Whale moves bitcoins mined in 2009, triggering speculation that Satoshi is preparing to sell

The bitcoin community was alive yesterday with speculation that bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakomoto would move bitcoin funds as 40 of the first ever mined bitcoins were moved for the first time in eleven years.

Mined just a month after the bitcoin genesis block was minted in 2009, whoever owns the bitcoin is likely to have at least been part of a small cabal of individuals involved with bitcoin in its early days. And it could also be Satoshi Nakomoto himself.

The news sparked nervousness in the bitcoin trading community, initially wiping out $ 600 of the bitcoin price on fears that the previously dormant bitcoin whales were now gearing up to sell large amounts of their fortune, potentially triggered by the recent bitcoin halving or from the price appreciation of bitcoin that has flirted with the $ 10,000 mark in recent months.

While 40 bitcoins (more recent updates from other sources have now suggested 50) representing less than $ 400,000 are small fry compared to the potential billions of dollars believed to be held in the hands of a handful of whales, the fortunes of these individuals are often spread across multiple portfolios. It is demonstration of the activity of a large carrier who might dip his toe in water in preparation for a big sale rather than the displaced quantity that scared the community.

Enter Craig Wright

To add further intrigue, this whale’s proprietary portfolio appears to have some association, albeit rather tenuous, with Craig Wright, the controversial figure in the bitcoin community who claims to be Satoshi Nakomoto.

Wright was involved in a legal dispute with the late David Kleiman’s inheritance regarding ownership of 1.1 million Bitcoins that may or may not have been mined by the founder of Bitcoin, may be in a trust controlled by Craig Wright.

The Kleiman family is suing Wright for allegedly tampering with the late Dave Kleiman’s bitcoin assets and intellectual property after his death.

According to the documents filed in the context of the dispute, the wallets containing more than 1.1 million coins, worth more than $ 9 billion, were held within the trust called the Tulip trust, the vehicle that Wright and Kleinman allegedly created. together.

However, Wright testified in court that he was unable to identify the wallets or check them as the associated keys were encrypted and he is not in possession of these keys. Wright said these keys will be delivered in the future by a captive courier. This is a claim that many in the community have considered dubious.

However, Steve Shadders, CTO of nChain, a Wright associate, performed an analysis of the bitcoin blockchain and, based on certain schemes, identified over 25,000 wallets that could potentially have been owned by the Tulip trust.

This information was presented in court as part of the dispute with Kleinman and included the portfolio which is now subject to the recent whale alert. However, it provides a legal basis for a claim, instead providing a temporary interruption until Wright’s bonded courier emerges from the scenes with access to the encryption keys.

With the coins now in motion, this raises a number of key questions. Or Wright lied about not possessing the encryption keys during the court case and instead has full control of this wallet, and potentially everyone within the trust.

Alternatively, he may now have taken possession of the keys, which could mean he would need to comply with a ruling to deliver them or he may be able to liquidate his bitcoin position which could significantly destabilize the market.

Alternatively, Steve Shadder’s list may actually be inaccurate, after all, the list was just the best guess on Wright’s owned portfolios. Therefore Wright may not be the actual owner of this wallet.

Several bitcoin analysts have previously commented on the accuracy of Shadder’s list, pointing to inaccuracies, such as the inclusion of the public addresses of cryptocurrency exchange Mt Gox and Roger Ver’s wallet. Additionally, some in the community have pointed out that the number of the portfolios identified from the Shadder list saw movement, with over 73 blocks prior to this whale warning, suggesting they are being controlled by other people.

Furthermore, there has been criticism of the algorithm used and Shadders himself admitted a bug in his parsing code that may have inadvertently included addresses that would not have met the initially established criteria.

Whether that means the list is now discredited enough to be completely unreliable remains to be seen. It is certainly not a document that has been deemed legally enforceable.

Crypto Twitter reacts

However, Calvin Ayre, a longtime business partner of Craig Wright who supported Wright in his bitcoin fork – Bitcoin Satoshi Vision – weighed in today to claim he had spoken to Wright and confirmed the movement was not related to Wright. , after all.

The Patoshi enters

Another source of evidence that the keys may not be owned by Satoshi – whether it be Wright or otherwise – is based on research conducted by security researcher Sergio Demian Lerner, who examined the signatures associated with early bitcoin miners.

Lerner was able to trace the patterns of early miners that may represent Satoshi’s fortunes or those of the small group of early bitcoin insiders. Lerner identified that the coins moved Wednesday were not among those believed to be Satoshi as the owner.

So potentially they were only owned by a first miner with no ties to Satoshi.

Maybe it was JK Rowling the whole time?

Probably the most unlikely theory, but the one we all probably wish was true, and would represent the biggest twist of irony, is that the whale is actually JK Rowling.

The famed author of the Harry Potter stories has mercilessly trolled the bitcoin Twitter community over the past week by providing a bit of lightness to a community that is often accused of taking itself a little too seriously.

In a moment of slight comic relief, a clever tweet from Coinpayment.net suggested that perhaps JK Rowling had been trolling the community this whole time.

To touch.

An earlier version of this article referred to a Twitter account claiming to represent Craig Wright, which was not the case. The article has been edited to reflect this.