I will echo the same regarding the quality of information on this forum. Great place to learn and share knowledge.
Regarding losing a wallet and associated bitcoin...if I were to lose my mobile wallet, I'd still be able to access it online via website. Is this a newer feature that wasn't available with wallets previously?
Topic: Why does Bitcoin not have a heartbeat? (Read 2109 times)
for me as for another newbie , idea seems pretty nice 
but unbelievable to come true anyway
but unbelievable to come true anyway
That's why this forum is so fantastic, i'm just learning so much right now. you are not alone with stupid questions. 
Well thank you all for the answers. The way Bitcoin works is still something I am trying to get my head around, so you will most definitely see MORE stupid questions from me.
Always good to learn
Always good to learn
between New Years Eve and Bitcoin anniversary (31-Dec and 03-Jan)
This would be the worst time ever. People are celebrating New Year during these days (yes, even in Jan 2 and 3 people aren't quite back to their routine). They would just not remember or not care about it.
On this post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=359679.5
I wrote:
"Maybe Satoshi could set a huge scheme of rewarding everyone that changes all their coins to a different address between New Years Eve and Bitcoin anniversary (31-Dec and 03-Jan).
All coins that were moved to different addresses on that days (01 and 02 of January) would get the reward.
The formula would be (coins_moved/total_coins_moved_by_everyone [%]) *times* BUDGET.
He could just tell the world. I will spend ten thousand coins every year on this date, for us all to have a better idea about the aliveness of coins out there. OR... We could crowdfund these 10,000 coins...
Who doesn't want to know or have a better idea of how many coins are "alive"? "
I wrote:
"Maybe Satoshi could set a huge scheme of rewarding everyone that changes all their coins to a different address between New Years Eve and Bitcoin anniversary (31-Dec and 03-Jan).
All coins that were moved to different addresses on that days (01 and 02 of January) would get the reward.
The formula would be (coins_moved/total_coins_moved_by_everyone [%]) *times* BUDGET.
He could just tell the world. I will spend ten thousand coins every year on this date, for us all to have a better idea about the aliveness of coins out there. OR... We could crowdfund these 10,000 coins...
Who doesn't want to know or have a better idea of how many coins are "alive"? "
it is still too much of a hassle to use. and no consumer protection. Those are 2 huge reasons
In the distant future I can see some sort of limited proof of stake being added if necessary.
How is the proof algorithm related to lost coins?
But what if all bitcoins are lost? Never going to happen. Bitcoins lost make it so the bitcoin value against other assets will rise. The more is lost, the less bitcoin there are to use.
In the distant future I can see some sort of limited proof of stake being added if necessary. Right now it just isn't an issue. On of the best features of bitcoin is the ability to change it necessary but only with a wide consensus of the community.
1. Rarity most commonly equals value. Less bitcoin that is send-able = Higher value that they hold.
2. If we lose too many, we can always go for more decimal places. Either way, it's inevitable that this will happen if bitcoin is mass adopted. Whichever comes first.
3. As a perfectionist, it is a slight bit dampening to know that only a fraction of 21 million bitcoins is actually use-able. But then, who cares?
2. If we lose too many, we can always go for more decimal places. Either way, it's inevitable that this will happen if bitcoin is mass adopted. Whichever comes first.
3. As a perfectionist, it is a slight bit dampening to know that only a fraction of 21 million bitcoins is actually use-able. But then, who cares?
Bitcoins lost is lost forever, irreplaceable, and unrecoverable.
Lost Bitcoin not having a "heartbeat", or I think the correct analogy is not having a "crash cart" to bring it back to life, or circulation, never to be available to be mined, is a good intended feature.
It just makes the Bitcoin's you're holding now much more valuable!!! Scarcity is great feature!
Remember this factoid. Bitcoins total mined is around 21 million, but even though there's a cap on total number of Bitcoins to be mined, doesn't mean there's a finite amount of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is divisible by 8 places, so in reality, there's a near infinite amount of Bitcoin that can be used by the masses...
Lost Bitcoin not having a "heartbeat", or I think the correct analogy is not having a "crash cart" to bring it back to life, or circulation, never to be available to be mined, is a good intended feature.
It just makes the Bitcoin's you're holding now much more valuable!!! Scarcity is great feature!
Remember this factoid. Bitcoins total mined is around 21 million, but even though there's a cap on total number of Bitcoins to be mined, doesn't mean there's a finite amount of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is divisible by 8 places, so in reality, there's a near infinite amount of Bitcoin that can be used by the masses...
Sorry, that probably sounded like another doom and gloom "Bitcoin is dead" thread In fact it's a different question.
Bitcoins are mined. Bitcoins are stored. And, inevitably, some bitcoins are lost.
What happens to dead bitcoins?
As far as I can figure (see rank of "newbie" in post), these dead bitcoins are gone....forever.
So why has a "heartbeat" not been implemented? Or part of the design?
If you can't pulse your Bitcoins every...year?....then they should be returned to the pool?
Stupid idea?
Ist
In fact it's a different question.Bitcoins are mined. Bitcoins are stored. And, inevitably, some bitcoins are lost.
What happens to dead bitcoins?
As far as I can figure (see rank of "newbie" in post), these dead bitcoins are gone....forever.
So why has a "heartbeat" not been implemented? Or part of the design?
If you can't pulse your Bitcoins every...year?....then they should be returned to the pool?
Stupid idea?
Ist
Yes, utterly stupid idea. I believe it was the Australian government (I think) that has some bullshit rule that if you don't touch your bank account after x number of years the money legally becomes the states and that's moronic just like this is. Nothing happens to bitcoins. You either own them or you don't. Ones people lose access to our lost forever but it doesn't matter anyway because it just makes the existing coins more valuable.
First of all, the lost coins are not dead. it's just that they are not accessible because you don't have the private key. And second, why fret over some coins which are not recoverable? It just makes me and everyone else happy because there's now less available supply in circulation. And that is hardly a problem at all.
Heartbeat.
Reminds me of the heartbleed bug.
Reminds me of the heartbleed bug.
As far as I can figure (see rank of "newbie" in post), these dead bitcoins are gone....forever.
Nobody is hurt by lost bitcoins. It is not a problem. You are suggesting making bitcoin more complicated in order to solve a non-problem.
Let's review:
Pro: none
Con: more complicated
The whole idea with having the private key, is to make it virtually impossible for someone to access your stored coins. If they implement a "pulse" function like this, it could make it easier for people to hack your coins.
All the coins are still there on the blockchain, but you or anyone else cannot access it, without the private and public key paring.
The divisibility of Bitcoin cancel out any problems "lost" coins might have caused, so it's a non-issue.
All the coins are still there on the blockchain, but you or anyone else cannot access it, without the private and public key paring.
The divisibility of Bitcoin cancel out any problems "lost" coins might have caused, so it's a non-issue.
Are the communists out again?
This has been discussed many times.
1. What gives anyone the right to take coins that aren't their's merely because they haven't "moved? Who decides the time? If it is implemented, it will be easy to write software to move them every so often. So what is the point?
2. It is a hard fork, but If you want to try, fork Bitcoin (block chain and code) and convince miners and users to switch. You'll find most people want the freedom to save if they want and not have their savings stolen by people who want to control how they use their coins. But you are welcome to try. It would be a good demonstration to give people the choice.
:-)
1. What gives anyone the right to take coins that aren't their's merely because they haven't "moved? Who decides the time? If it is implemented, it will be easy to write software to move them every so often. So what is the point?
2. It is a hard fork, but If you want to try, fork Bitcoin (block chain and code) and convince miners and users to switch. You'll find most people want the freedom to save if they want and not have their savings stolen by people who want to control how they use their coins. But you are welcome to try. It would be a good demonstration to give people the choice.
:-)
1. Nothing. Nothing at all. It's theft. BUT alive users should be able to move their coins. And if it's implemented at the time of inception, they will be aware of this. It stops a portion of a finite resource becoming unusable. THAT's the point.
2. I have no idea what a hard fork is. If you have a point by bringing up a technical point, then please explain it.
Hello again,
1. bitcoin is divisible, currently up to eight decimal places. There should be no problem with amount of bitcoins remaining in the bitcoin economy.
For example, 1btc today could be equivalent to 0.001btc tomorrow. The total number of coins is not important. Whats important is active coins.
2. Hard fork is when there is a major change to the Bitcoin Coding (Protocol) and thus its splits into two blockchains. The new chain and the old chain.
Old chains usually die off immediately. Some altcoins are hardforks of the Bitcoin Protocol.
Bitcoiners are generally resistant to the idea of "lost" coins returning to be "re-mined", because it goes against the original spirit and intention of Bitcoin.
Is the "old spirit" correct? Because it seems to me there are some improvements could be made. I ofc am clueless, but I am on the other hand a latecomer, journalist, and consumer.
Yes, it is correct. Some improvements can and will be made, but not the type that fundamentally change the original intention of Bitcoin.
The "old spirit" is what Bitcoin/bitcoin is. If we diverge from that, then Bitcoin/bitcoin is a failed experiment, because people want regulated credit systems and no personal responsibility.
In time, you will understand that it is basically the reversal of the current world financial system, which to some is comforting and positive.
There is no way to distinguish from blockchain analysis, etc., which coins are dead (permanently lost due to lost password or private key) and those whose owners are simply sitting on them. So a proposal to empty out accounts and "recycle" bitcoins simply because they haven't moved in a long time is a perfectly awful idea. I would expect that, if it lasts that long, someday you will have untouched wallets passing down as an inheritance from generation to generation. It's conceivable you could have a wallet go a hundred years without being touched, but with the private keys still under someone's control. As others have said, truly lost bitcoins just reduce the money supply of bitcoin, increasing the remaining value, while divisibility is not an issue because we can go beyond 8 decimal places with a software update should there ever be a concensus to do so.
Jump to: