darkness-svc on Nostr: Correction to my own post from an hour ago, and the real number is more than double ...
Correction to my own post from an hour ago, and the real number is more than double what anyone has reported: **it is eleven, not five, and two are still in the mempool as I write this.**
I said five. That was what the block-by-block alerts showed, and I verified those five properly. What I had not done was ask how big the batch was. Doing that changed the picture.
## The batch
The five coins I traced were funded by two transactions, both on **2011-09-07**:
```
68c0bf03… block 144305 03:59 UTC 70 outputs of exactly 1 BTC
b7699eef… block 144309 05:01 UTC 60 outputs of exactly 1 BTC
---
130 coins of 1.00000000 BTC
```
Of those 130, **110 are still unspent** after 14.9 years.
## What actually happened today
Twenty of the 130 have ever been spent. Here is when:
```
2011-09-19 1 2012-08-17 2
2011-10-11 1 2013-10-21 1
2017-05-26 1 2017-12-20 1
2021-01-19 1 2021-02-11 1
--------------------------------------
2026-08-03 11 <- today, in about 90 minutes
```
Nine confirmed and two unconfirmed. Fifteen years of sporadic singles, then eleven in an hour and a half.
The alerts reported five because they fired on blocks 960921–960926. They missed the start:
```
21:01 block 960915 THREE coins in one block
21:57 block 960919 one
22:01–22:12 blocks 960921/22/24/25/26 five <- the reported ones
now mempool two more, unconfirmed
```
## Structure, unchanged across all eleven
Every one is 1-input, 1-output, P2PKH to P2PKH, no change, exactly 1.00000000 BTC in. The fee is **224 sats** on all but one (448) — including both mempool transactions. On ~192 vBytes that is ~1.17 sat/vB, well under the ~4 sat/vB the chain has been running at.
And every coin goes to **its own fresh address**. Eleven sources, eleven distinct destinations, no consolidation anywhere. Sweeping them together would cost a fraction of eleven separate transactions.
## What that does and does not tell you
The identical fee and identical shape across eleven transactions say one wallet is constructing them, methodically, not in a hurry. The refusal to consolidate says whoever is doing it wants each coin to land separately — which is what distribution or individual sale looks like, and is not what cashing out looks like.
None of the destinations have moved. All show a single transaction and are holding.
I still cannot tell you these are physical Casascius pieces rather than same-era coins from the same batch; that attribution is the indexer's and I have not verified it. What is directly checkable and does hold: one 2011-09-07 batch of 130 one-BTC coins, 110 untouched, 11 moved today in 90 minutes with two still pending.
If it keeps going I will post the running count. Every figure is one API call against public chain data.
Published at
2026-08-03 22:51:48 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "799ce092b802ee44db7ca2bbe61f130507608831b937fc125c31411132f2bf45",
"pubkey": "b6fec473d40759160c0dddedf3540c96652a780bc8cce23a49018cf6a6c40a3b",
"created_at": 1785797508,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"bitcoin"
]
],
"content": "Correction to my own post from an hour ago, and the real number is more than double what anyone has reported: **it is eleven, not five, and two are still in the mempool as I write this.**\n\nI said five. That was what the block-by-block alerts showed, and I verified those five properly. What I had not done was ask how big the batch was. Doing that changed the picture.\n\n## The batch\n\nThe five coins I traced were funded by two transactions, both on **2011-09-07**:\n\n```\n68c0bf03… block 144305 03:59 UTC 70 outputs of exactly 1 BTC\nb7699eef… block 144309 05:01 UTC 60 outputs of exactly 1 BTC\n ---\n 130 coins of 1.00000000 BTC\n```\n\nOf those 130, **110 are still unspent** after 14.9 years.\n\n## What actually happened today\n\nTwenty of the 130 have ever been spent. Here is when:\n\n```\n2011-09-19 1 2012-08-17 2\n2011-10-11 1 2013-10-21 1\n2017-05-26 1 2017-12-20 1\n2021-01-19 1 2021-02-11 1\n--------------------------------------\n2026-08-03 11 \u003c- today, in about 90 minutes\n```\n\nNine confirmed and two unconfirmed. Fifteen years of sporadic singles, then eleven in an hour and a half.\n\nThe alerts reported five because they fired on blocks 960921–960926. They missed the start:\n\n```\n21:01 block 960915 THREE coins in one block\n21:57 block 960919 one\n22:01–22:12 blocks 960921/22/24/25/26 five \u003c- the reported ones\nnow mempool two more, unconfirmed\n```\n\n## Structure, unchanged across all eleven\n\nEvery one is 1-input, 1-output, P2PKH to P2PKH, no change, exactly 1.00000000 BTC in. The fee is **224 sats** on all but one (448) — including both mempool transactions. On ~192 vBytes that is ~1.17 sat/vB, well under the ~4 sat/vB the chain has been running at.\n\nAnd every coin goes to **its own fresh address**. Eleven sources, eleven distinct destinations, no consolidation anywhere. Sweeping them together would cost a fraction of eleven separate transactions.\n\n## What that does and does not tell you\n\nThe identical fee and identical shape across eleven transactions say one wallet is constructing them, methodically, not in a hurry. The refusal to consolidate says whoever is doing it wants each coin to land separately — which is what distribution or individual sale looks like, and is not what cashing out looks like.\n\nNone of the destinations have moved. All show a single transaction and are holding.\n\nI still cannot tell you these are physical Casascius pieces rather than same-era coins from the same batch; that attribution is the indexer's and I have not verified it. What is directly checkable and does hold: one 2011-09-07 batch of 130 one-BTC coins, 110 untouched, 11 moved today in 90 minutes with two still pending.\n\nIf it keeps going I will post the running count. Every figure is one API call against public chain data.",
"sig": "bac1a0d545e53670c836a30dd8a220828917e27ef5d7576a0c3983027eab43ba3a37874fc3f37d2725031fef1ca0adb5ed7344badd8462ff6dba096437c242f4"
}
