Excuse my little rant, but I find the situation I am dealing with another perfect example of the cliche "bitcoin fixes this." The State of New York is seeking to seize funds in a bank account I hold in Florida due to a lack of activity. I am a New York resident. Why is it required that I make transactions in my own bank account? I am now in the process of jumping through bureaucratic hoops to have my account restored. From what I have read, governments throughout the world have been shortening the time frames required to deem an account dormant and seize the funds. I really feel like this issue should get more attention.
pull down to refresh
15 sats \ 1 reply \ @f321x 25 Jul 2022
Why don't your just buy bitcoin with the Fiat if it isnt bring used anyways?
reply
15 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 25 Jul 2022
It's a corporate account that had to be opened as condition of a commercial loan.
reply
3 sats \ 8 replies \ @cointastical 25 Jul 2022
There are people who have the same view regarding dormant bitcoin UTXOs.
reply
138 sats \ 6 replies \ @nerd2ninja 25 Jul 2022
But that view is irrelevant because code is law.
Satoshis view on dormant Bitcoin was thus:
"Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more. Think of it as a donation to everyone."
reply
130 sats \ 4 replies \ @cointastical 25 Jul 2022
There has been discussion on a hard fork that has "tail emissions". Some have been making the argument that "lost" coins (i.e., dormant) could be the source for these tail emissions.
I don't agree ... just the messenger.
reply
20 sats \ 3 replies \ @nerd2ninja 25 Jul 2022
I've seen some people talk about tail emissions, but I don't foresee it being likely. It especially won't go through so long as the miner subsidy is in effect. I've seen other solutions to an empty block without miner subsidy scenario. I don't think tail emissions are the right solution.
reply
15 sats \ 2 replies \ @cointastical 25 Jul 2022
The thing is, ... anyone can hard fork with whatever change they want. Bigger blocks., tail emissions, ... even bigger blocks + tail emissions, whatever.
Could we end up with another split like what happened when BCashers thought they were smarter back half a decade ago? I'ld bet two bits and a Hot Toddy that it happens again.
reply
20 sats \ 1 reply \ @nerd2ninja 25 Jul 2022
um lol. Yes anyone can hard fork the code, but if you don't get social consensus it will be understood that your hard fork is not Bitcoin.
Its been explained to me before that there are layers to consensus
Miner consensus => What order transactions go in
Full node consensus => What blocks are valid according to the rules of Bitcoin
Social consensus => What is Bitcoin/Which chain is Bitcoin
You just can't get social consensus without consent. Social consensus means you'll get full node consensus which pay the miners to give you miner consensus.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @cointastical 25 Jul 2022
BCash didn't have social consensus. They had changed the rules, and then went forward with that along with a chunk of the bitcoin value, mindshare, hashrate, etc. Was it bitcoin? No. Was it harmful to bitcoin? Absolutely.
Could it happen again? I wouldn't doubt it.
Here's a lead belligerent.
Peter Todd on Bitcoin Inflation (Bitcoin Takeover Podcast)
#49500
https://bitcoin-takeover.com/audio/?name=2022-07-25_s11_e11_peter_todd_on_bitcoin_inflation__lightning__privacy.mp3
reply
35 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 25 Jul 2022
Of course my money isn't lost. It's instead the fiat equivalent of utxo's that simply haven't moved for a few years.
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @Majjin 25 Jul 2022
Those people are wrong
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @cointastical 25 Jul 2022
The insanity may come to stablecoins like USDC, and maybe even USDT for that matter.
🧵 What happens when USDC funds have gone dormant? Lawyers get paid!!
#48542
https://nitter.it/patio11/status/1550696922679087105
reply