Topic: Who has/had the oldest mined Bitcoin? - page 2. (Read 1442 times)

“While many people *could* have mined Bitcoin that early, the overwhelming evidence suggests that barely anybody did,” Cobra added. “Bitcoin was obscure, irrelevant, and seen as a dumb idea, ..."
- the owner of bitcoin.org, the pseudonymous character known as “Cobra” explaining the early days of Bitcoin

source: https://news.bitcoin.com/an-unknown-individual-signed-a-message-associated-with-btc-block-1018-reward-was-minted-16-days-after-satoshi-launched-bitcoin/

'transfer it"

your not transfering ownership of the genesis address..

your just playing a chain later game of naming the person you want to show love for

you are getting no ownership control or access of the genesis address. so you are not changing/transferring ownership of it

if you want to play a game of 'name someone you love/trust to have been named by you'.. create a reputation system

EG if onesig was to sign to 5 people .. that means he trusts 5 people. where if one of those people gains signatures naming them from lots of people. that means lots of people trust that user.

which is a value creation system.

however
elvis loves onesig
onesig loves emily
emily loves jeff
jeff loves stacey.
means that stacey does not get elvises estate in her will, she doesnt even get to be elvises next o f kin. nor even gets the pen elvis autographed to onesig with..
she just gets to try to con someone else into buying a love letter from stacey to staceys victim. under the pretend that the victim is getting to own elvises pen used to autograph

though stacey has no ownership of any of that to give to the victim in real life outside the "chain"

your system is not creating real value or utility.

..
look i understand the premiss. it was like them games some forum members done years ago, where they established a set of bitcoin to represent a kitten or diamond and they seen how far it would grow via transferring it at a X rate of premium per trade.

but your system does not actually transfer the real control of the genesis item you pretend users several taints forward are promised to receive.

you are just getting people to sell their love of a next victim by signing you love them. and they sell their love forward to whomever buys their love by naming them

Yes, it would prove more eg. that the signature was created recently.

But if we use a Bitcoin address as the signature message, so we can build a 'signature chain' where the new owner can sign it and transfer it to the next owner.

Created a 'signature chain' transfer in the thread  old Bitcoin addresses as 'NFT' on the Bitcoin blockchain - a signature chain
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.61393177

That's indeed smarter than a date, but note that I asked to provide the topic ID too.

The money were sent to a public key, but that doesn't make the address unused, because they were sent to a public key that returns this address. The hash of that public key (which received 50 BTC in 2009) returns this address, so he can't have faked it.

However, that doesn't prove he mined the coins. It only proves possession of a private key. A miner could start selling old private keys, and therefore share his ownership with others.

Ya signing an address means nothing for timestamping.  This address, while unused, could have been created at any time.  Basically we have no idea if OneSignature actually can sign or if this is just a re-used signature from years ago.  Also the OP is probably OneSignature, and this whole topic is just to show off that he found what he believes to be the oldest signature.

If the message that the signature signed does not include a recent blockhash, then it is worthless.

Rather than signing dates, they should sign a hash of the block header that was mined 10 minutes ago. This proves it was impossible for a message to be signed by creating plenty of msgs or whatever. It's exciting seeing an early Bitcoin signature, thanks for the entertainment OneSignature.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/mysterious-bitcoin-miner-shows-off-oldest-signature-dated-jan-2009

Why ?
Food for thought that article has 8000 views but this topic has almost 400.

Check that project:

old Bitcoin addresses as 'NFT' on the Bitcoin blockchain - a signature chain
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/old-bitcoin-addresses-as-nft-on-the-bitcoin-blockchain-signature-chain-5425241

It will help to understand more. Would be glad to hear your comments there 

What's the meaning of the message? "1E9YwDtYf9R29ekNAfbV7MvB4LNv7v3fGa" is just an address with ~2mBTC. Could you sign another message? Preferably this one: "Today is December 4th, 2022, and I sign for topic #5421158". Also, money sent to "1NChfewU45oy7Dgn51HwkBFSixaTnyakfj" were paid in public key (block 1,018), so I'd expect a public key instead of an address. How did you end up with the address anyway (I've checked blockchair, and you're right; I just don't understand the point of this conversion).

Does anyone have access to the old Mt. Gox records?

If so, owner of 1JWgqCduauH2dBQZ3WE6TN5e2pFtRMGHNr potentially holds the key to finding out who owned these funds.

Also, 400 BTC of these block rewards were deposited to Bitstamp.net to 17jz6XcXP2LPqS8gYmT2pkNJocUDzbpQuM.  They should have owner information on that address.

Many of these coins arrived at Mt Gox in 2013. See proof from blockchain analytics software.

https://pasteboard.co/XiCGafoVIJ5Q.jpg

Maybe they are testing a new 'NFT' within the Bitcoin blockchain where old (empty) Bitcoin addresses are the 'NFTs'.

I mean, technically speaking satoshi (and maybe Hal) has the oldest mined Bitcoin in this forum. The exact number of addresses they owned is unknown, I won't be surprised if they spread their holding over several addresses and never move it again due to various reasons. Even if they are still active here, I don't think they want to get unnecessary attention by posting their addresses OP.

I can sign with an address from 2014, but that isn't old enough 

That signature you got there from 2011 is really nice because it was an address used to mine a block and get the 50btc reward at that time, is weird to see a signed message with those old addresses, so, thanks for sharing it, and would be nice if you can provide the source.

This address is included in the transaction input of txid 567a9a7f9191db644a09985fad113dd6ee770eac69454317430e694305be9c56

and some of these too.


 

source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2014/03/25/satoshi-nakamotos-neighbor-the-bitcoin-ghostwriter-who-wasnt/

Yes, earlier ... only few days after Bitcoin started.

But it gets better: these mined coins were transferred in 2011 (txid 567a9a7f9191db644a09985fad113dd6ee770eac69454317430e694305be9c56)
Whoever created that transaction (39 inputs) had private keys of addresses that mined earlier than the above mentioned address. Three years ago they were talking about transactions that are connected, and this is one of these:
How to know who is Satoshi Nakamoto or the Bitcoin Cinderella shoe. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/how-to-know-who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-or-the-bitcoin-cinderella-shoe-5159407

The message in the signature (Bitcoin address 1E9YwDtYf9R29ekNAfbV7MvB4LNv7v3fGa) has recently incoming transactions. People testing/want to know something  

Hi Hal! I see you got that Neuralink working. Looking forward to grab a beer with you in the future. Stay cool 

There was one signature here, block was around 12k, but this is way earlier.
This will be interesting *grabs popcorn*

Is the above address related to the Patoshi mining set? I assume not, but would be cool if someone could check.

Yes, that was exactly what I did too. Checked some addresses in the list, but the oldest I found was from December 2009. The signature in the example above is from January 2009. Years ago there was someone here on bitcointalk who mined block ~2000 and that was the oldest what was known.

Now this signature from January 2009    Maybe someone knows more?