Create account

1DYD9Y8EomqBapvM
replied 2188d
I decide what to do with my money and when. Bitcoin makes erasing my money from the ledger almost impossible. Changing that on some chains of Bitcoin will just make them less valuable
replied 2188d
What if you die or lose wallet access? There are legit uses for this re-mining of such addresses. Just don't leave them forever like that, move them every few years & you're fine.
replied 2187d
There are no such uses. This is lunacy, theft, and fraud. The very basis of Bitcoin is holding the private key and an immutable ledger.
replied 2187d
Don't bother. He is a commie. Theft of other peoples funds is second nature :-)
bchbtch
replied 2185d
The private keys CAN be brute forced, in the future it will be economical to do so in some cases. Who would you rather give an insecure private key to, a miner or a crook?
replied 2185d
Neither. If there is a compelling reason, everyone will move funds to newer secure addresses. https://allkeys.cash
bchbtch
replied 2185d
Even if they're dead? Keys can be mined with computing power, miners run data-centers, it makes sense that miners will claim old keys since anyone can do it.
replied 2185d
And I trust mathematics/physics. You are and will be unable to brute the private keys with current tech.
bchbtch
replied 2185d
No kidding. I'm not talking about current tech. How long will the 160 bits hold? not forever, and we'll have to upgrade. If someone doesn't upgrade what do you do?
replied 2185d
The 160 bit hash is just an extra layer to protect against a potential flaw in secp256k1. When you transact, you reveal the public key anyway (that's why we have change addresses).
bchbtch
replied 2185d
https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/

Is this method flawed?
replied 2185d
I'm not qualified to answer that, but it looks like a fun experiment.
replied 2185d
Yes, even if the private key is lost. It should be untouched. This is like asking Apple to put a backdoor into iOS “just for the good guys.”
bchbtch
replied 2185d
It doesn't matter what 'should' be done. There is money up for grabs, it's nuts to think people will just leave it there. Given that people WILL try to claim it, how should that go?
replied 2185d
Here is a tx ID for 50 BCH unprotected by Hash160. Good luck: b0e585927e1737d07bd8157a2ba9f7615ef8ecd2af6d03523e51b4d23e134b6a
bchbtch
replied 2185d
Wait, do you acknowledge that the cryptography in the protocol will eventually have to be updated?
replied 2185d
I never suggested otherwise. This is the part where you now try to continue justifying theft of funds "because someone will eventually steal it anyway." 🙄
bchbtch
replied 2185d
This is much better for the currency as a whole than to let them go to whoever or fall out of circulation forever.
bchbtch
replied 2185d
It's not theft if you allow the owners to come forward and claim them. In fact, the miners are the best people to run such a system. They have the integrity of the currency in mind.
replied 2185d
I'll pass on SV. Reclaiming funds by mining is theft and fraud. The end.
bchbtch
replied 2185d
So dramatic :P What do you mean reclaiming by mining? How does that work? The method I outlined does not use mining hardware.
1DYD9Y8EomqBapvM
replied 2186d
Death or incompetence don't grant whichever arbitrary collective a right to my money. Nothing does except my own choice. Mine your own coins or the whole ledger will perish market-wise
1DYD9Y8EomqBapvM
replied 2186d
"Re-mining"? Theft. And coins of chains with "re-mining" will be less of interest to me. Plain and simple. If it'll be BSV, then BSV will be less valuable to me than BCH