What should happen to permanently dormant value?
A meaningful share of supply is likely lost forever, yet the system can still carry it as if nothing changed.
OBTC / Working prototype
A lifecycle model for Bitcoin, explored as a working experiment.
OBTC is a Bitcoin-derived proof of concept. It asks a narrow but serious question: if on-chain value stays dormant for many years, should the system keep treating it as untouched forever? The proposed answer is a long renewal window, a reclaim path for abandoned value, and a feedback loop into network security.
Long horizon renewal matters only after a very long window
Reclaim split 70% refund path, 30% security budget
Status experiment / POC, not a finished doctrine
The starting point
The project starts with three simple questions.
OBTC is not trying to out-market Bitcoin. It is a focused design experiment built around three long-horizon issues that are easy to postpone and hard to ignore forever.
Who keeps paying for long-lived state?
Storage and verification are not free in practice. Someone keeps carrying that burden over time.
How does PoW stay funded far out?
If subsidy keeps shrinking, security eventually needs something more durable than hope alone.
Lifecycle model
The proposal is straightforward: add a long lifecycle, then make dormancy visible.
For active holders, the intended behavior is light-touch. Most of the time nothing happens. The clock only matters when value stays untouched for a very long time.
Create
A new asset enters circulation and starts a long validity window.
Move or renew
If the holder acts within that window, the lifecycle resets and control remains with the holder.
Mark long dormancy
If nothing happens for long enough, the system stops pretending that silence is costless.
Reclaim and recirculate
Most value follows a refund path. A smaller share feeds the security budget that carried the state.
Working thesis
OBTC is better read as a stack of connected ideas than as a single feature.
The experiment combines lifecycle rules, reclaim logic, inherited dormant history, and a software-assisted stewardship lens. Together, they form a different way to think about time inside a Bitcoin-like system.
The core claim is modest but sharp: permanent state should not be treated as free forever.
Whether that claim is right is an open question. The value of the project is that the question becomes concrete enough to test.
Storage cost becomes explicit
The model turns a hidden long-term burden into a visible rule rather than leaving it as background subsidy.
Security budget gains an internal loop
Dormant value can feed a limited return path into network security instead of staying inert forever.
It starts with inherited history
OBTC is framed against Bitcoin's dormant past, not as a clean-sheet thought experiment with no baggage.
It fits software-assisted stewardship
Time-based rules are easier for wallets and agents to monitor than value that can stay silent forever.
Choose a reading path
Start where it makes sense for you.
Mode 01
Why OBTC
Read the plain-language version first: the problem, the proposed rule change, and the main trade-offs.
Mode 02
Organic thesis
See why the project uses the word “organic,” and how lifecycle, renewal, and circulation fit together.
Mode 03
AI era
Look at the software angle: why lifecycle-aware money may be easier to monitor and maintain over time.
Mode 04
Full whitepaper
Go straight to the long-form document if you want the full argument, parameters, and operational detail.