings would continue again (from 50btc/reward to down).
A bit of 'conspiracy' theory on my side, but how do we know that this was not the Satoshi's intent?
I keep reading about 4 mil 'lost" already in just 14 years.
What if Satoshi surmised that this loss in 256 years (with issuance stopping by year 2140) would bring available bitcoin numbers too low and actually designed the "bug" to revitalize bitcoin about a century after. Interesting, but would not affect things in our lifespan, perhaps.
See the discussion of BIP-42 here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4r878s/in_case_you_missed_it_two_years_ago_bip_42_is/
Apparently, there was a 'bug" (or rather technically undefined area) in the original bitcoin code that would produce ANOTHER 21 mil btc starting in the year 256 from the get-go.
The "bug" was eradicated in BIP-42, which was done post-Satoshi.
Without BIP-42, rewards of 50BTC would restart in 256 years, then halvings would continue again (from 50btc/reward to down).
A bit of 'conspiracy' theory on my side, but how do we know that this was not the Satoshi's intent?
I keep reading about 4 mil 'lost" already in just 14 years.
What if Satoshi surmised that this loss in 256 years (with issuance stopping by year 2140) would bring available bitcoin numbers too low and actually designed the "bug" to revitalize bitcoin about a century after. Interesting, but would not affect things in our lifespan, perhaps.
See the discussion of BIP-42 here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4r878s/in_case_you_missed_it_two_years_ago_bip_42_is/
You have a relatively creative imagination, yet what you are describing could not have been Satoshi's intent.
It does not make any sense to start the issuing of blockrewards over again at 50 coins per ever 10 minutes... that would really fuck up incentives and overall value... so that's a bug.. not a "hidden - true intention" of satoshi.
Perhaps it was not his intent, albeit we would never know, I assume, but, then, how to deal with bitcoin "evaporation"?
We, as a humanity, seem to have lost about 20% of ALL bitcoins that would ever be in a short 14 years.
I know that people dismiss it and say that the rest are just getting more valuable. True, but only in a short time.
However, think about it long term: a complete loss is inevitable within relatively short historical time frames.
So far, we were losing btc at a 1.36%
With the same rate of loss going forward, it would be 59.5
If the loss would decrease by a factor of 10, then it is 595
I find it amusing that the original code of Satoshi had in it a "revitalization" of bitcoin by a new issuance cycle after 256 years.
As 256 is < than 350 (my original number), but > than 59.5 there might
There could be another solution (but I like Satoshi's better):
1. Change to the address system so everybody has to send their btc every, say, 50
2. From that, surmise the actual "losses" and make a small random seepage of new btc, so total number never exceeds 21 mil. Not sure how to do it in code.
TL;DR All bitcoin will eventually "evaporate" according to the current code and historical human behavior. BIP-42 might have been detrimental to the future (hundreds of years from now).
EDIT: the math is even worse: 1.36% loss a year, see correction. We would need to know the average loss per year pretty soon, maybe in the next couple of decades.
Be reminded of this quote:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1647
Your solution to a problem, that very well may or may not happen, will be more of a detriment to the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Forcing people to act a certain way in order to keep participating?.. where to next?
Changing the rules mid game is the reason why we are in this situation. Dollar back by faith not gold, money printer go brrr! de-valuation of your money and time, etc etc.
I have to strongly disagree with you that bitcoin will eventually "evaporate". If we humans are so dumb to "lose access" to every single bitcoin, every single sat, then we have bigger issues to worry about.
Historical human behavior, relatively short in the grand scheme of things, has shown, we are exceptionally good at doing what humans do, and that is survive!
I wish you were right.
However, if we continue to lose 1.36% of all btc a year, then it is a problem, isn't it?
Now, that you found that quote, it looks like that the 256 year 'solution' was really an omission from him than intent.
I can only think that he wasn't aware of the scope of the problem back in 2010, because the argument that "Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more" holds water only until all are lost, which is a finite amount of time, especially if it is that much a year (less than 60 years).
Whatever solutions I wrote in-I don't care about them, just a small suggestion, it could be something else, but the eventual "evaporation" problem is real and cannot be dismissed easily, and even mathematically as long as the loss is material and there is no add-ons after 2140.
