What to do with lost bitcoins - page 4.

AgentofCoin

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: deisik on December 09, 2016, 03:31:50 PM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 03:20:30 PM

Quote from: deisik on December 09, 2016, 02:40:45 PM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 01:39:42 PM

Let me get this straight:
1. miner finds a block
2. miner adds pending transactions, and also checks past work for "expired txs".
3. if a previously confirmed yet now "expired tx" is found, the miner debits that address.
4. the miner forwards the debited amount to another address or piggy bank, presumably by a miner controlled tx.
5. Since this is an agreed protocol change, all nodes accept this and relay it as valid.

So if the above is correct, what is the mechanism that allows the miner to debit the address without a privatekey?

As I understand it, the miner wouldn't need the key altogether since that would be a special transaction debiting the wallet directly, completely bypassing the keys, and all subsequent transactions from that wallet will be processed taking into account this transaction, if they are to be allowed at all. Since it will be based on the expired transaction (so you can't just take and debit any arbitrary wallet in a similar way), there is no possible backdoor here. And consequently, no possibility for government interference or regulation...

Whatever you might mean by those

Debiting (and crediting in theory) by anyone other than privatekey controller

You asked how it can be done, I answered

And it is irrelevant whether direct debiting is forbidden or not. Besides, it remains to be seen yet whether such transactions are forbidden at all. If they are in fact forbidden that pretty much means that they are possible even now (despite what you have been claiming to the contrary). In any case, the question is not about debiting random wallets (as I have already pointed out), but only those wallets whose owners specifically scheduled such a transaction, for whatever purpose. I think there is no point in arguing over this issue any more

I asked for a detailed mechanism. You are waving your hand and just saying it could be done.
Of course it could be done. Almost all things can be done in this universe. We could genetically
engineer pigs to fly for the shits and giggles. But that doesn't mean it should be done.
In fact, placing a debiting system is a spit into the face of this novel system and Satoshi.

Very plainly, it is a betrayal of our origin. I am telling you the truth to the best of my ability
and you still disagree which is fine, but you do not disagree based on a fact, but on a belief.

Do yourself a favor and ask people who are more knowledgeable than both of us within the
development section. If you can't accept the answer they provide you, then I don't understand
why you are really here bothering to participate with bitcoin and the Bitcoin network.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 03:20:30 PM

Quote from: deisik on December 09, 2016, 02:40:45 PM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 01:39:42 PM

Let me get this straight:
1. miner finds a block
2. miner adds pending transactions, and also checks past work for "expired txs".
3. if a previously confirmed yet now "expired tx" is found, the miner debits that address.
4. the miner forwards the debited amount to another address or piggy bank, presumably by a miner controlled tx.
5. Since this is an agreed protocol change, all nodes accept this and relay it as valid.

So if the above is correct, what is the mechanism that allows the miner to debit the address without a privatekey?

As I understand it, the miner wouldn't need the key altogether since that would be a special transaction debiting the wallet directly, completely bypassing the keys, and all subsequent transactions from that wallet will be processed taking into account this transaction, if they are to be allowed at all. Since it will be based on the expired transaction (so you can't just take and debit any arbitrary wallet in a similar way), there is no possible backdoor here. And consequently, no possibility for government interference or regulation...

Whatever you might mean by those

Debiting (and crediting in theory) by anyone other than privatekey controller

You asked how it can be done, I answered

And it is irrelevant whether direct debiting is forbidden or not. Besides, it remains to be seen yet whether such transactions are forbidden at all. If they are in fact forbidden that pretty much means that they are possible even now (despite what you have been claiming to the contrary). In any case, the question is not about debiting random wallets (as I have already pointed out), but only those wallets whose owners specifically scheduled such a transaction, for whatever purpose. I think there is no point in arguing over this issue any more

Tanic

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: rajasumi3 on December 08, 2016, 12:34:31 PM

this is the loop hole of bitcoins and its blockchain .and i think in the future run wehn the top programmers will find a good solution for this problem and recover all the bitcoins that have been lost then it would be awesome .

I think that is just impossible to recover those bitcoins that already have been lost. The one thing that programmers can do is to create some perfect protection to bitcoin wallets and exchangers. But as we all know - there is nothing perfect.

AgentofCoin

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: deisik on December 09, 2016, 02:40:45 PM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 01:39:42 PM

Let me get this straight:
1. miner finds a block
2. miner adds pending transactions, and also checks past work for "expired txs".
3. if a previously confirmed yet now "expired tx" is found, the miner debits that address.
4. the miner forwards the debited amount to another address or piggy bank, presumably by a miner controlled tx.
5. Since this is an agreed protocol change, all nodes accept this and relay it as valid.

So if the above is correct, what is the mechanism that allows the miner to debit the address without a privatekey?

As I understand it, the miner wouldn't need the key altogether since that would be a special transaction debiting the wallet directly, completely bypassing the keys, and all subsequent transactions from that wallet will be processed taking into account this transaction, if they are to be allowed at all. Since it will be based on the expired transaction (so you can't just take and debit any arbitrary wallet in a similar way), there is no possible backdoor here. And consequently, no possibility for government interference or regulation...

Whatever you might mean by those

Debiting (and crediting in theory) by anyone other than privatekey controller
is strictly forbidden within Bitcoin, even miners have no power to do that now,
and I believe they don't want that power since they will carry more liability.

Not allowing debiting is a fact within the Bitcoin community and is not in any dispute.

The Bitcoin system is founded on the principle and designed that debiting is immoral.
The current bitcoin economy and ecosystem is based on the fundamental truth that debiting is
strictly forbidden.

If you want a system that can debit an address, it must be a secondary layer or a thirdparty
system. It can not and will not be allowed within the protocol. I would suggest you write up
your idea and post it in the development section of this forum and see what they tell you.

*But I think as a work around, you could do a CLTV tx for 50 years into the future that sends the
bitcoins to your donation address. If you do not invalidate that pending tx with RBF and Non-CLTV tx
than before the end of 50 years, it will be placed into a block and confirm to the donation address in
50 years. That would solve your issue without debiting system or miner control to backdoor.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 01:39:42 PM

Let me get this straight:
1. miner finds a block
2. miner adds pending transactions, and also checks past work for "expired txs".
3. if a previously confirmed yet now "expired tx" is found, the miner debits that address.
4. the miner forwards the debited amount to another address or piggy bank, presumably by a miner controlled tx.
5. Since this is an agreed protocol change, all nodes accept this and relay it as valid.

So if the above is correct, what is the mechanism that allows the miner to debit the address without a privatekey?

As I understand it, the miner wouldn't need the key altogether since that would be a special transaction debiting the wallet directly, completely bypassing the keys, and all subsequent transactions from that wallet will be processed taking into account this transaction, if they are to be allowed at all. Since it will be based on the expired transaction (so you can't just take and debit any arbitrary wallet in a similar way), there is no possible backdoor here. And consequently, no possibility for government interference or regulation...

Whatever you might mean by those

CroIsBest

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Yea i agree also with that because why money should be in one wallet and no touched that will not help to economy money is for using not only for stay in same place and just stay and stay that is really bad.

AgentofCoin

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: deisik on December 09, 2016, 12:19:14 PM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 11:50:06 AM

Please explain in detail how the mechanism will work without using the privatekey.

That should be self-evident, shouldn't it?

Nevertheless, when a miner finds a new block, he checks for expired transactions (such transactions might be already sorted and queued to speed things up) and adds a transaction with special attributes that debits the wallet in the amount of the expired transaction and sends the money to some piggy bank. Since this is a special transaction based on the expired transaction, it gets confirmed by other nodes. That's pretty much all there's to it, at least, as far as I understand it. How to properly unmine bitcoins, I don't know. But I don't think either that it should be any harder than that

Let me get this straight:
1. miner finds a block
2. miner adds pending transactions, and also checks past work for "expired txs".
3. if a previously confirmed yet now "expired tx" is found, the miner debits that address.
4. the miner forwards the debited amount to another address or piggy bank, presumably by a miner controlled tx.
5. Since this is an agreed protocol change, all nodes accept this and relay it as valid.

So if the above is correct, what is the mechanism that allows the miner to debit the address without a privatekey?
Currently, the only way to move bitcoins is with the privatekey OR by a hardfork that would make the
blockchain no longer an immutable ledger system.

If another system is added to Bitcoin to allow debiting or whatever, that could be used by governmental regulators.
Currently, governmental regulators can not do anything because no one party holds enough power.
Only the privatekey holder controls the coins, as designed by Satoshi.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 11:50:06 AM

Please explain in detail how the mechanism will work without using the privatekey.

That should be self-evident, shouldn't it?

Nevertheless, when a miner finds a new block, he checks for expired transactions (such transactions might be already sorted and queued to speed things up) and adds a transaction with special attributes that debits the wallet in the amount of the expired transaction and sends the money to some piggy bank. Since this is a special transaction based on the expired transaction, it gets confirmed by other nodes. That's pretty much all there's to it, at least, as far as I understand it. How to properly unmine bitcoins, I don't know. But I don't think either that it should be any harder than that

AgentofCoin

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: deisik on December 09, 2016, 11:45:00 AM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 11:24:42 AM

I am not going to explain how it could lead to government regulation. It should be self evident.

There is nothing that could validate the claim you made. It was obvious right from the start, that's why I kept asking you. Nothing would essentially change in the way how transactions get confirmed by the network. There is no backdoor in that either, and can't possibly be since hacking that would require hacking the whole network. Regarding moving the coins after the term expires, you don't need any keys, all you need is confirmation of the respective transaction by the network...

You just need to add the update for making such transactions possible to the Bitcoin code

You never answer or comment on my prior statements.
You only take one point in my answer and change the subject to that.

Please explain in detail how the mechanism will work without using the privatekey.

What you have stated previously and continuously is not based in any reality.
You are only saying it should be easy and no problem.

Please explain in detail why. Please explain why I am mistaken.
Please design the mechanism that will not violate all the protocol and social rules
so that we can evaluate it and determine if it could lead to footings for regulation.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 11:24:42 AM

I am not going to explain how it could lead to government regulation. It should be self evident.

There is nothing that could validate the claim you made. It was obvious right from the start, that's why I kept asking you. Nothing would essentially change in the way how transactions get confirmed by the network. There is no backdoor in that either, and can't possibly be since hacking that would require hacking the whole network. Regarding moving the coins after the term expires, you don't need any keys, all you need is confirmation of the respective transaction by the network. Basically, you just need to add an update for making such transactions possible to the Bitcoin code...

Since bitcoins themselves are the transactions written in the blockchain and confirmed by the miners

AgentofCoin

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: deisik on December 09, 2016, 04:39:18 AM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on December 09, 2016, 02:44:47 AM

Quote from: deisik on December 09, 2016, 02:34:30 AM

I still can't fathom how that could possibly allow any footing for regulating Bitcoin by the authorities. Let's assume that funds can be forcefully moved without the necessity of possessing the keys. After all, that's what my suggestion comes down to. For example, if some variable associated with the address is set to, say, 50, which should be interpreted in terms of years, after that period of time, coins get moved to another address or just considered as unmined and the transaction(s) which added these coins to that address are marked as invalid in the next block. But that would still have to be confirmed by the whole network, right?

So where is the backdoor for regulating Bitcoin here?

Very simply, if your variable is met at 50 years, the coins would need to move without a privatekey telling them so.
Basically, your original tx would have stated that if no movement within 50, then selfmove to coin jar or other.
The issue here is that there can be no "selfmove" without another mechanism like a privatekey.
The only way to do that is by a backdoor.

... Also, I don't see why all previous blocks should be invalidated. You seem to assume that the original transaction that put the money into the wallet (and which also set its lifetime to 50 years) should be invalidated, whereas in fact it will remain valid forever. I talk about a new transaction that would just end its term, if you want me to put it this way. Thereby, there is no point in invalidating any blocks or transactions at all...

And I still can't understand how that could potentially contribute to possible government regulations

You are suggesting creating a new tx format that has term limits, that after a term expires,
that the coins selfmove to another address or moves back into the coinbase (which I am not
sure is possible, without invalidation and chain destruction).

Can you please explain in detail the mechanism used to move the coins after the term, without using the privatekey?
Bitcoin does not and will not ever use complex smart contracting, so please explain without using such a system.

I am not going to explain how it could lead to government regulation. It should be self evident.
I shouldn't have to explain how government agencies and regulations function and are able to enforce their will.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Dudeperfect on December 09, 2016, 10:03:41 AM

Quote from: rapazev on December 08, 2016, 06:54:47 PM

most people in investing in bitcoin are in it for the future. People buy it, send it to a wallet, save the privkey and never look back(at least for a few years). i even remember of post around here of a guy who bought 2~4 bitcoins using his savings and hided the keys in a pendrive in his backyard(burried).

So, how would you know which wallet has "lost" bitcoins and which is just holding for the years?

Yes I can remember him too.. Yes it is the fact that people are looking it as an investment but I think we should look at it as the medium of exchange instead of investment. Bitcoin's prime feature is the lowst fees as compared to fiat and hence we should treat it like a medium of exchange and not as a commodity to buy and sell (we do that, including me) and we need to improve. Trading is not bad but we should focus on core elements of bitcoin

We may not be there yet

Bitcoin may not have yet reached that level of adoption that would justify its use a currency on purely economic grounds. Any currency to be used as a means of payment should first get widespread, for example, like gold had been across the world. On the other hand, while Bitcoin adoption is still expanding at a fast rate with its price growing, it may not be quite useful as a full-fledged currency since most vendors and merchants wouldn't want to accept it as payment if it is not widely recognized and its price is constantly changing at that

Dudeperfect

hero member

Activity: 1190

Merit: 534

Quote from: rapazev on December 08, 2016, 06:54:47 PM

most people in investing in bitcoin are in it for the future. People buy it, send it to a wallet, save the privkey and never look back(at least for a few years). i even remember of post around here of a guy who bought 2~4 bitcoins using his savings and hided the keys in a pendrive in his backyard(burried).

So, how would you know which wallet has "lost" bitcoins and which is just holding for the years?

Yes I can remember him too.. Yes it is the fact that people are looking it as an investment but I think we should look at it as the medium of exchange instead of investment. Bitcoin's prime feature is the lowst fees as compared to fiat and hence we should treat it like a medium of exchange and not as a commodity to buy and sell (we do that, including me) and we need to improve. Trading is not bad but we should focus on core elements of bitcoin.

stark101

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

if someone lost their bitcoins well, its very sorry to his part. I know there are many people encountered this kind of situations. The question is whether or not those coins are lost for good.

But can lost Bitcoins be recovered? well, it is very impossible to recover the lost coins. In fact it, this kind of situations maybe can be preventive if the users can be more careful and aware of what they do even in sending bitcoins to someone.

Zadicar

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1020

DGbet.fun - Crypto Sportsbook

Quote from: saiha on December 09, 2016, 07:22:39 AM

Quote from: thisappointed on December 09, 2016, 06:32:04 AM

What to do with lost bitcoins? Just simply accept the fact the it was already gone, move on and continue on earning some because thinking over and over again where did it go will just make you confused and you will just get yourself stress just because of that.

Yes it is lost forever and we can't anything just to recover those losses. If you wanted to recover those, then stop thinking of some ways of recovering that.

And don't do the same with those people who totally forgot their bitcoins in their wallet or else you will add to the sum of those lost bitcoin forever.

Thats why we should be very careful on our bitcoin so that it wont be easily lost and we should really keep our private keys and other back up that needs when you accidentally forgot something regarding on your wallet so that you could still able to retrieve it when that thing happen. You are right we should not stressed out ourselves to think on how to get those lost bitcoin back.

saiha

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 501

Strength in Numbers

Quote from: thisappointed on December 09, 2016, 06:32:04 AM

What to do with lost bitcoins? Just simply accept the fact the it was already gone, move on and continue on earning some because thinking over and over again where did it go will just make you confused and you will just get yourself stress just because of that.

Yes it is lost forever and we can't anything just to recover those losses. If you wanted to recover those, then stop thinking of some ways of recovering that.

And don't do the same with those people who totally forgot their bitcoins in their wallet or else you will add to the sum of those lost bitcoin forever.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: ranochigo on December 09, 2016, 05:26:46 AM

Quote from: deisik on December 08, 2016, 12:29:21 PM

We all know that there can be no more than 21M bitcoins. We also know that every day some bitcoins get lost forever. That means that they still exist on the blockchain, but no one can access them since the keys are lost. I don't think that this is a right thing. We should recover these coins somehow, and that issue could be addressed eventually. I suggest setting a grace period of, say, 10 years (or 50 years if 10 years is too little) after which all wallets that remain untouched during that time and not reclaimed by anyone, should be declared as public property. The transactions that credited these bitcoins to such a wallet should be cancelled (just like correcting entries are made in a real ledger), and the coins should be moved to a new wallet, for example, to finance scientific research...

It isn't important to have 21 million Bitcoin. Bitcoin can divided into smaller part and each unit of Bitcoin becomes much more valuable if more coins are getting lost. If you are moving the coins from an address that has no activity for a long time, what is the difference between this and theft? The coins are rightfully the owner's even if they don't want to touch it or has lost it

If the owner is no longer alive, these coins should be considered as left for dead too, unless his heirs take possession of them, of course. I think there are a lot of people who would be happy to donate their stashes to charities or, for example, medical research should they pass away (I myself would opt for the scientific research without doubt), but they might want to do it right, to do in the Bitcoin way...

That is, by employing the blockchain itself and not corrupt government agencies

thisappointed

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 502

What to do with lost bitcoins? Just simply accept the fact the it was already gone, move on and continue on earning some because thinking over and over again where did it go will just make you confused and you will just get yourself stress just because of that.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Yuuto on December 09, 2016, 03:12:24 AM

But, doesn't that take away the entire point of bitcoin as a safe haven? That means people are forced to move their coins every 10 years or so, and keep track of it. Might not sound like a big deal, but it is annoying and if you forget about it, then it's lost forever

I have already suggested a more robust system. If you don't want your coins forfeited for the common good after you pass away, you might not have to do anything. I suggest adding a variable which would set the lifetime of the transaction or the whole wallet. For example, if the value is set to 50 that would pass as 50 years (0 should obviously mean infinity). After that term expires, a new automatic transaction is generated which doesn't require the private key (since it is generated by the network itself), and all funds from that wallet (or added by that transaction) are either considered as unmined or sent to a Bitcoin piggy bank

After all, isn't Bitcoin all about giving user a choice?

Quote from: Yuuto on December 09, 2016, 03:12:24 AM

Also another problem is how are you going to distribute the coins? You said that you could use it to finance scientific research, so how will we reach consensus? How will be pick a legitimate scientific research team to invest in? In my opinion all of this requires centralisation, which is against the very idea why bitcoin is created in the first place.

This was just a suggestion. If you don't like this idea you can think of these bitcoins as unmined after they expire

ranochigo

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 4418

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: deisik on December 08, 2016, 12:29:21 PM

We all know that there can be no more than 21M bitcoins. We also know that every day some bitcoins get lost forever. That means that they still exist on the blockchain, but no one can access them since the keys are lost. I don't think that this is a right thing. We should recover these coins somehow, and that issue could be addressed eventually. I suggest setting a grace period of, say, 10 years (or 50 years if 10 years is too little) after which all wallets that remain untouched during that time and not reclaimed by anyone, should be declared as public property. The transactions that credited these bitcoins to such a wallet should be cancelled (just like correcting entries are made in a real ledger), and the coins should be moved to a new wallet, for example, to finance scientific research...

It isn't important to have 21 million Bitcoin. Bitcoin can divided into smaller part and each unit of Bitcoin becomes much more valuable if more coins are getting lost. If you are moving the coins from an address that has no activity for a long time, what is the difference between this and theft? The coins are rightfully the owner's even if they don't want to touch it or has lost it.

It would be impossible for the community to agree on which foundation the coins will go to anyway.

Topic: What to do with lost bitcoins - page 4. (Read 5600 times)