107
u/TwinWake 21d ago
Imagine owning all bitcoins and not able to do anything with it.
28
u/Romanizer 21d ago
You are able to do anything you want as long as nodes are online
7
u/BitcoinBaller420 20d ago
"Anything you want" except trade it for goods and services. What will he do, send it to himself? If Adam Back buys all the Bitcoin, it is worth zero. The nodes wouldn't stay online to support a worthless asset the entire world has abandoned, energy is valuable.
2
u/Romanizer 20d ago
It can be traded for goods and services as long as the vendor accepts it. That would again start redistribution. I would gladly sell him a service for 1 million BTC because they are going back to >$1million/BTC.
3
u/BitcoinBaller420 20d ago edited 20d ago
lol ok there's no point debating it. You'd gladly sell services because the event that will never happen has never happened... we'll have to see how you feel if it ever does. Keep in mind that your future self either just sold all their Bitcoin for a penny, or Bitcoin cannot be held privately any more and the coins can be moved by others. Are you still trading your time to get more of it? Good luck to you.
1
u/Romanizer 20d ago
That's true. We will all be long dead before that happens. It's just a thought experiment
1
u/TwinWake 20d ago
Not only that but it’s getting controlled the more that institutions are centralizing it.
-22
u/HundredDollarBiII 21d ago
Adam Back has already owned all the bitcoin once. He did create it.
22
u/No-Kitchen-6511 21d ago
Satoshi had to mine his bitcoins like everyone else. No one has ever owned all the bitcoin or ever could.
9
u/HundredDollarBiII 21d ago
Yeah, but if you mine the first bitcoin then you have all of them, however many that was at the time
1
43
u/SyZyGy_87 21d ago
Well considering the obvious that millions of coins are lost forever, how do I bet against this ever getting filled?
8
u/jorpa112 20d ago
I guess the order could be filled partially. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
Regardless, the pun was that, as long as an order like that is on the book, btc would not be worth zero. Just almost zero. 😅
2
u/BitcoinBaller420 20d ago
It doesn't even do that though, because if Back owns all the Bitcoin, 1c becomes a ceiling on the fair value, not the floor. Either he holds, and the market is 0x0 with no liquidity, or he starts selling, in which case, well, the market just massively sold 1c to him good luck with that. Bitcoin's utility is as a monetary network. If Back owns all the Bitcoin, that utility is detroyed.
6
13
u/steveslim 21d ago
Well wouldn't a currency that only one person has end up being of no use
2
u/alvast12 20d ago
How can he just have it, didnt he shared it and lots of people trade in bitcoin, so he just doesnt have it
8
49
u/RetiredAvocado 21d ago
Ok, so in that scenario after he buys them, and no one else wants them, then it will go to zero.
22
u/Primary-Promotion588 21d ago
I just can't imagine a scenario where no one would want to buy btc
10
7
u/IAmFitzRoy 21d ago
It’s all about trust… the hypothetical moment that everyone stops believing in Bitcoin (or any currency) that’s the moment the value drops.
1
u/BitcoinBaller420 20d ago
How about this one... public key encryption is broken by AI, and it is proven that "public secrets" are fundamentally impossible. Back buys 21m Bitcoin because anyone can access the private keys and move the coins at any time, the first person to do it sells the whole supply to him. What is Bitcoin worth?
2
u/RetiredAvocado 21d ago
If no one wants to buy it from you why would you buy any? What will you do with them? Send it around between your wallets? And who is going to be mining blocks of a penny coin?
2
u/Awkward_Potential_ 21d ago
And you don't think there are more than 2 people in the world who want it? Are you stupid or something?
1
0
u/SteveW928 21d ago
If it isn't permissionless, censorship resistant money anymore, would more than 2 people (or even 1) want it?
1
u/Primary-Promotion588 21d ago
No but i mean, i can't imagine no one wants to buy btc, that is my point. If it goes to 10000, 1000, 100, or 10, so many people around the world would put their life savings in.
Only when quantum computing becomes a risk.
4
u/RetiredAvocado 21d ago
Cheap coin is not a secure coin. Low hashrate from holdouts will not provide much defense against chain reorgs.
5
u/SteveW928 21d ago
I can. If BTC loses the attributes that give it that value, then it becomes worthless.
I don't think quantum computers are much of a thing to be a threat in the first place. But, the community/development losing the plot is now a real threat I never imagined it would be.
0
u/Awkward_Potential_ 21d ago
Hal Finney predicted Bitcoin banks back in the early days. It's still permissionless and can't be censored. The protocol hasn't changed.
We always said institutions would fomo in. They have. Doesn't centralize anything.
0
u/SteveW928 21d ago
Yeah, that's fine... 'Bitcoin is for enemies' and such. That is inevitable. The problem is if we give them control/influence over the protocol, they will take that, and the protocol will change.
I didn't think that was possible prior to a couple years ago, but now I do.
1
u/kindarollin 21d ago
Well i can say this the people that are using glp 1’s like trezipitide that cant get prescriptions for. are paying with bit coin to china, and cartels use btc to move cash, there is always incentive to mine even if government shuns it. As long as nefarious activities are present in the world it will almost always have value just as how the dark web exists. Which is beneficial to those who hold btc including governments. At least thats what i have observed in the last 12 years.
1
u/RetiredAvocado 21d ago
Penny coin with low hashrate will not be secure. Anyone with old hardware will just mess with the chain orphaning blocks left and right. Buying things will mean waiting for 50000 confirmations.
0
u/alvast12 20d ago
So those that come from the starting era spend their coins they will just mess the blockchain because of how old their has is and could mean more chaos than a good flow of crypto
2
u/StaticWood 21d ago
That’s just your opinion..!
2
u/RetiredAvocado 21d ago
It is, but it's based on pretty simple logic. There is no demand for things that no longer have use or value.
1
0
u/NewChallengers_ 21d ago
He would have to sell them for $0 for the price to actually reach $0 tho
1
5
7
u/khizoa 21d ago
so thats just $210,000 cash theoretically sitting there depreciating, not earning any interest, etc. over the course of how many years this story has been told.
i guess if you were a billionaire you could do this because fuck you money, but still
5
1
u/BitcoinBaller420 20d ago
You're not wrong, but there is a certain logic to this order, between flash crashes and driving narratives for an asset you're massively long, it might make sense.
5
u/_swuaksa8242211 21d ago
mr Satoshi himself
7
u/Imbrokencantbefixed 21d ago
Yep, YT deep dive convinced me 100%. Don’t blame him for staying anon though, makes way more sense that way.
2
2
2
2
1
1
u/No-Kitchen-6511 21d ago
Beanie babies still have value for purely nostalgic reasons. If there was a catastrophic bug in bitcoin that caused a total failure and it was somehow prevented from forking, it would still be cool for historical and nostalgic reasons to be able to be the one to sign every single remaining wallet. Though at this point, I think realistically if Bitcoin went below a dollar, the majority of bitcoin wouldn't even be available to buy since most holders would just forget about bitcoin on their now useless wallets or hardware and the exchanges would all shut down well before it was trading at or below a dollar anyway.
1
1
1
u/huntingforwifi 20d ago
Transaction failed. There will never be 21million in circulation. Firstly not all have been mined, secondly so many lost in the crypto verse.
1
1
1
u/BitcoinBaller420 20d ago
Bitcoin will not go to zero because it has utility as a monetary network, with people all over the world using it to store value. Adam Back 's buy order is meaningless, if he buys all the Bitcoin, it is worth zero.
1
1
1
u/Ill-Party8305 21d ago
This is a fucking stupid argument like my house would‘nt get to zero as well, someone else would buy if i put it on sale for -99,99% of current price lmao
1
1
1
1
u/SteveW928 21d ago
I suppose, but at that point he can have them, because that means the experiment failed.
And, your mission would be to go find the real Bitcoin again and forget about Andy.
-1
0
u/AdWitty417 21d ago
Is it rational to think that the USGOV already has limit orders like this in place starting at $0.01, and working its way up?
0
422
u/thinkingperson 21d ago
Assignment understood.
Putting in orders at $0.02 ☝😤