I can guarantee you that lost btc address will eventually be subject to forfeit much like an old bank account with no action gets grabbed.
An untouched btc address in terms of no funds ever removed will be considered lost .
The funds will be folded back into mining rewards for blocks.
There are some that think that this is CSW's motive behind BSV based on various things that he has said. I don't really see it happening with BTC but it's not impossible. There's also the possibility of quantum computing meaning that private keys will no longer secure and BTC will have to be moved to a more secure scheme or be swept by those with the capability.
You are correct Richy, including the implication that philip may well be getting his "bitcoin"s mixed up.. to the extent that there are "other bitcoins" out there
in fantasylandia.I can guarantee you that lost btc address will eventually be subject to forfeit much like an old bank account with no action gets grabbed.
An untouched btc address in terms of no funds ever removed will be considered lost .
The funds will be folded back into mining rewards for blocks.
To anyone that thinks I am wrong I simply laugh.
Zero reason not to do it. Say in 2059 all 2009 address must show some withdrawal or lost.
To those that say no privacy I say you are clueless.
To those that say it will be outvoted maybe in 2059 it will be outvoted but down the road say 2084 or 2109 it will be out voted.
That will be the death of bitcoin, besides it does not make sense as it goes against everything bitcoin stands for and it goes against common sense as well.
If I take the bus and I lose my wallet with some money inside even if the wallet is lost all the contents still belong to me, if someone finds it and then takes that money for themselves it is still stealing, the same logic applies to lost coins, even if the coins cannot be claimed by their owners they are still the legitimate owners of those coins and taking them away in any way or form is stealing, at that point I might as well open a bank account at Cyprus and let them steal my funds as they did years ago.
I agree with your overall point wxa7115, but something is wrong with your lost billfold analogy. Bitcoin is a bearer instrument like cash, so who ever has it is the presumptive owner, but changing the protocol to create a "have to spend" or "have to move" is a kind of different kind of problem that surely touches upon monetary policy that is quite unlikely to change based on currently existing consensus dynamics that are likely NOT going to significantly change merely because we go from 1% world adoption to 50% or more world adoption... or whatever scenarios are imagined to cause such desire changes in consensus in that direction.. even assuming that some folks want to change the protocol in that direction (and engage in warfare to attempt to change the protocol in that direction.. not likely to happen.).
[edited out]
Ok that makes sense..
Yeah I remember the usual goal being 21 BTC, then Kindof 2.1, and now 0.21 I guess..
As the price goes up by an order of magnitude, iguess a good goal should go down by the same..
I sure don’t have 21 BTC LOL..
For sure, 21 BTC was way more reachable when you first became a forum member, but still it is understandable that it can take a while to actually 1) focus on BTC accumulation or 2) even have enough resources to actually garner up to stack BTC - even if you might have known about the bullish case for bitcoin back then.
Just think about back then (2015-ish).. some forum guys might have been saying that they were shooting to accumulate up to 21 BTC, and some other forum members might have proclaimed that they already have reached 3x those entry-level aspirations. Keep in mind through much of 2015, BTC prices were in the mid-$200s, so it would not be unreasonable for a guy to buy BTC at $250 or even $300 per BTC, so even assuming the purchase at the higher $300 price per BTC, the 21 BTC would have cost a mere $6,300 and of course, 3x the target size of 63 BTC would have cost $18,900..
A lot of those amounts of investment into BTC seem reasonable now, even though back then, it would have likely still seemed like a lot of money to be putting into BTC, especially considering how scared a lot of normie folks seemed to have been about BTC through much of 2015 with the BTC prices staying down there and bouncing around largely in the $200s for most of that year.
In 2015 a lot of people thought that the last ATH was mainly caused by the fox bot pumping and a lot of people really thought bitcoin was dying/dead..
Things did not look good..
I started playing with Bitcoin when it was in the 600s, still coming down from the gox ATH, and I saw it plummet to what, something like $160, and then just float dead around 200-300 for a very long time..
Saying that Bitcoin was going to go to $10,000 back then was generally thought to have been crazy..
Now after 2017 we know it doesn’t take a gox bot to pump BTC, and we know much more about halving cycles now instead of them being a myth or a maybe now halving cycles are more of a fact..
It is much more clear now that Bitcoin is a wise and stable investment than it was back then..
Back then yeah, you could legitimately say that you thought Bitcoin might actually go to zero.. Not anymore..
Their might not be as much fast upside as their used to be, but Bitcoin is also not completely disregarded as a scam or pyramid scheme like it used to be in the mainstream..
The mainstream has come around now to taking Bitcoin very seriously, and everyone and their brother knows about Bitcoin now..
Back then, it was almost embarrassing explaining Bitcoin to people because they would think you were a lunatic half the time..