A journalist purposely destroyed access to his cryptocurrency wallet in 2013. There are 13 bitcoins left in it
Sometimes a radical criticism of a phenomenon does not end well for the critic. This is most often seen in the cryptosphere, where “experts” are constantly trying to prove the “uselessness” of Bitcoin or altcoins. One of them was Wired journalist Robert McMillan, who back in 2013 destroyed the private key to a Bitcoin wallet to prove his point. Now the coins in that wallet are worth at least $761,000. We tell you more about what’s going on.
As is traditional, let's start with an explanation. There are two types of keys in the cryptocurrency world: public and private. Public keys are essentially an address where a person can send you cryptocurrency.
At the same time, private keys allow you to claim that you are the owner of the cryptocurrency address. It can be used to sign transactions and thus conduct them. A private key is a long string of numbers and letters. Sometimes they are translated into more convenient formats.
The most important detail is that anyone with access to a private key can do anything with the crypto at that address. The same goes for the reverse situation: if the private key is removed, then you can say goodbye to the coins. The latter is exactly what happened here.
How bitcoins can be lost
In 2013, Wired decided to conduct a little experiment with Bitcoin mining. That’s when the cryptocurrency first received relatively wide publicity, and mining began to rapidly gain popularity. As a result, journalists set up a crypto-farm from Butterfly Labs in the company’s office, which mined about 2 BTC every 10 days. Recall, the value of 1 BTC was then equal to about $110, that is, the amount was relatively small.
The headline of the Wired article about the experiment
McMillan was not left with the best impression of crypto in general during the experiment. Here’s his quote from a 2013 Wired article in the Cointelegraph.
The world’s most popular digital currency is really nothing more than an abstraction. In the end, the result of the experiment was obvious. We will destroy the private key of our Bitcoin wallet. Our coins will remain in this digital vault forever, or until someone manages to crack the SHA-256 encryption.
That is, the journalist himself decided to destroy access to the cryptocurrency wallet to validate his attitude towards digital assets. He didn't like them at all, and in general, the Wired representative probably didn't think that Bitcoin would last that long. And the growth prospects of one coin up to 69 thousand dollars must have seemed like a fiction, because it had to jump a hundred times for that.
A wallet with a lost private key
All in all the journalist managed to get 13.34623579 BTC worth about 1500 dollars at that time. It’s worth noting that the Wired experiment was conducted before another major jump in Bitcoin mining complexity: a year later, mining the same amount of coins with the same processing power would have taken twice as long.
It should be noted that Bitcoin's mining complexity has increased nine times in a row since the crypto's major collapse in the summer of 2021. However, the day before, the figure did decline - it happened on November 28. It then slipped by 1.49 per cent. It's a small dip, but it makes it clear that it took slightly longer than the ideal fourteen days to mine the last 2016 blocks. As such, the mining difficulty should be reduced.
Bitcoin mining difficulty recalculation figures
“Virtual money has not been an impressive source of passive income for Macmillan. The journalist was convinced that the very fact that Bitcoin is “virtual” makes the cryptocurrency a “passing” phenomenon that could well disappear in the coming years. To prove this point, the author of the article donated the coins and destroyed the private key to the wallet containing them. They are now permanently out of the circulation of all bitcoins. So in essence the author of the articles not only gave up a serious sum of money in the future, but also technically made the remaining coins in circulation more valuable.
Bitcoin’s price rise since 2013
An old Wired article recently attracted a lot of attention from Reddit users. Some of them commented that the case clearly proves how their own arrogance about innovation can negatively impact their earnings prospects. However, other commentators said that McMillan did have an excuse: after all, Bitcoin’s potential was still unclear in so many aspects in 2013.
We believe that this case not only shows the benefits of quietly embracing innovation, but also once again reminds us of the pros of long-term storage of popular and reliable cryptocurrencies. Yet since then, Bitcoin's value has increased hundreds of times, something that surely cannot be achieved with conventional bank investment vehicles. Now, the new hit altcoins can offer similar returns - and not always.
What do you think about it? Share your opinion in our Millionaire Crypto Chat. We’ll talk about other blockchain-related topics there too.
Related posts
