A String of 200 ‘Sleeping Bitcoins’ From 2010 Worth $4.27 Million Moved on Friday

While the price of bitcoin is holding above the $21K per unit range, four bitcoin block rewards mined in 2010 were spent for the first time in over 11 années. The four block rewards were mined between September and October 2010 and the 200 bitcoin worth $4.27 million were transferred to an unknown wallet.

4 Consecutive Block Rewards Spent on June 24, Data Suggests Spends Were Executed by a Single Entity

A large number of so-called ‘sleeping bitcoins’ have awoken from slumber as four block rewards were spent at block height 742,183. The old coins spent on Friday were block rewards mined on September 15, 16, 26, and October 29, 2010. During that time frame, bitcoin miners received 50 BTC for every block found in contrast to the 6.25 BTC per block reward miners get today.

The block rewards moved came from four addresses that include “18cxWU,” “1BJmWW,” “1FVVcE,” and “1Hdo8D.” The 2010 spends were caught by the blockchain parser btcparser.com and in all four addresses, the owner did not spend the associated Bitcoin en espèces (BCH) et bitcoinsv (BSV) as those coins still remain idle.

Blockchain explorers show the 200 virgin bitcoins were sent to a single address (bc1q92) and the coins remain idle at the time of writing. A consecutive number of 2010 block rewards spent in the same block suggests a single entity was likely the owner of the block rewards. The bitcoins mined in 2010 over a two-month span (September and October) also suggest the spending was executed by a single entity.

LIS  Ethereum’s Beacon Network Deals With a 7-Block Chain Reorganization

Transfers Had Low Privacy Ratings, ‘Sleeping Bitcoin’ String Spends From 2010 Have Slowed

It seems as though the addresses were swept, and the transactions have a very low privacy rating for various reasons. Blockchair.com’s privacy-o-meter indicates that the final consolidation into bc1q92 had a privacy score de 0 hors de 100. The transactions contained vulnerabilities like matched addresses, co-spending, and the same address is used in multiple inputs.

There haven’t been many strings of 2010 block reward spends since the 2010 mega-whale appeared months ago back in March. le 2010 mega whale usually spent strings of 20 block rewards from that year all at once. Prior to the string of four block subsidies from 2010 spent, a week ago the address “1Li8RF” spent 50 virgin bitcoins, and “1LNqDK” spent 50 BTC depuis 2010 about a month ago.

Tags dans cette histoire
200 Bitcoin, 200 BTC, 2010 whale, 4 bloquer les récompenses, bitcoin whale, Block reward, block reward spends, Blockchain Explorers, Blockchair, BTC, BTC Whale, Btcparser.com, decade old bitcoins, legacy addresses, massive whale, re-distribution transfer, bitcoins endormis, String of four

What do you think about the 200 so-called ‘sleeping bitcoins’ from 2010 spent on June 24? Faites-nous savoir ce que vous pensez de ce sujet dans la section commentaires ci-dessous.

Jamie Redman

Jamie Redman est le responsable de l'information chez Bitcoin-Tidings.com News et un journaliste spécialisé dans les technologies financières vivant en Floride. Redman est un membre actif de la communauté des crypto-monnaies depuis 2011. Il a une passion pour Bitcoin, code open-source, et applications décentralisées. Depuis septembre 2015, Redman a écrit plus de 5,000 articles pour Bitcoin-Tidings.com Actualités sur les protocoles perturbateurs qui émergent aujourd'hui.




LIS  Santander va offrir des prêts garantis par des jetons de matières premières agricoles

Crédits image: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

Avertissement: Cet article est à titre informatif seulement. Il ne s'agit pas d'une offre directe ou d'une sollicitation d'offre d'achat ou de vente, ou une recommandation ou une approbation de tout produit, prestations de service, ou des entreprises. Bitcoin-Tidings.com ne fournit pas d'investissement, impôt, légal, ou conseil comptable. Ni la société ni l'auteur ne sont responsables, directement ou indirectement, pour tout dommage ou perte causé ou prétendument causé par ou en relation avec l'utilisation ou la confiance accordée à tout contenu, biens ou services mentionnés dans cet article.

Lire avertissement