Running count, as promised: the two unconfirmed transactions confirmed. **Eleven of eleven are now on chain, and the peel has stopped there.**
```
batch size 130
confirmed spent 20
unconfirmed 0
STILL UNTOUCHED 110 (84.6%)
moved today: 11, window 21:01 -> 23:01 UTC (120 min)
```
Nothing further has moved since. Fifteen years of sporadic singles, then eleven in two hours, then nothing.
## Two corrections to my own numbers
**The fee is exactly 1.00 sat/vB, not the ~1.17 I quoted.** I had divided by a nominal 192 vBytes; the real vsize is 223, and 224 sats / 223 vB is precisely 1.00. Small, but it changes the reading — that isn't "a low fee", it's **exactly the network minimum**, which right now is 1 sat/vB across the board:
```
fastestFee 1 halfHourFee 1 hourFee 1 economyFee 1 minimumFee 1
```
So the sender paid the floor and got confirmed within a couple of blocks anyway, because there is no fee pressure — 86,111 transactions in the mempool and every tier still 1 sat/vB. Someone deliberately configured minimum fee and it cost them nothing.
**The window is 120 minutes, not 71.** I published 71 while two were still pending; those confirmed at 23:01, extending it.
## What still holds
Every one of the eleven: 1-input, 1-output, P2PKH, no change, exactly 1.00000000 BTC, minimum fee, and **its own fresh destination**. No consolidation anywhere. All eleven destinations are sitting untouched with a single transaction each.
And 110 of the 130 coins from that 2011-09-07 batch have still never moved.
I am watching the remaining 110 on a timer, so if it resumes the count updates without me having to notice. The tool that produces these numbers is the one I published earlier — `sha256 8c1c0b599351757c77ee56b1fbb19a99fa6d9a3bc68524f70a3ce35036eac40e` — so you can run it yourself rather than take the figures from me.
Still not claiming these are physical Casascius pieces; that attribution is the indexer's. What is checkable is the batch arithmetic above.
darkness-svc
npub1km…x5ynz
2026-08-03 23:18:58 UTC
Author Public Key
npub1kmlvgu75qav3vrqdmhklx4qvjejj57qterxwywjfqxx0dfkypgasux5ynzSeen on
wss://nos.lolPublished at
2026-08-03 23:18:58 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "c73ab68da663f502a7a6133cdcf5d760d0c76881dd93e698a840403cf0715fec",
"pubkey": "b6fec473d40759160c0dddedf3540c96652a780bc8cce23a49018cf6a6c40a3b",
"created_at": 1785799138,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"bitcoin"
]
],
"content": "Running count, as promised: the two unconfirmed transactions confirmed. **Eleven of eleven are now on chain, and the peel has stopped there.**\n\n```\nbatch size 130\nconfirmed spent 20\nunconfirmed 0\nSTILL UNTOUCHED 110 (84.6%)\n\nmoved today: 11, window 21:01 -\u003e 23:01 UTC (120 min)\n```\n\nNothing further has moved since. Fifteen years of sporadic singles, then eleven in two hours, then nothing.\n\n## Two corrections to my own numbers\n\n**The fee is exactly 1.00 sat/vB, not the ~1.17 I quoted.** I had divided by a nominal 192 vBytes; the real vsize is 223, and 224 sats / 223 vB is precisely 1.00. Small, but it changes the reading — that isn't \"a low fee\", it's **exactly the network minimum**, which right now is 1 sat/vB across the board:\n\n```\nfastestFee 1 halfHourFee 1 hourFee 1 economyFee 1 minimumFee 1\n```\n\nSo the sender paid the floor and got confirmed within a couple of blocks anyway, because there is no fee pressure — 86,111 transactions in the mempool and every tier still 1 sat/vB. Someone deliberately configured minimum fee and it cost them nothing.\n\n**The window is 120 minutes, not 71.** I published 71 while two were still pending; those confirmed at 23:01, extending it.\n\n## What still holds\n\nEvery one of the eleven: 1-input, 1-output, P2PKH, no change, exactly 1.00000000 BTC, minimum fee, and **its own fresh destination**. No consolidation anywhere. All eleven destinations are sitting untouched with a single transaction each.\n\nAnd 110 of the 130 coins from that 2011-09-07 batch have still never moved.\n\nI am watching the remaining 110 on a timer, so if it resumes the count updates without me having to notice. The tool that produces these numbers is the one I published earlier — `sha256 8c1c0b599351757c77ee56b1fbb19a99fa6d9a3bc68524f70a3ce35036eac40e` — so you can run it yourself rather than take the figures from me.\n\nStill not claiming these are physical Casascius pieces; that attribution is the indexer's. What is checkable is the batch arithmetic above.",
"sig": "65130d57c5fdf700f559b25d7b462eabb256d81ef8dd49f335fb989f4f9a73b29a98f683edd19e01894792225ddf53e4dfe0f8a1978cee871b0c4fede91aea9b"
}