History might repeat itself, but I would be very surprised if it did. Bayer has been very dominant on the national stage this year, and let's not forget that Kaiserslautern is a 2nd division club. Not only that, but it's a 2nd division club placed among the bottom clubs of the 2. Bundesliga. The fact that they qualified for the finals of the national cup is an amazing feat in itself. 

Leverkusen already showed weaknesses in the return leg against AS Roma in the semi finals and they were lucky not to lose it at home. Seems that they used up all their wild cards before the Atalanta match.

In theory, it should. That is the official website of the Sparrow wallet.

I am not surprised considering that you paid just above 5 sat/vByte for it. I don't think the mempools cleared to the point of confirming transactions below the 7-8 sat/vByte since the time you broadcast your transaction. If you are in a hurry to have it confirmed, you should do a RBF transaction. It should be as simple as right-clicking on the output you sent and finding the "increase fee" option as satscraper's source confirms. If you are not in a hurry, wait it out a little bit more. Your coins aren't going anywhere. They will either be dropped from most mempools or be confirmed when the conditions allow it.

Mempool.space has a paid service to speed up stuck transactions. The one you are thinking of is probably ViaBTC. But his fee isn't high enough for the transaction to be supported for a free bump.

Pa možda i postoji rješenje samo ga mi ne znamo. I ja vjerujem da postoji neki takav bridge ali je pitanje koiiko je siguran i može li mu se vjerovati. Ne bi bio prvi put da se neki bridge hakira i da kripto ode u tuđe ruke. Jesi li probao ovo što ti je dkbit98 preporučio za Liquality novčanik? Vidi možeš li s njim nešto započeti.

Na kraju krajeva pitaj u engleskom altcoin podforumu gdje ima puno više korisnika nego ovdje.

Trusting your memory for important data like seed phrases shouldn't be done. You should have physical backups of the entire phrase, not just a bigger or smaller part of it. I know this discussion is about digital backups, but I am just saying. And even if someone found your seed backup that contains 8 out of 12 words, the remaining ones can be bruteforced.

Perhaps, but I can't comment on that. Regarding that signing mass blog post by Tom Honzik, do you know any critiques of his work? Do experts agree or disagree with him about the phenomena of signing mass? Is anyone else talking about it?
Also, these multisig tests that Jameson made were all carried out in a testnet environment. So, who knows what kind of affect an UTXO's prior history has in those conditions. 

I am on a VPN right now, but not logged in to my Blackjack.Fun account, and the sports betting tab is blank. The rest of the site loads just fine. I have noticed that with the sportsbook before as well, but I don't care about it since I am not planning to access my account with a VPN. Perhaps it's a security measure against VPN usage?!

Not a bad choice on first sight. It's also worth remembering that Bayer doesn't concede many goals. Atalanta is a dangerous team, but lacks experience in finals. I watched them in the Italian cup final against Juventus. Despite being the better team for the entire duration of the match, they didn't create many clear goal scoring chances and lost the match. They could have even lost with a bigger margin if it wasn't for a millimeter offside of Dušan's shoulder. The VAR technology is destroying the emotions that football is supposed to create.   

slackovic ima bitcoin i želio bi njega direktno zamjeniti za wBTC na Ethereum mreži. Na Uniswap ne može poslati svoj bitcoin, treba mu ether ili jedan od ethereum tokena.
Mislim da mu za tako nešto preostaju samo dvije opcije: može ili da koristi neki BTC to wBTC bridge (ja niti jedan ne znam) ili može poslati svoj bitcoin na neku od mjenačnica a potom povuči istu količinu ali kao wBTC. E sad, da li će morati da odradi trade ili može jednostavno deponovati jednu valutu i povuči drugu zavisi od berze i njenih pravila.

Correct. Only taproot transactions can be silent payments. So a server can skip anything that isn't a taproot output. Servers can also skip any taproot output below a certain size. That rules out the on-chain spam like Runes and Ordinals probably (not sure which of these two attack vectors use taproot). Finally, there could be an option to scan only taproot outputs after a certain date or block height. If you generated your silent payment address last week, there is no need to have your client scan anything older than that because you can't possibly receive a payment before you had a silent payment address. 

More details are covered in these docs:
https://silentpayments.xyz/docs/explained/

The USD amount isn't important. What matters is how much sats per vByte you paid. You should see a number from 1 sat/vByte and more. $0.52 could be enough or too little depending on the number of inputs/outputs and type of addresses you used.

Did you check your transaction history to see where you downloaded the software from? What's the address?
You can't just download a new version and verify the signature for that one. You should verify the authenticity of the software currently installed on your computer.

I am not sure why you are having issues verifying the software. I did it some time ago by following the instructions on the official website, and had no problems. Did you change the directory in your terminal to the correct one where the files you are trying to verify are located?

Obsolete or not, it's a genuine device which was on-sale and it wasn't cheap, and some people purchased it. The Nano S is also obsolete but still found its way into this multisig test.

Actually, if you remove the Ledgers from the equation which were the worst performers, you will see that Trezor's devices take the last place as the second-slowest for signing multisig transactions.

This is the first time I hear about the term "signing mass." I did a quick search on Ninjastic Space and didn't find anything useful there. A search using "site:bitcointalk.org signing mass" also finds nothing relevant. I wouldn't consider it an important factor or a topic that's been researched enough.

Jameson Lopp carried out an interesting test to check how different hardware wallets performed when signing multisig transactions of various complexities. Each hardware wallet has its own limitations, so the question is, which ones are the best for multisig transactions involving 10 and 100 inputs?

First, here is a list of the hardware wallets he tested:

• Blockstream Jade
• Cobo Vault
• Coinkite Coldcard Mk4
• Coinkite Coldcard Q
• Foundation Passport Founder’s Edition
• Keystone Pro
• Keystone 3 Pro
• Ledger Nano S
• Ledger Nano S Plus
• SeedSigner
• BitBox02
• Specter DIY
• Trezor Model One
• Trezor Model T
• Trezor Safe 3

*More information on firmware and software versions in the source.

The tests were done using Sparrow Wallet 1.8.2 and Electrum 4.5.3 (Ledger only) on Ubuntu 22.04.
Jameson created native segwit multisig wallets on the hardware devices he tested. He funded each wallet with 100 transactions to create 100 UTXOs. Everything was done on Testnet.


Testing Results

2-of-3 multisig:

The first test was for 2-of-3 multisig. He made two transactions: the first one spent 10 UTXOs, while the second one spent all 100 UTXOs.

Here are the results:



We can see that Seedsigner is the absolute winner, with the best results. Coldcard Mk4, Cobo Vault, and Keystone Pro also performed decently.
Ledger Nano S and Ledger Nano S Plus performed the worst using the HW1 library, with the Nano S granddad requiring almost two hours to sign the 100-input transaction. The results were better using Electrum.
The Passport Founder's Edition didn't have enough memory to complete the second test but did well for the first transaction. Jameson noted he used outdated firmware and will perform a second test with the newest version.


3-of-5 multisig

The second test was for a 3-of-5 multisig. Again, he made two transactions: one spending 10 UTXOs, while the second spent all 100 UTXOs.

Here are the results:



Seedsigner was again ahead of the pack, with Cobo Vault and Keystone Pro being the runners-up.
Just like with the first test, Ledger Nano S and Nano S Plus had terrible results using the HW1 library. It's a different picture when using Electrum, but it's still not good enough.
The Passport Founder's Edition again failed to sign the 100 inputs multisig transaction.


Scaling performance test:

The last test compares each device against each other. The aim is to show if the hardware wallet scales linearly. That means that the 100-input transaction should take 10 times as long as the 10-input transaction. If it scales poorly, it will take longer. If it scales well, it will take less time.

Here are the results:



The overall winners in this category are Bitbox 02, Keystone Pro, and Trezor Safe 3.
The Ledger Nano S/Nano S Plus didn't perform bad on Electum, but their results using HWI are the worst of all tested models.
The Passport Founder's Edition couldn't be assessed for the previously mentioned reasons.


I recommend you read the rest of Jameson's report in his blog post. He discusses a major downside of the Seedsigner, despite the excellent performance during his tests. He also offers additional notes on Ledger's performance and the reasons for the bad results.


Source:
https://blog.casa.io/bitcoin-multisig-hardware-signing-performance-2024/

Each payment on the blockchain will look like any other Taproot payment. Third parties wouldn't be able to look at the on-chain data and recognize that it's a payment made to a silent payment address. Silent payments require more work on the receiver's end to scan the blockchain and recognize that payments were sent their way. The way I understood it, people running their own nodes will benefit in the speed of scanning compared to those relying on SPV clients. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Kad odeš na tu stranicu koju si pronašao i klikneš na "GET WBTC", dobićeš veliku listu mjenačnica koje podržavaju wrapped bitcoin i gdje ga možeš kupiti u zamjenu za USDT ili neku drugu kriptovalutu.

Imaš onda i ovo:
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/wrapped-bitcoin/#Markets
Tu su ti i CEX-ovi i DEX-ovi gdje možeš swapat jednu valutu za wBTC. Za svaki slučaj provjeri da li linkovi vode na zvanične stranice. Nikad ne treba vjerovati nikome slijepo pa tako ni CoinMarketCap-u.

Šta ko klinci, još to radim. Bus i vozači su odlični za šverc svega i svačega. Ali to ima smisla raditi sa ljudima kojima vjeruješ ili s kojima si već dugo surađivao na ovaj ili onaj način. Ja ljudima koje ne poznajem ne bi prvi poslao pare nikad, niti bi poslao kripto da nisam već dobio keš.

Blockstream Green isn't a very popular wallet in these parts, so besides interpreting their documentation and looking at the code, like nc50lc did, I don't think you will find many people with hands-on experience. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to contact Blockstream's customer support and ask them directly. You could also check if they have quality personnel attending reddit, Telegram, or some other medium where you could ask such questions.

Since you mentioned Electrum, this software wallet has a portable version that you can put on a USB flash drive and run it from there or move it across various devices with that USB. But that's again different from what OP is asking about. Being an SPV client, Electrum doesn't require that you download the entire blockchain, which significantly shortens the sync times before you can use it.

I think you mentioned my name here by mistake. I am still very active and post on Bitcointalk every day. You must have confused me with someone else or we aren't reading and writing in the same boards, which is weird because you can find me posting all over the place. I prefer serious discussions about Bitcoin above anything else, though.

Check your transaction history in your browser and post the address here please. Just to be 100% sure.

So, your transaction is still unconfirmed, even now? Can you tell me what fees you paid for your transaction? I don't think that should be the reason why it was invisible in Sparrow all this time, but you never know.

Are you using a public node with Sparrow wallet or perhaps your own Bitcoin node? If you are using a public server, it shouldn't take more than a couple of seconds (or minutes max) to synchronize. If you are connecting to your own node, it might have been out of sync and it needed time to download the blockchain.

I use Sparrow with one of my airgapped hardware wallets, and the transactions are visible in the wallet within seconds of sending them. I am guessing it's a sync issue. Go into the settings and change server if it happens again.
Do you perhaps have multiple wallets, and you were looking at the wrong one?

Now that the transaction is finally visible, I recommend you try to spend from the wallet before moving any significant bitcoin to it.
Have you verified your Sparrow wallet and made sure to download it from an official source?

You haven't imported your seed phrase from Coldcard into Sparrow wallet have you? It should only have your master public key.

If he is looking for some freebies, which aren't exactly free, but nothing is these days, he should keep an eye on their Twitter profile to see what events are currently ongoing. For example, they have a trading competition that's going live soon. Registration starts in a couple of minutes. Similar promotions will be advertised on Twitter.