We dropped almost $1000 (10,300–>9,400) in that 48 hour period. I predicted it would hit 8K region and it didn’t quite get there in 48hours...but no one is disputing the “48 hour huge drop” part of the prediction. That part was right.
your problem is that you think falling to $9400 and $8000 are the same thing! well, they are not. in fact it doesn't get any more different than that. falling to $9400 (although still big) was not abnormal. it was a price that we have been seeing for the past 1.5-2 months as i mentioned in this topic before. so basically we are still in the same range as we were for the past 2 months. but falling to $8000 is another 15% lower than what we had established as the bottom of this sideways action. nobody is disputing the price going "sideways", they are disputing your unreasonable expectations. |
|
|
|
this may be another bug in bitcoin core similar to decoderawtransaction which fails to decode transactions containing witnesses properly unless you explicitly pass a Boolean (true) to tell it the transaction is a SegWit one. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5014781.0try using a legacy transaction and see if the amount you get is zero again. this means use a regular address like a P2PKH (address starting with 1 on mainnet) and spend coins from that address. if you don't see the same problem then it must be the bug i mentioned. |
|
|
|
Still, I don't know who are they supporting the Bitcoin SV! Why this coin's rank still too high?
it is because the "ranking" system is a broken one that is ranking different altcoins based on a flawed concept called "market capitalization". so when a shitcoin forks out of bitcoin, it automatically summons 18 million of supply and with at least $100 value it would be $1.8 billion market cap out of thin air! now since majority of users don't even touch these shitcoins and worse they don't touch the shitcoin forked out of another shitcoin forked out of bitcoin (ie. BSV) that means their price isn't going to tank that easily so they stay up. |
|
|
|
the reason why this question keeps coming up for different users every day is that the thing they call "market dominance" has nothing to do with actual "dominance". if we define what that number means, i believe a big part of the question is answered. in short what CMC is calling "dominance" is simply division of bitcoin's market cap (with its ~18 mil supply) by the total market cap of 2000-3000 altcoins (with their total supply of hundreds of trillions). so obviously when bitcoin goes up $1 its market cap goes up $18 million but if those coins go up $1 their market cap goes up hundreds of trillions. so in order to go up the same amount in market cap as bitcoin they just have to increase in price a very tiny fraction of a $1 which is why that percentage which falsely referred to as "dominance" shrank in first place and that is also why it is rising back up again. But what about other possible use cases and some proposed innovative projects in the pipeline? Will this have an impact on crypto innovation if the industry only see a handful of other coins including BTC as viable and disregard others which might even offer superior features and innovation?
the only thing that has an impact on "crypto innovation" and has been preventing it in the past couple of years is the developer's greed. all they want is to make a ton of money in a short time. so what we have is a bunch of premined, fundraising garbage coins that have no innovation and are reusing the same things again and again. if some day some new coin comes along with ACTUAL innovation and superiority, then it wouldn't matter if bitcoin's dominance (or more correctly market cap ratio) were 1% or 99.9999% that new coin would grow automatically and i am not talking about its price but its adoption. |
|
|
|
although the following belongs to BCH but i think it is interesting to see how a spam attack works in real time against bitcoin (BCH is the exact copy inheriting everything) and since it is on an empty mempool so you could clearly single out the spam transactions.  at all times BCH mempool looks like what you see on the right side of the above chart (the flat line), mostly an empty mempool with no more than 200 kB of transactions in it mostly around 50 kB. the interesting thing about this is how it is performed. - it starts with an initial injection of a large number of transactions (265,000) with a total size of 51 MB- the total time it takes is less than 30 minutes. that is ~150 spam/second - another wave also starts 6 hours later that time with half the amount (163,000- 31MB) - this entire spam cost only a 100 bucks. this is how the 2017 spam attack basically worked. of course ratio-wise it is not comparable (they injected 51000 kilobytes in a mempool that only had 200 kilobytes in it) another interesting thing which is mostly BCH related is: - it created a fee market! that "200 kB max" regular transactions that you always see started paying higher fees to get their transactions confirmed. in case you have forgotten BCH has 32 MB blocks...  - and finally looking at the way mempool drops it shows miners are not picking up any more than 1 to 1.5 MB of transaction data to put in the blocks they find (apart from 1 that picked up large amounts in 2 goes). |
|
|
|
it actually is a very easy thing to use. it's just that no wallet implements it, even bitcoin-core only supports it if you use its debug window (command line). it basically is creating a transaction that may or may not have more inputs added later. using it with Sighash_All you ensure that your outputs remain the same. or you could add Sighash_Single so that you sign one output and make sure that remains the same but still leave room open for cases if the other inputs added had a higher value so the "change" could be sent to a new output. |
|
|
|
|
it all comes down to your strategy. if you are an investor then you should have a long term outlook and that makes below $10k a good opportunity to start buying and moving the bought bitcoins to your cold storage for that long term investment.
but if you are a day trader, things would be very different and difficult for you. because nowadays things are unpredictable compared to 3 days ago when price was going up and down in a range that day traders kept making money in. now $9300 was the bottom and you should have bought there and sold at $9800 wishing for it to come back down to buy back again and sell again at above $10k this time,... and so on.
|
|
|
|
|
the problem is that sometimes you can't switch to Linux. for example many day to day things many users do can only be done on Windows because that specific application is only released for Windows. eventually you get used to using the same OS so for anything not-security-critical you stick to Windows which means you have to have an antivirus installed to protect you against "majority" of unwanted things.
so in case of what was quoted, you can't really tell him to uninstall his AV because it may not give him 100% protection because you really are telling him to give up the 90% protection he has just because it is not 100%!
of course the only argument you could make is to move to a secure OS and offline when you deal with things that require security like your cold storage, but for running a node Windows is fine. you just have to learn how to use the AV properly specially the FireWall.
|
|
|
|
How do add those codes to a website?
I can't get the github files from keys.lol on my website too.
Does someone knows what i am doing wrong?
Or could someone describe step by step what do do?
Regards,
it seems like you want someone who takes your hand and walks you through all the steps. there is nothing wrong with that but as i said this is a waste of time project, if it were more constructive project actually aiming to help people, then i (and probably others) would have been more willing to help you out. but there is no point in what you are trying to do here! what would be the purpose? fooling some newbie into entering his private key in your new site so that you could steal his funds? |
|
|
|
1. User provides it's public key (xpub)
i'm confused, why does the "user" provide his xpub if it is "you" who is accepting payments? 3. After that a cron job queries the blockhain for the generated address and checks whether the payment has been made.
4. if balance for the address is equal to the order price the order is marked as paid.
we cannot run a full bitcoin node for that.
so you are relying on a third party to do this verification for you? it doesn't sound safe, specially if the payments are not small. also you should look for "transaction" not just balance. of course since RBF is a thing you have to keep looking. the benefit of this is that as soon as you receive the transaction you can show a message to the user so that they don't have to wait in the dark without knowing if the site is broken or not. a message saying "we've receive this transaction (txid) which has (low/medium/high) fee and needs (x) number of confirmation, it currently has (y)". you could also run bitcoin core in pruned mode which requires less resources. again it depends on the size and frequency of payments you are receiving. |
|
|
|
you should really know what you are doing though, otherwise you may lock up your funds for eternity or sign a transaction that is not valid until hundreds of years. i did something like that recently on testnet because i didn't know about BIP68 and relative locktime, which is for version 2 transactions and the Sequence starts having a more complicated meaning (still haven't read about it though). (to create this example, I ignored all proper security measures and used Bitaddress.org and Coinb.in online. That's why I only used 0.0001BTC for this example. This is very bad practice to do for anything with value. Take precautions!)
you could've used TestNet to save on precious bitcoins and fees and also don't create unnecessary transaction on the main blockchain. run bitaddress.org html or open the website by adding "?testnet=true" to the end. and go to https://coinb.in/#settings and set the network to Bitcoin(testnet) We can't predict transaction fees in the future, so you'll have to take a guess there.
you could also sign with ALL | AnyoneCanPay flags so that in the future they could add an input to your signed transaction to cover the fee. |
|
|
|
I think you would be less interested in this news if we just remove 'Bitcoin' from the title, like:
Scammer caught tortured and killed.
Every day, a lot of people, who scammed others are caught, and punished somehow...
If the scammer is not scamming with bitcoin, but any other kind of money, valuable things, etc... it's possible that he/she would get the same punishment from those who were scammed...
That's life, if someone starts to scam he/she should think about the possible consequences... maybe he was expecting some years in jail and after to spend the money happily somewhere on an exotic place...
well they tortured him for a key reveal. Kind of only can be a btc story. not really. for example if he was scamming fiat then he would be hiding the cash somewhere and they would beat the location out of him. it goes for anything else too, the security levels and methods of storing the valuables might be different but the principle is the same. |
|
|
|
I think we should compare within the period I specified
That is, the period from the recent bottoms (both Litecoin's and Bitcoin's earlier this year) till now, and within this period specifically Litecoin is still a better alternative to Bitcoin if you primarily aim for speculation. Litecoin is now underperforming since the bottom and is at its lowest ratio since 12-2017. Whoever held on halvening hype got rekt. that is partly because litecoin, like other altcoins, is taking effect from bitcoin and since during the LTC halving hype a lot of shit was going on in bitcoin market and price couldn't go up there was dumping all over the altcoin market including in LTC. on top of that there was a lot of FUD and some reality coming out about how LTC development is dead, which it partly was since they just copy everything from bitcoin. which is why i don't think we can call it "underperforming"! |
|
|
|
what these websites do is that they try connecting to different node IP addresses and if they accept the connection (incoming) then the site counts them as a node and if they reject it, the site doesn't. so it other words they are not counting a ton of bitcoin nodes just because these nodes don't accept incoming connections. - Has China lost its leading position in bitcoin ecosystem, that reflected via total bitcoin nodes in that nation?
China has never had any "lead" to lose it now. the media made them big partially because the biggest ASIC manufacturer and mining pool is located in China and partially because of the fake and huge trading volume their exchanges used to report. but China has never been in the lead. There is language barrier - most of the quality resources are in English, so it can be very hard to effectively use Bitcoin Core without the knowledge of this language. You also need some pretty good general computer proficiency to run the client, and you can see that most countries on the list also have high quality education, especially in fields like computer science. Bitcoin's ideology of freedom is also more appealing to people from the West, as historically ideas like democracy and liberalism originate from that region.
it is not like China is at the bottom of the list! it is the fifth one which is still a pretty high rank. |
|
|
|
~ But as long as i type in www.binance.com on the address bar on my google chrome address bar, that is fine right? yeah, that is fine the browser will automatically recognize the ssl part and adds the https to the beginning. it is also a good idea to bookmark the site so that you can just click the bookmark. you could also always switch to another browser like Firefox. |
|
|
|
is there ANY POINT AT ALL in using a cash-like internet currency if we accept a middleman that changes it back into a controlled system?
what if that middleman is acting like a link between the two worlds. it helps those who don't want to accept bitcoin be linked with those who want to spend bitcoin. of course in an ideal world you don't want a third party but in that ideal world bitcoin price is stable and it is mass adopted so the merchant accepting bitcoin doesn't have to convert it back to fiat and possibly lose a big percentage when he wants to resupply. i say they are a necessary evil for now. |
|
|
|
Hey,
i already knew those. But i need/ want them on a file.
Those sites are generation them from the fly.
Does anyone know how to do that?
it is better to spend your time doing something better, but if you want to waste it then here is the pseudo code: int keyPerPageCount
int pageNumber
Base16Encoder enc16
Base58Encoder enc58
for i from (pageNumber*keyPerPageCount) to ((pageNumber+1)*keyPerPageCount)
keyHexArray <- enc16(i).Pad(32)
keyWifArray <- enc58(i)
Print(keyHexArray & keyWifArray)
|
|
|
|
Address generation from mnemonic phrase is random. There is no guarantee that you'll end up creating the exact same address set as of Coinomi.
the mnemonic phrase itself is generated at random not the addresses. they are in fact reproducible and that is the whole point of deterministic design, to be able to generate the same exact address from the same exact seed anytime you want. |
|
|
|
|
it is not called "diggers", it is "miners" and it is not "the loot", it is called "block reward". and it is not split between anyone it is claimed by the one who finds the block but if that "one" happens to be a pool then that pool splits what it received among all those who shared the work based on their share.
the more "workers" the smaller their share but the thing is the number of "workers" only increases when price goes up which means the smaller share they would receive is going to be worth more then. so they are content.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
