4 ms·

"We report that 0.01% of the addresses contain over 58.21% of all Bitcoins in circulation." Pretty bonkers. See: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/

• alchemist1e9 4y ago
  As usual this is nonsense and irrelevant. Satoshi himself had over 1M coins but the vast majority of early coins are lost. According to that analysis many old lost wallets are these supposed whales. The observation that is also unjustified is this idea that whales can prop up the price, how does that work exactly? if they hold the asset then selling it would lower the price, so hold on did they sell earlier and are using USD to buy now, but that would generate tax liabilities they would have to pay now and also lose transaction fees, yet supposedly they are propping up Bitcoin price. It’s a nonsensical theory.
  • roflyear 4y ago
    You're trying to simplify the study, but it isn't that simple - they use pretty complex analysis to present their findings, so replying to what you said here is a little off subject. > The observation that is also unjustified is this idea that whales can prop up the price, how does that work exactly? I don't have interest in getting into this.
    • alchemist1e9 4y ago
      I’ve read portions and skimmed all of the paper. Then using PDF version I used keyword searching to make sure I’m not crazy, I can’t find any portion of the complex analysis that handles Satoshi’s coins, or lost coins at all. This paper is now one of many examples where intelligent and sophisticated authors produce complex analysis but omit very basic and obvious factors, likely because they negate their conclusions.