Discussion:
BIP - Dead Man's Switch
(too old to reply)
Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-11 17:30:37 UTC
Permalink
It is estimated that about 4 million of the about 16.4 Bitcoins ever mined
are lost forever because no one knows the private keys of some Bitcoin
addresses. This effectively mean there are actually only 14.4 million
Bitcoins in circulation even though 16.4 million are mined. There is no way
of eliminating the human errors that cause these losses of Bitcoin from
circulation, while the number of Bitcoin that will ever be mined is capped
at 21 million. This means the total number of Bitcoins that are in
circulation will eventually become zero, bringing the network to an end.

The solution this BIP proposes is to implementing a dead man's switch to
Bitcoin addresses. The dead man's switch causes the Bitcoins assigned to
dormant addresses to automatically expire. A Bitcoin address is deemed
dormant if it is not used in transactions for some fixed length of time,
say ten years.

The calculation of the miner's reward should take into account the Bitcoins
that has expired. This means there is a possibility that miner's reward can
increase if sufficient number of Bitcoins expire.

Ref:

http://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/


<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
Douglas Roark via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-11 18:12:02 UTC
Permalink
With all due respect, this isn't a BIP. It's idle speculation regarding
what one person considers to be a problem and others may not. Please
read https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0001.mediawiki and
try again. Among other things:

- Convince us this is a real issue, and that your data is accurate.
Who's to say which coins are truly lost? Maybe the people controlling
the keys are just laying low, wish to use their coins in 2112, etc.
- Propose formulas for how the miners will take everything into account,
and explain why they're acceptable.
- Write code that implements your ideas.

Good luck!
--
---
Douglas Roark
Cryptocurrency, network security, travel, and art.
https://onename.com/droark
***@vt.edu
PGP key ID: 26623924
Nick Pudar via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-11 18:12:05 UTC
Permalink
This topic has come up several times in recent years. While it is well intentioned, it can have devastating outcomes for people that want to save long term. If such a system were implemented, it would force people to move funds around in order to not get nullified. In that process, it introduces multiple opportunities for errors. Cold storage should be able to stay cold. I personally would be apprehensive about implementing this kind of a system.

...via Android



From: Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
Sent: Monday, December 11, 1:04 PM
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - Dead Man's Switch
To: bitcoin-***@lists.linuxfoundation.org


It is estimated that about 4 million of the about 16.4 Bitcoins ever mined are lost forever because no one knows the private keys of some Bitcoin addresses. This effectively mean there are actually only 14.4 million Bitcoins in circulation even though 16.4 million are mined. There is no way of eliminating the human errors that cause these losses of Bitcoin from circulation, while the number of Bitcoin that will ever be mined is capped at 21 million. This means the total number of Bitcoins that are in circulation will eventually become zero, bringing the network to an end.
The solution this BIP proposes is to implementing a dead man's switch to Bitcoin addresses. The dead man's switch causes the Bitcoins assigned to dormant addresses to automatically expire. A Bitcoin address is deemed dormant if it is not used in transactions for some fixed length of time, say ten years.
The calculation of the miner's reward should take into account the Bitcoins that has expired. This means there is a possibility that miner's reward can increase if sufficient number of Bitcoins expire.

Ref:
http://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/


Virus-free.
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
www.avast.com
Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-11 18:26:40 UTC
Permalink
On Dec 11, 2017 10:23, "Nick Pudar via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-***@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

This topic has come up several times in recent years. While it is well
intentioned, it can have devastating outcomes for people that want to save
long term. If such a system were implemented, it would force people to move
funds around in order to not get nullified. In that process, it introduces
multiple opportunities for errors. Cold storage should be able to stay
cold. I personally would be apprehensive about implementing this kind of a
system.


Furthermore, if it rewards miners with funds that are expired, it creates
terrible incentives. Miners in their best interest could choose to censor
transactions that move funds close to their expiration time, to increase
their own future rewards.

Cheers,
--
Pieter
Radoslaw Biernacki via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-11 18:13:26 UTC
Permalink
Aside from that such change would require a hard fork it also violates one
of basic rules of bitcoin, which has long term consequences for miners and
for whole Bitcoin economy. In short, after altering the supply limit it
would not be "bitcoin" anymore.

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev <
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
It is estimated that about 4 million of the about 16.4 Bitcoins ever mined
are lost forever because no one knows the private keys of some Bitcoin
addresses. This effectively mean there are actually only 14.4 million
Bitcoins in circulation even though 16.4 million are mined. There is no way
of eliminating the human errors that cause these losses of Bitcoin from
circulation, while the number of Bitcoin that will ever be mined is capped
at 21 million. This means the total number of Bitcoins that are in
circulation will eventually become zero, bringing the network to an end.
The solution this BIP proposes is to implementing a dead man's switch to
Bitcoin addresses. The dead man's switch causes the Bitcoins assigned to
dormant addresses to automatically expire. A Bitcoin address is deemed
dormant if it is not used in transactions for some fixed length of time,
say ten years.
The calculation of the miner's reward should take into account the
Bitcoins that has expired. This means there is a possibility that miner's
reward can increase if sufficient number of Bitcoins expire.
http://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#m_-612306741899295358_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Chris Riley via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-11 18:28:03 UTC
Permalink
Hi,
1. If there are 16.4 million mined and 4 million are lost, that results in
12.4 million in circulation vs 14.4 million.
2. Satoshi addressed this as have numerous other people (
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=198.msg1647#msg1647 ) - lost coins
decrease supply, increasing value of the remaining coins.
3. This assumes this is a problem. Bitcoin is divisible, 100 million,
potentially more if necessary. (
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Help:FAQ#How_divisible_are_bitcoins.3F)
4. Why is it okay to steal bitcoins from people who's bitcoins have been
"dormant" for a fixed period, 10 years in your example?
5. What happens to bitcoins that, say, Hal Finney still had (if any) and he
put in cold storage while he is in ultimate cold storage (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Finney_(computer_scientist)#Death) ?
Ditto for someone, say, in a coma for 11 years, in jail for 11 years or any
other similar event? Or a 20 year old sets aside coins for retirement.
The following year, the system is changed, and when he looks again after
not paying attention for a decade or two, they are gone.
6. This encourages censorship by miners for people attempting to move coins.
7. This has been discussed many times before and everyone is welcome to
fork bitcoin code and the block chain and convince people to follow this
chain and code. Then you can see if you can get many people to agree that
this is a good idea.








On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev <
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
It is estimated that about 4 million of the about 16.4 Bitcoins ever mined
are lost forever because no one knows the private keys of some Bitcoin
addresses. This effectively mean there are actually only 14.4 million
Bitcoins in circulation even though 16.4 million are mined. There is no way
of eliminating the human errors that cause these losses of Bitcoin from
circulation, while the number of Bitcoin that will ever be mined is capped
at 21 million. This means the total number of Bitcoins that are in
circulation will eventually become zero, bringing the network to an end.
The solution this BIP proposes is to implementing a dead man's switch to
Bitcoin addresses. The dead man's switch causes the Bitcoins assigned to
dormant addresses to automatically expire. A Bitcoin address is deemed
dormant if it is not used in transactions for some fixed length of time,
say ten years.
The calculation of the miner's reward should take into account the
Bitcoins that has expired. This means there is a possibility that miner's
reward can increase if sufficient number of Bitcoins expire.
http://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#m_2495265241835744459_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-11 18:34:12 UTC
Permalink
You can implement this already, but only for ~1 year expirations.

IF <normal script> ELSE <1 year> CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY ENDIF

Perhaps it would make sense to propose a flag extending the range of relative
lock-times so you can do several years?

Luke


On Monday 11 December 2017 5:30:37 PM Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
It is estimated that about 4 million of the about 16.4 Bitcoins ever mined
are lost forever because no one knows the private keys of some Bitcoin
addresses. This effectively mean there are actually only 14.4 million
Bitcoins in circulation even though 16.4 million are mined. There is no way
of eliminating the human errors that cause these losses of Bitcoin from
circulation, while the number of Bitcoin that will ever be mined is capped
at 21 million. This means the total number of Bitcoins that are in
circulation will eventually become zero, bringing the network to an end.
The solution this BIP proposes is to implementing a dead man's switch to
Bitcoin addresses. The dead man's switch causes the Bitcoins assigned to
dormant addresses to automatically expire. A Bitcoin address is deemed
dormant if it is not used in transactions for some fixed length of time,
say ten years.
The calculation of the miner's reward should take into account the Bitcoins
that has expired. This means there is a possibility that miner's reward can
increase if sufficient number of Bitcoins expire.
http://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campa
ign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campa
ign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-12 01:10:38 UTC
Permalink
Hi,
The only solution other than Dead Man's Switch to avoid gradual loss
Bitcoins in transaction is increasing the divisibiliy of Bitcoins. Then
Bitcoin values will need integer of more than 64 bits. Could that be done
with soft fork?
Post by Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
You can implement this already, but only for ~1 year expirations.
IF <normal script> ELSE <1 year> CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY ENDIF
Perhaps it would make sense to propose a flag extending the range of relative
lock-times so you can do several years?
Luke
On Monday 11 December 2017 5:30:37 PM Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
It is estimated that about 4 million of the about 16.4 Bitcoins ever
mined
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
are lost forever because no one knows the private keys of some Bitcoin
addresses. This effectively mean there are actually only 14.4 million
Bitcoins in circulation even though 16.4 million are mined. There is no
way
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
of eliminating the human errors that cause these losses of Bitcoin from
circulation, while the number of Bitcoin that will ever be mined is
capped
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
at 21 million. This means the total number of Bitcoins that are in
circulation will eventually become zero, bringing the network to an end.
The solution this BIP proposes is to implementing a dead man's switch to
Bitcoin addresses. The dead man's switch causes the Bitcoins assigned to
dormant addresses to automatically expire. A Bitcoin address is deemed
dormant if it is not used in transactions for some fixed length of time,
say ten years.
The calculation of the miner's reward should take into account the
Bitcoins
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
that has expired. This means there is a possibility that miner's reward
can
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
increase if sufficient number of Bitcoins expire.
http://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
source=link&utm_campa
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
ign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
source=link&utm_campa
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
ign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
Ricardo Filipe via bitcoin-dev
2017-12-12 14:02:12 UTC
Permalink
You can do it on 2nd layer solutions such as the lightning network,
with their own format.
On the base layer you cannot do it without a hard fork, or it would
undermine the invariants of bitcoin.
How?
From: Ricardo Filipe
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 4:44 AM
To: Teweldemedhin Aberra; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - Dead Man's Switch
yes
2017-12-12 1:10 GMT+00:00 Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
Hi,
The only solution other than Dead Man's Switch to avoid gradual loss
Bitcoins in transaction is increasing the divisibiliy of Bitcoins. Then
Bitcoin values will need integer of more than 64 bits. Could that be done
with soft fork?
Post by Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev
You can implement this already, but only for ~1 year expirations.
IF <normal script> ELSE <1 year> CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY ENDIF
Perhaps it would make sense to propose a flag extending the range of
relative
lock-times so you can do several years?
Luke
On Monday 11 December 2017 5:30:37 PM Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
Post by Teweldemedhin Aberra via bitcoin-dev
It is estimated that about 4 million of the about 16.4 Bitcoins ever
mined
are lost forever because no one knows the private keys of some Bitcoin
addresses. This effectively mean there are actually only 14.4 million
Bitcoins in circulation even though 16.4 million are mined. There is no
way
of eliminating the human errors that cause these losses of Bitcoin from
circulation, while the number of Bitcoin that will ever be mined is
capped
at 21 million. This means the total number of Bitcoins that are in
circulation will eventually become zero, bringing the network to an end.
The solution this BIP proposes is to implementing a dead man's switch to
Bitcoin addresses. The dead man's switch causes the Bitcoins assigned to
dormant addresses to automatically expire. A Bitcoin address is deemed
dormant if it is not used in transactions for some fixed length of time,
say ten years.
The calculation of the miner's reward should take into account the
Bitcoins
that has expired. This means there is a possibility that miner's reward
can
increase if sufficient number of Bitcoins expire.
http://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campa
ign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campa
ign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Loading...