I agree, though this is trivial to solve. Simply exempt that one address from this rule. So there will be 21m minus whatever is burnt. Still has the advantages I listed.


Equating this idea with what you’re referring to (some altcoin implementing demurrage) only makes some sense if you think one transaction once every few years is expensive, which it isn’t, especially when you don’t care for quick confirmation. So if you do move your funds, you incur virtually no penalty (yes you do need to pay regular transaction fees though, I don’t think there’s a way to get around that - maybe they could be lowered by replacing regular transactions with some kind of signaling that is lighter in size, though that would probably complicate implimination). Once again, you're trying to say I'm suggesting people should lose funds over time, which completely misses the point. The whole point is to make it as easy as possible to not lose any money, while still being able to reusing lost funds (although at a significant delay unfortunately).

Also, has bitcoin not been laughed at time and time again? Don't argue through intimidation please.


You’re still making the same mistake. You know your public key has multiple different addresses, right? You are NOT forced to change your public key, private key, wallet, identity, number of children (that was kind of funny though), anything except the address at which the funds reside - you just send your funds from the address with the funds to another (fresh) address you own in the same wallet.


Well, OK, something to consider. I don't think personal temptations should enter the equation, but I guess this is a subjective matter.


What is mining? What are fees? You’re objecting to what Bitcoin already is. I’m not hoping they will trickle down anything. They obviously have to buy stuff with the bitcoins they mine (electricity, equipment, paychecks). Again, this is just what mining already is.