1. Wallet Characteristics: 8 “Frozen Whales” from the Same Entity
According to on-chain data, all eight wallets involved this time used the early P2PKH standard (pay-to-public-key-hash), which was the address format originally adopted by Bitcoin.
Each wallet holds exactly 10,000 BTC
No records of any payments since 2011
This means that they are most likely from the same early holder.
However, what is more noteworthy is not the movement of funds itself, but a series of abnormal on-chain messages that occurred in the days before the transfer.
2. OP_RETURN hidden information: takeover statement and strange numbers
Starting from July 1, these wallets have received a series of on-chain messages sent using OP_RETURN. Let’s take the address 1BAFWQhH9pNkz3mZDQ1tWrtKkSHVCkc3fV as an example:
📍 Article 1 (July 1)
It reads: “Legal Notice: We have taken control of this wallet and all its contents.”
It was seen by many at the time as a meaningless gimmick.
📍 The second one (25 minutes later)
“Not abandoned? Please use your private key to perform on-chain transaction proof before September 30.”
At first glance, it looks like a challenge to the original holder, but it is more likely a legal disguise of "self-directed and self-acted".
📍 Article 3 (Two days later)
Attached is a web link with a self-built "Ownership Claim Process Instructions", which claims that unclaimed addresses can be legally taken over through a certain "legal agency process".
📍 Article 4: The number sequence “4 8 15 16 23 42”
This set of numbers comes from the American TV series "Lost", in which they must be entered at a certain time, otherwise a global disaster will occur. This is interpreted as a symbolic warning: this action may have disastrous consequences for the Bitcoin network.
This string of numbers was only sent to three wallets, with each one sent exactly three minutes apart, demonstrating a high degree of orchestration and technical control.
3. Aesthetics or attack? The calm planning behind “On-chain Art”
In addition to the sophisticated control at the technical level, there are more "deliberate" details:
Some receiving addresses contain custom characters such as "fxck", which technically requires tens of millions of calculations to generate, indicating a deliberate act.
The takeover statement website was launched 24 hours before the funds were transferred, and the content was updated several hours before the transfer to include a clause that "may be operated by a representative", further indicating that the actors were well versed in legal structures and compliance strategies.
All this is not just a technical act, but more like a combination:
Artistic Expression
Legal Experiment
On-chain political statements
of complex events.
Conclusion: Is this a scam, an attack, or a “legal takeover test” of the system?
This is a highly symbolic event for the crypto world.
On the one hand, this could just be an early miner retrieving his assets in an artistic and anonymous way;
On the other hand, this may also reveal potential vulnerabilities in the Bitcoin network's "identity and inheritance" mechanism.
Whatever the truth, one thing is certain:
Behind this incident is a combination of long-term planning, precise deployment and on-chain contract technology;
It exposes another side of Bitcoin’s “ungovernability” — can early wallets be “legally” taken over once no one claims them?
There may be more similar incidents in the future, especially when assets enter the "inheritance/lost contact" state.
This time, the OP_RETURN warning may be just like the computer in "Lost" - if no one enters the password regularly, the system will crash.
