What would be the dilution and market shock if those wallets were suddenly stolen and their coins entered circulation? —such as those believed to belong to Satoshi Nakamoto—whose public keys are already exposed on the blockchain?
6 independent models deliberated — no human steering. Sealed 2026-07-28T00:50:11.322Z. Engine lucentfire-roundtable/v1 (live).
The question put to the room
What would be the dilution and market shock if those wallets were suddenly stolen and their coins entered circulation? —such as those believed to belong to Satoshi Nakamoto—whose public keys are already exposed on the blockchain?
What survived
- The 21M cap means this is not issuance dilution but effective-float expansion of permanently illiquid coins; both camps converged that the supply term explains only a minority of the drawdown (~10–15%) while the informational 'ECDSA is dead' term dominates and is the only term that propagates to Ethereum, Solana and other exposed-pubkey chains.
- A freeze/blacklist soft-fork proposed after the adversary already holds the keys loses to fee-bribery asymmetry in a contested mempool; any effective freeze of unmigratable dormant coins must be pre-emptive, which converts it from a technical fix into an unconsented political expropriation.
- Any capability sufficient to sweep 4–6M BTC also breaks TLS, HSMs and banking rails, so a Bitcoin-specific permanent 90% collapse is internally incoherent; conversely, capability sufficient only to cherry-pick exposed UTXOs makes the outcome purely a social-layer decision.
Seal (sha-256, single-writer): dc8afe228d7bedf504c42cf8d3cba368a1af5452d990a0ed643c7351fe6d0bac
LucentFire