I am operating on a Theory that various of our modern ailments are due to things we used to do that we no longer do.
Your theory implies that there were no diseases in the past. I think that can be shown to be false. |
|
|
|
I don't understand why almost everyone focuses on money printing when it comes to inflation.
The reason is that inflation is defined as money printing in some camps, and rising prices are the result of inflation. The more current/modern definition of inflation is the opposite. Inflation is rising prices, which can be caused by money printing in addition to other factors. |
|
|
|
This could happen for lots of reasons. One may be due to the fear of the old's compromisation. If that's the case, you'll have to state in your signed message that the owner of the account is only the one who'll provide a signature from the new address and not from the old one.
Revoking an address this way is problematic because if a key is comprised there is no way to prove that the legitimate owner is revoking an address and not the attacker. |
|
|
|
The benefit of signing the first time (and with the new addresses) is that it proves that you actually control those addresses. That might be useful, but it does not prove identity. What's the benefit of knowing that I actually control an address the time I stake it? You have two options. Option 1: Post an address you own. Option 2: Post an address you don't own. Whichever option you choose, you deserve your fate. If you chose option 1, you'll be able to provide a proof of your identity in the future. If you chose option 2, you'll only harm yourself. There might be a good reason to prove that you control an address upfront. I don't know a reason off-hand, but if you are going to stake and address, you might as well take the opportunity to prove that you control it. Edit: One reason might be if your signing address is used elsewhere and you want to link other identities to your BCT account. It seems that they don't get this since the 20th post.
I don't fault them. Signatures and their capabilities are complicated. |
|
|
|
Why should you sign from both addresses? The new address is posted by the conviction that you'll need it to provide a proof of your identity in the future. You should only do the following if you've never posted in this thread above: And this, if you have: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I am <user name>. Today is <today's date>. My new signing address is <NEW signing address>.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
<OLD signing address>
<signature using OLD address>
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- Sorry, I am editing my posts as you reply. I think we are agreeing. The benefit of signing the first time (and with the new addresses) is that it proves that you actually control those addresses. That might be useful, but it does not prove identity. |
|
|
|
I think that what odolvlobo says isn't necessary. Essentially, he told you to include your old address in the message that is signed from your new address.
No, I am saying to do this: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I am <user name>. Today is <today's date>. My new signing address is <NEW signing address>.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
<OLD signing address>
<signature using OLD address>
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This proves without a doubt that the original <user-name> want to use the new signing address. As I wrote above, signing messages with today's date using both addresses is probably sufficient assuming the post is quoted, but it is not a cryptographic proof, and it is actually more work than what I propose. Actually, if you feel that simply quoting a post is sufficient protection against changes, then this is sufficient: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I am <user name>. Today is <today's date>.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
<OLD signing address>
<signature using OLD address>
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
My new address is <NEW signing address>
But, note that simply moving the new address inside the signed message provides so much more protection. |
|
|
|
You have made the same mistake as Charles-Tim. You have signed a message with only your user name and a date, and that is not helpful.
I am commenting on my behave. I signed an old address with the the present date while also signed a new address, both are verified. I still do not understand what you meant once the old address that was newly signed has already indicated that I am the one that signed the new address. Signing a message with your name and date doesn't prove that the original Charles-Tim wants to use the new address. Suppose someone hacked your account and changed the message to the following. Now, I agree that someone quoting your post provides some proof that is probably sufficient for most, but it is not a cryptographic proof and so there may be additional vulnerabilities. If you simply sign a message with your old address saying that you want to start signing with a new address, that solves everything. New address: bc1qt8wzxfq4p2ufpumd6w02p7kdr5c7uaqeekmeje -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is Charles-Tim. My Bitcointalk.org newly staked address
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
<signed with bc1qt8wzxfq4p2ufpumd6w02p7kdr5c7uaqeekmeje>
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- ... Thanks, I have just signed the old address now, I was using Coinomi before, but I want to use Electrum address is the reason for the new address signed up there. I perfectly sign the old address now on Coinomi. Old address: 3HkmxFukfkRkTV6BR7xRSNxGjyM38qcnaJ -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is Charles-Tim. My Bitcointalk.org old staked address. August 10, 2021.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
HyQX0/AAqwkmGcl+mKXQSUaDnkrFpN74iQj7H5zmQNYUXVtFv5GNMXIWerYRlQLT+0IuiCofTM76eLk1kI9e0sg=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
|
|
|
MY NEW ADDRESS: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi. This is Marvell1. Today August 10 2021
I want to proof my new BTC address: bc1q0h35js5pm2qrnfx3a44jv4funs0fkqqhd3dlq8
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
bc1q0h35js5pm2qrnfx3a44jv4funs0fkqqhd3dlq8
IF9LOCOd2qFizu++ZzZOwnNn0ciYjWHm21K04BlslEypReoY9MM9hqdGvkx0V1CFWTIgagtfQXrkJBZwezon0ic=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Think about what you are trying to do. Marvell1 wrote a message 4 years ago saying that their signing address is 1NNSoJsWABSiqftBVWze6HUFRFtaBkZy4G. Now, a person claiming to be Marvell1 is saying that they want to use another address for signing. How does someone know that Marvell1 truly wants to use a new address? Marvell1 signs a message saying that they want to use the new signing address. Without a signature, the message can be changed. How does someone know that the person changing the address is the true Marvell1? The message is signed with the original signing address. Presumably, only the true Marvell1 can sign using that address. In short, -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi. This is Marvell1. Today August 10 2021
I want to proof my new BTC address: bc1q0h35js5pm2qrnfx3a44jv4funs0fkqqhd3dlq8
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
<old address>
<signature using old address>
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On the other hand, what you have done (sign messages with both addresses) is sufficient in practical terms because while someone hacking your account can replace or delete your messages, they can't replace or delete those messages quoting yours. But, if you are going to do it, you might as well do it correctly. |
|
|
|
Old Adress: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi. This is Marvell1. Today August 10 2021
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1NNSoJsWABSiqftBVWze6HUFRFtaBkZy4G
IGm3M8shRm0200WX0O1HaycP3RuqwdvBMOB6zFFx9LmjFmkAuO9FSC0dsAB8HeOToT3i3sVR9ft0dN2u5H4o+pI=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
MY NEW ADDRESS: -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi. This is Marvell1. Today August 10 2021
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
bc1q0h35js5pm2qrnfx3a44jv4funs0fkqqhd3dlq8
IF9LOCOd2qFizu++ZzZOwnNn0ciYjWHm21K04BlslEypReoY9MM9hqdGvkx0V1CFWTIgagtfQXrkJBZwezon0ic=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Sorry for being pedantic. You have made the same mistake as Charles-Tim. You have signed a message with only your user name and a date, and that is not helpful. If you want to change you signing address, you should sign a message saying exactly that. Otherwise, people in the future can't be certain that you really changed your signing address because everything outside of a signed message can be faked. |
|
|
|
... If I backup my 24(+1) Seedphrase from my Ledger,
Bitbox, Trezor or whatever => Am I also backing up my Altcoins?
The only way I imagine this could be possible is, if the wallet software from the
company uses the btc masterkey to generate all other keys on the wallet. Is that
the case and if so: Are there hardware wallets that don't do this?
Generally, a wallet generates all keys for most coins from the same master key. If you don't have to do anything special when you create an account for a coin, then its keys probably come from the master key. |
|
|
|
... Old address: 3HkmxFukfkRkTV6BR7xRSNxGjyM38qcnaJ -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is Charles-Tim. My Bitcointalk.org old staked address. August 10, 2021.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
HyQX0/AAqwkmGcl+mKXQSUaDnkrFpN74iQj7H5zmQNYUXVtFv5GNMXIWerYRlQLT+0IuiCofTM76eLk1kI9e0sg=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- The message you signed doesn't say anything except that your user name is Charles-Tim and the date is August 10, 2021 You already signed a message before saying the same thing, so what good is the new message, other than to say that your user name is still Charles-Tim? Think about it. What do you want to say? I think you want to say, This is Charles-Tim. My new signing address is bc1qxg4yj92wnq3lcw0kgj8s3l9xx9jhp4f463gxpu. It is August 10, 2021. If you sign that message, then people will know without a doubt that a message signed with the new address is from you. If you don't sign that message then there is no way to be certain. |
|
|
|
I recommend RaspiBolt. It is a complete guide to building an RPi Bitcoin/Lightning node. RaspiBlitz is another option, but I have not tried it. |
|
|
|
According to many analyzes, inflation is caused by the printing of money by the Central Bank. Excessive printing of money will create an imbalance in supply and demand, which will have a negative impact on the balance sheet.
As a person who really loves BTC, I want to ask, is Bitcoin anti-Inflation?
You might think that Bitcoin is anti-inflationary because the supply is fixed, but that is not the whole story. Inflation (rising prices) can come from 3 factors, as shown in this relationship: P = MV/Q. Here is how Bitcoin can impact inflation: - Rising money supply (M). The number of bitcoins is fixed, but Bitcoin fractional reserve banking (FRB) is inflationary and it can increase the apparent bitcoin supply by a large multiple.
- Rising velocity (V). This is how often the same money is respent. Bitcoin transactions are more efficient, so Bitcoin is inflationary with respect to velocity.
- Falling transaction volume(Q). A contraction in the economy is inflationary because the same amount of money is available for fewer goods. Bitcoin has no effect on this.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe the idea of a cryptographically-linked chain of data existed before Bitcoin; however, the extension of that idea as it is manifested in Bitcoin (what we call a "block chain") was a part of the invention of Bitcoin.
Anyway, when people say "block chain, but not Bitcoin", they are really just hoping that they can adapt Bitcoin to do something else.
|
|
|
|
Decreasing isn't stability mate, even if the volatility chart goes to the lowest this isn't any where close to stability, all I can see here is massive adoption rate only and that doesn't mean people won't dump when they need money, accept how BTC works and enjoy while doing that
How do you define stability? Is there a measure of stability that I can track? What is the difference between volatility and stability? |
|
|
|
On August 5, 2021, Apple announced new technological measures that Apple will apply to almost all of its devices under the umbrella of "Extensive Child Protection" ( https://www.apple.com/child-safety/). While child abuse is a serious problem, and while efforts to combat it are almost certainly well-intentioned, Apple's proposal introduces a back door that threatens to protect essential privacy for all users of Apple products. This has provoked strong protests from experts and specialists in Internet security and privacy. Experts around the world have sounded the alarm over how Apple's proposed measures could turn any iPhone into a device that continuously scans all photos and messages that are scanned through it to remove any content Report the protest to law enforcement and set an example where our personal belongings become a radical new tool for aggressive surveillance, with little surveillance to prevent possible misuse and unreasonable expansion of the scope of surveillance. more information https://appleprivacyletter.com/I could be wrong, but my understanding is that Apple scans only the pictures that you upload to iCloud. |
|
|
|
Why should i check entire range if i know upto 136bit please check start and end hex values mentioned in above post
B0BEA32711DBB7429BA37464FFBB4C8CDA2FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF -start
B0BEA32711DBB7429BA37464FFBB4C90901000000000000000000000000000 -end
8CDA2FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
90901000000000000000000000000000
This is actual range
ignoring first part
No of Keys need to be checked :-1262600442496196964774503731383792304129 to be exact
this is the address i am looking for 1Btud1pqADgGzgBCZzxzc2b1o1ytk1HYWC
As you wrote, there are potentially 1262600442496196964774503731383792304129 keys to check. That is the number I used in the calculation to determine the time in my previous post. However, there might be a way to theoretically optimize it down to to a much smaller number of keys (see Pollard's kangaroo ECDLP solver), which would give you an answer quickly (again assuming you could check 1x10 21 keys per second), but it would require around a huge amount of storage (potentially more than exists on the planet). Edit: Actually, I don't know what the optimized numbers would be, but that's not really important here. |
|
|
|
I am extremely skeptical of any statements by anyone saying that "whales did this" or "whales did that". It is impossible to accurately associate addresses with people or companies just by analyzing the blockchain. Even with heuristics and advanced surveillance techniques, I don't believe anyone can be as accurate as they want you to believe.
I do NOT want to "associate addresses with people or companies", I DO know there are addresses with large balances, I would like to know which address is changing its balance. It's easy to "know which address is changing its balance" by looking at the block chain, but that information says nothing about whales and nothing about trading. Simply stated, you cannot determine who is trading what by looking at the block chain because trading is done completely off-chain. On the other hand, DeFi protocols on Ethereum might be a different situation. |
|
|
|
How do bitcoin nodes/miners communicate with each other using the same port? Any ideas on how to fix this?
The port is only used to listen for connection requests. |
|
|
|
|
I am extremely skeptical of any statements by anyone saying that "whales did this" or "whales did that". It is impossible to accurately associate addresses with people or companies just by analyzing the blockchain. Even with heuristics and advanced surveillance techniques, I don't believe anyone can be as accurate as they want you to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
