El sistema de España para regulaciones de todo tipo es basnate estricto,solo saber que nada más a personas como Shakira las pueden hacer olvillo si puede, ¿que queda para nosotros los mortales?
El sistema de Hacienda hace arrodillar a cualquier persona y si tengo un exchange ,igual ellos lo saben y más si hago una transferencia o un pequeño intercambio,si eso lo descubren es un porblema porque se debe pagar un gran impuesto,entonces yo digo ¿Cómo evadir esto? ¿Cómo tener libertad para mover mis bitcoin? un intercambio P2P es la posible solucion,yo me pregunto si yo me voy a España como migrante y siempre uso Binance,¿cómo hago para cambiar mi estilo de vida si no uso bancos? si hay algo que admiro de los españoles es la manera para manejarse con el BTC y las altcoins llevarlas a Euro sin pagar nada,ya no hay exchanges que no pidan el famoso KYC.
A Shakira creo que le pillaron con el dinero fuera, o al menos argumentaba Hacienda de España que habia ganado su patrimonio viviendo +183 dias en España y le correspondia pagar el IRPF, por lo tanto toca demostrar que has pasado esos +183 dias fuera para poder empezar siquiera a presentar una defensa. A partir de ahi incluso habiendo vivido +183 dias fuera, Hacienda pudiera argumentar que el centro de interes vital/economico esta en España. Realmente nunca sabemos lo que hubiera pasado si Shakira hubiese dado batalla, ya vimos en otros casos como Xavi Alonso o Jorge Lorenzo doblegaron a Hacienda. Pero esta gente, son multimilonarios. Para un caso normal, recomiendo leer la historia del campeon de ajedrez que gano a Hacienda, pero aun asi, su situacion actual es que habiendo ganado se siente que ha perdido, despues de todo el dinero invertido en abogados y el detrimento que sufrio su salud por la sitacion. En este sentido, hemos visto a mucha gente con BTC sin declarar que gano de manera licita por ejemplo en este foro, y ahora no saben bien como regularizar la situacion. Si bien, si vas y te presentas ante a Hacienda queriendo regularizar, es mucho mas positivo que te pillen, realmente es desconocida cual pudiera ser el resultado de dar ese paso, es algo a tener en cuenta. En cuanto a las estrategias de Cryptospain, llevan tambien un riesgo implicito, puesto que son estrategias bastante "extremas" y para que son mas bien grises que legales diria yo, aunque entiendo que hay gente que pueda optar por esa via, puesto que presentarte ante Hacienda de buenas, tambien tiene su riesgo. Aqui hay pensar que escenario seria mejor. Solo hay esas 2 opciones, o presentarse por la via oficial, o buscar una via alternativa. Quedarte con un capital inutilizable, no lo ve como una opcion valida. |
|
|
|
In fact I would trust Saylor more than an ETF, since this guy is an actual bitcoiner, unlike Blackrock and co.
Read more about him and what he did during dot.com bubble. What he promised and how average investor ended up trusting him. in fact, this is visible in the chart. Dump form $3200 to $20 in 1.5 year. Saylor simply stuck to bitcoin, which became the last resort for his unprofitable company. I wouldn't trust him, because history shows that he likes to swim in the tears of his investors. What you say is exactly what saylor wanted to become (or have to become) to save his company. And I'm not entirely sure if he actually is what he claims to be. As for Bitcoin exposure, many fully regulated brokers have Bitcoin CFDs available. My regulated broker has CFDs on over 100 crypto trading pairs. this will be enough for you, at least while waiting for bitcoin etf, which will probably arrive in a month. Well Saylor has a stack of the underlying asset, a massive one that is, and is doing a great job at leveraging and managing the way in which he has borrowed debt. He's basically got billions worth of fiat at very low interest rates, even 0%, and now he is going to be able to keep buying Bitcoin dips for years to come, he's at 1+ billion profit. I don't know what he did in the past, but so far he is doing great. Even Adam Back is buying MSTR and has praised his company in the way they are delivering a premium. He also has become a hardcore Bitcoiner and knows what he is doing. His company is now profitable and he is managing debt properly so I don't know what else would you ask for as an investor. Also, if you watch any chart of the companies that are doing great nowadays, they all nosedived hardcore on 2000, but those are the winners of today. If he found a way to win by becoming a Bitcoin's holding company then so be it. |
|
|
|
Talking about Windows, are you aware of LTSC version which has less bloat and longer support?
Yeah, that is what I have been using since day 1. Windows 10 LTSC Enterprise version 1809. It works pretty well, gets updated, and has never added anything in terms of bloatware, so im good. Im not sure for how long does this get you covered before they force you to update to Windows 11. I think it was 10 years, so arround 2028 I'll have to update to whatever is the next best thing that's lightweight and long term supported. |
|
|
|
|
I would like to know if anyone has MSTR shares. Does it correlate well with BTC? I am considering using Michael Saylor's stock as a way to get into BTC with fiat without being blocked by banks. Trying to buy BTC with exchanges it's becoming annoying, banks block transactions, it's just annoying. Then there's the risk that the exchange fucks up somehow. If they get hacked, now some bastards will be able to buy your dox next to your BTC movements on the darknet, so I was looking at alternatives and only found GBTC, but I don't get how the whole premium stuff works. There's some sort of an ETF in Canada but I have no access to it.
The only alternative i've seen is the MSTR shares, I can buy this on my bank right now with no problem, any amount I want, and I would have BTC exposure without risks, other than having to trust Saylor with not screwing up on the custody side, but he seems to know what he is doing. From what I've seen correlation is not 1:1 but close to it. With 150k+ BTC bought, his company is almost a de-facto ETF. In fact I would trust Saylor more than an ETF, since this guy is an actual bitcoiner, unlike Blackrock and co.
I know the best thing to do is to be your self custodian, but sometimes you have to be realistic. If you sold a property for like 300k, and you want to buy 300k worth of BTC, you are going to face problems when buying on an exchange, because they'll block your transaction. With MSTR, I've already got the funds ready, just a click away and I've got the BTC exposure I want. It is also not a 10+ year move. I want exposure for like 1 to 2 years, hoping BTC does not disappoint as an hedge during a potential recession.
So my question is, does anyone own shares, and has anyone researched this at any serious level to recommend anything I should know before I buy in?
|
|
|
|
your original topic was not about index funds. it was about you long holding bonds yourself
because with index funds YOU dont hold the 10 year bond, the fund does, You are not locked in for 10 years
the fund decides whats in the basket and you just get the averaged interest of the basket each year
however now you moved the conversation to index funds.. you dont need to worry or care about "long holding"... its the portfolio fund manager that holds. and you just take your yearly interest.. short or long term. you choose
so you wont care or mind about length. thats the portfolios problem. and in most cases.. they dont sell early. because you selling your share is just a new customer buying your share. so no impact on the portfolio manager for them to need to sell the bond
that said.. you need to, if you are just going to invest and forget your shares.. when the current 5% bonds expire in X years.. if the interest rates have dropped again where 2% are the only options the portfolio manager can buy post-expiry. then it can affect your interest on your side if the portfolio manager gets heavy in 2% bonds basket average
most other investments EASILY make a swing between 7-12% so if you are looking for a strong support of 5% plus.. investing in other markets, it can do you well..
bonds (actually holding them) is only done as a last ditch effort to throw money at bonds when other investment plans have been filled
..
again people only buy bonds directly when they have tapped out all of their yearly deposit limits of other investment plans. and they dont want more then $250k(FDIC limit) left in a bank account.
most people prefer to buy real estate or other things that appreciate before buying bonds direct.
bonds usually top out at 6% interest max.. other investments start at 6% minimum
How do you rate the TLT bet as of right now? Looking at the chart, looks pretty bottomed. I was looking at older articles, found stuff like this: https://www.seeitmarket.com/one-chart-for-investors-watch-long-bond-etf-tlt/The descending triangle was bearish but this guy said to buy in, well we know what happened, now at still under 100, seems like a nice to buy, considering rates seem to be topped, keyword "seem", they can always raise again, but realistically, it seems inflation is going lower, and it's not on their interest to go into an election with high rates, it's unpopular, for both markets and families due mortgages being higher. So at the minimum possibility, I see them lowering them, however, as rates are lowered, it usually means the market tops after a while, or at least it's been the case 3 out of 3 times since the 2000's. So my possible bet is to buy TLT as an hedge in a recession, as my shares would go up since they are bought at higher yield, and I would be well diversified on a single fund, then to bet that BTC will do well and also to profit from ETF hype, im considering MSTR shares, at this point, it just tracks BTC. Im going to make a thread on this to see if anyone is holding this at all. Im not interested in buying big amounts of BTC with exchanges because they are all scams so I rather trust Saylor with the custody of the BTC, I don't even want to hold it long term just for a couple of years anyway. |
|
|
|
I have been running the same distro for years and now im basically forced to wipe the install and start from scratch because they stopped rolling updates. I was using Elementary OS version 5 and as you can see the Ubuntu release it's based on doesn't do updates anymore. elementary OS Version Released Ubuntu Release Ubuntu Maintenance Updates
0.4 Loki Sep 9, 2016 16.04 LTS April 2021
5 Juno Oct 16, 2018 18.04 LTS April 2023
5.1 Hera Dec 3, 2019 18.04 LTS April 2023
6 Odin Aug 10, 2021 20.04 LTS April 2025
6.1 Jólnir Dec 20, 2021 20.04 LTS April 2025
7.0 Horus Jan 31, 2023 22.04 LTS April 2027I want to ask what people here are using. I want something that is easy to install that has full disk encryption features during the install on the GUI. And basically something without privacy unfriendly bloatware (like Ubuntu). I would also like something that doesn't force you to wipe your stuff and start from scratch every 2 or 3 years. I was looking at n0nce's guide on OpenSUSE. I have never tried that one. Not sure if meets the criteria but having a guide is really nice and would save a lot of time. But there's not much documentation in regards to Bitcoin, most of it is Ubuntu or Debian based. Someone commented this: SUSE is rather painful to get in to in some aspects. I did many custom deployments of OS and post install automatic configuration. Suse frustrated me because they put things in different places compared to most of the other distros, and have an extremely capable and complicated installation control file. Unfortunately, it is not easily created and the documentation is partially missing. To allow users/admins to make use of control files; ALL the possible valid options must be listed in the documentation and this documentation needs to be in a well known or easily found location. It is only AFTER investing considerable time that I came to appreciate the odd and different over-engineered aspects of SUSE. It is very powerful. So I would rather use something more common. I want to be able to search for stuff and find answers. mocacinno has a guide for CentOS, but it hasn't been update in 3 years so probably there's some stuff that changed. Does anyone maintain any other guides for different distros? Im interested in mostly a Bitcoin Core node to form transaction in a desktop install, and a watch-only wallet to broadcast them and check funds, and do this through Tor with a laptop. There has to be a simple OS that just works. But I guess im going to need to go with Ubuntu based ones so that will require full updates every 2 or 3 years when LTS versions run out of updates. And since I use full disk encryption im going to need to reinstall the whole think backing up the wallets and resync. I guess I can do that every few years. In that case I would try the new ElementaryOS but I would like to know what people hereare using, please let me know so I decide what to install. I'm not sure why everyone is so obsessed with updates. Many would say it's not safe to keep using OS without getting regular updates, but I've seen lots of machines running something ancient like Centos 5 for example and yet they're rock solid. Don't fix it if ain't broken they say. Reinstalling from scratch every 5 or even 3 years doesn't seem reasonable to me. Just my 2c. Well one would expect that as time progresses bugs are found which can be exploited, and these exploits would receive updates, so it seems reasonable to update when possible. Of course reinstalling sucks but what can you do? Beside going for LTS releases, at some point you need to reinstall which sucks, that is why try to extend as much as possible each install. For my Windows computer I was using Windows 7 until the very last day and I hope to do the same with Windows 10. |
|
|
|
when you have maxed out your allowed deposit limits of investments and pension contributions where you are left with leaving funds accruing in a easy access normal banking account where the sum in that account then exceeds the FDIC insured amount ($250k) then you would put the excess into bonds, knowing you dont need to touch it short term because you have all the other amounts you can spend/dip into first
if you are on a lower income. when you have enough savings to cover emergencies in an easy access account. like house repairs, kitchen applience replacements and enough to cover 3-6months of unemployment expenses. and you are putting your pension contributions in. then put excess into bonds knowing you wont need to touch it for the full period
on a fixed term bond you only lose if you sell early. so if the 5%/year is good for you. and you wont touch it for 10 years. and you dont see a better investment to put the funds into. then put it into bonds. but in most cases getting 6%+ via other investments is possible so a 5% fixed 10% is a question you should ask only when you have filled up all other temporary savings/investment pots
I edited the original post to indicate the fact that I was talking about index funds, not holding the actual bonds yourself. TLT is an index fund that holds a ton of different bonds and always self-adjusts to have a 20+ average duration, which means if interest rates go higher it will be like leveraged betting, it's liquidation value will go up if these long term bond's yield goes down, approximately it should be around 20% on each point basis. This is a cool bet to make if interest rates are really going to go lower, but you are basically betting that we go into another QE round of low interest rates, not sure if 0, but perhaps, 1 to 2%? In EU the 20 year German bond is already pretty low tho, so if they go lower, they either don't have that much of a margin to go lower, or go into near 0 again (and EU went negative interest rates for a period which is nuts). The thing is, if they go back to QE, this may lead to more inflation, but if they don't lower rates, this may lead to bankruptcies as the higher interest rates hit the economy. So who knows what they will do. Im leaning more towards the lower rates period which means these funds should go up. This is not investment advice since your strategy can get wrecked at any moment if they decide to raise rates again. |
|
|
|
|
Does anyone here have long duration bonds on their portfolio using index funds? Im talking 10+ year duration. Typically the US investor would use TLT ETF for this bet, but it can be bought in most countries. Is this a buy in your book at current prices? Some people are making big bets with 3x leveraged ETFs. Im considering a position on this as an hedge during a recession. I have my doubts that BTC will perform well on that scenario or if it will just follow the SP500 again, since I don't want to find out I would rather diversify.
This may be a decent bet, even tho you can get wrecked if long term bonds don't go down. So far the yield curve is still silly at such inverted levels, but the market seems to be ok with these rates and expects it to go lower. If they really go lower, who knows if inflation will not hit even harder eventually. All things considered, from a TA this looks like a buy, but things can always go lower. The macro aspect is hard to predict. But as with everything, if you wait for market confirmation you may miss all the best gains, but you will also protect yourself from getting wrecked if interest rates move up additionally.
PS: Im talking about index funds, not directly holding the bonds yourself.
|
|
|
|
Most of the important stuff has already been covered... The only thing that worries me is your definition of *shredding*.
Most others have already assumed you're actually using a tool that's overwriting the sectors on your disk when you're *shredding* a file. I just want to make sure your definition of shredding isn't using a gui file manager to remove a file and then emptying the recycle bin (my first job required me to man the endusers helpdesk for 1 day a week... I've learned that assuming somebody is using the correct definition of a process might lead to disasters).
OP, how are you shredding the wallet file? If you do this correctly, the attack vector is small, if you mess this up anybody able to run an forensic toolkit on your disk might be able to recover you wallet (depending on things like encryption, physical access, the ability to log in to your running system, etc)
I mean the shred tool on the Linux terminal which I think comes preinstalled in all distributions. The average Ubuntu user should at least have these installed by default. I personally use shred -uvz. This will deliver 3 passes by default, but you can specify with -n x where x is number of passes. The default should be enough for HDD. And for SSD, if you use full disk encryption, im not sure if they would realistically recover anything. From stackexchange: -u ensures that after the shred operation is completed, the file is unallocated and removed. -v enables verbose output for tracking the shred progress -z performs a final zero-ization of the file to hide that the allocation on disk was shredded. I navigate manually into the folder and use shred for the specific file instead of using path on the command to not accidentally screw something up. |
|
|
|
Quick question about the macOS build.
Over time, it seems that the more recent builds of Bitcoin Core require a newer and newer version of macOS to run. Is this because you guys are building against a newer XCode, or has it stayed the same all these years?
By comparison, the Windows and Linux builds have an excellent lifecycle.
Im not familiar with macOS at all or anything Apple for that matter but it probably has to do with lack of backward compatibility with some libraries or something. Considering how the whole Apple stock depends on short lived newer models being bought and replaced. This guy here said on stackexchange: The Windows code-base is all about backwards compatibility, some apps from Windows 1.0 continue to work just fine, as you can even run 16-bit apps in Windows 10 if you need to. macOS has a different philosophy, Apple burns the underbrush and cleans house on certain compatibility stubs on a regular basis. A Mac app from 2012 probably won't run today unless recompiled 64-bit, yet a Windows app from 1992 might run just fine. Wouldn't recommend running anything Bitcoin outside of Linux anyway. |
|
|
|
|
If you open a wallet.dat file, will it leave any traces anywhere at all? Im talking about a linux step, specifically Debian 12.
Suppose you have 2 wallets, wallet1.dat is a KYC wallet, wallet2.dat is a non-KYC wallet. You have wallet2.dat saved elsewhere, but copy it into this partition where you run Bitcoin Core and open it to check funds. You check funds and are ok with it, the funds are there, I don't need this file in there anymore, so you shred it.
My question is, if an attacker where to inspect this hard drive, would they see that wallet2.dat was ever there? This is a matter of forensics, but this has also to do with the software. For instance, some software leave temporary files in certain "temp folders", or have a "recently opened" files on a dropdown menu, etc.
Does Bitcoin Core leave any of these necessary traces that a file was used? if so then how does one disable any of that?
|
|
|
|
|
Could the network of nodes be used in a way to create a built-in system to send joined transactions of sorts within the Bitcoin Core? Or is this considered outside of the scope of the project and you are always going to need to use some sort of 3rd party software or web as a service?
Could there be any legal implications in doing this? (see, "privacy enhancing" coins like XMR, I reckon had some sort of problems when being listed in some wallets).
I would just prefer to have it all inside Core so you can select to make a non-private transaction or a private transaction, which would enter into a pool of other people that are wanting to do a non-private transaction and join all of these somehow, with a fee market or something like that. I would like to get your view on this and if it's worth developing for Bitcoin Core with the eventual implementation or nobody is going to want this within the wallet software? And again the legal implications would also be interesting to know if anyone is an expert on this matter.
Until then I guess we have to keep using other wallets and webs to get any privacy out of Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
They will never be mainstream unless the public is essentially forced to use Bitcoin as the only alternative for private payments, that is, once governments remove physical cash, then the only alternative to pay without reporting to someone what you are doing, will be to use Bitcoin (and I assume, some other altcoins). The problem with BTC will be the fees, so in order for anyone to bother, if we really move smaller payments to LN, it will need to be insanely useful and accessible through your standard phone. Nobody is going to bother, at the mainstream level, to deal with convoluted operations like opening and closing channels and so on. They'll probably end up just giving up on any privacy and use whatever CBDC they are issued.
|
|
|
|
Suse is knows as a secure distro, you would not believe how many flags pop up if you run the stig profile trough openscap on a plain vanilla installation... It took me ages to close most of the "gaps", but it's allmost impossible to get a perfect score. Next to this, security vulnerability's are found (and patched) on a daily basis, there ARE virusses targetting linux distro's... And then there's the PICNIC problem, every piece of software has config you CAN (and probably will) mess up, sometimes resulting in a (small) attack vector.
There will never be such thing as PERFECT Security. There will always be gaps. I tend to believe Linux offers better Security than Windows only if the user continues the same behavior they had when they had Windows installed. Browsing the same pages. The same websites. Downloading from the same sources. If your behavior changes from typical Windows user to paranoid Linux user then you are going to visit more Privacy oriented websites. You will download from more Privacy oriented sources. You will change your behavior. I would say for the better. But on the other hand there will be more Linux targeting viruses on such websites than if you search for things the usual user of Windows would. As a consequence you are going to probably have about the same Security you had on Windows. Also remember there is a Terminal we are supposed to use. This gives us control but it is pointless to think of it as more secure if the user has no idea what they are writing into it. Installing DEB files from unknown sources or with out verifying their legitimacy beforehand. Downloading packages from the Internet instead of using the Terminal for this purpose. Installing 'App Stores'. Modifying and doing things as SU. There are many ways some body could mess up badly even with the 'safest' Distro. I would argue it is a steep learning curve but also a steep way to more Security. The more you learn, the less likely an attack. Any body who has never used Linux before. If you want to separate from Windows and move to it, go ahead. But I really do recommend you first experiment with it. Get some old laptop and start messing with Linux. See what is good or bad to do. Learn. When you are ready and feel safe to move permanently, go. I would say you are already compromised by default no matter what you do if you run a Windows machine. Your entire operating system is essentially a backdoor since your code is unknown, so anything goes. A Linux user is going to be protected from that, since most software developers on Linux have an open source philosophy and such mindset and environment is free of viruses since if your code is open source, no one is going to bother with putting bad stuff on it anyway. There's also the fact that anyone that bothers enough to look up a Windows alternative should already have some minimum knowledge of not downloading pirated software, visiting websites that tend to have scripts and so on. As far as Debian, im going to go with version 12 since I've decided it's the best approach. SuSe is too niche for me and other alternatives are either bloated or lack documentation. |
|
|
|
|
Sobre los puntos 2 y 3:
2) No se como sera en España, pero en USA el IRS tengo entendido que considera la compra de bienes y servicios con cryptos como un evento taxable, es algo a tener en cuenta por si en España asi fuese tambien.
3) Las terceras partes deberian tributar el impuesto de donaciones y sucesiones (se consideraria una donacion) y si estos vendiesen (incremento patrimonial IRPF en base ahorro)
Evidementemente tanto 2) como 3) son una estafa desde un punto de vista objectivo aunque sean ley, pero no recomiendo saltarse ninguna ley con este comentario.
|
|
|
|
So every time you want to use Bitcoin to buy a gift card, pay a bill, buy any physical or digital good, cash it out in a fiat currency other than the US dollar, its a capital gains event.
Stupid as all hell.
Clearly the government is not getting our best and brightest. To be frank I've only ever met a handful of "smart" government employees. And their jobs were incentive-based, not just a flat salary, which partially explains it.
I understand part of it is they want to make Bitcoin as inconvenient to use as possible so people will stick with the dollar, but in the long run I just don't see that happening. They can attempt to do it through threatening legislation, but its simply not going to work, mark my words.
The whole goal is obviously making any OTC operative impossible at the regulatory level, to the point users feel asphyxiated and wouldn't even bother withdrawing their funds out of exchanges. That's the whole point of the ETF's. Investors with relevant amounts of money willing to buy BTC are never going to bother holding the money themselves. If it's hard by itself being a self-custodian due all the things involved from a technical POV and the high responsibility it takes, now add in the fact that you'll have to document every single movement your wallet does and they'll just not bother and stick to regulated instruments, whether buying on the exchange and not withdrawing or by buying the ETF. Once they are main custodians on BTC I can see them attempting a fork of sorts. I hope everyone is aware of this possibility. They also want to do this so when they ban physical cash, people are scared to use BTC as a cash substitute since every transaction would mean some sort of liability against the assorted taxman. |
|
|
|
What I want to do now is to find a new phone, because I have some Galaxy phone from 10 years ago, so im assuming this Android version it's using is not updated and thus dangerous to use. You can always wipe the outdated OS and use a FOSS one instead. In addition to the distros ETFbitcoin has already mentioned, there is also Ubuntu Touch. Your best bet will probably be LineageOS or DivestOS though, which both support a wide range of old Samsung models: https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/#samsunghttps://divestos.org/pages/devicesI would then basically use Electrum, and transact through Tor. I would need to consider if I would even need to transact through my node or just use some of the reasonable to use servers through Tor. Since the amounts aren't even big, it should be enough. And I don't want to connect my phone back to my node which is sitting at home physically anyway, I would rather compromise using someone else's server and send through there. If you are only using the wallet to store a single UTXO received from elsewhere and then to later send that UTXO to your trading partner, then there will be minimal privacy loss from using a third party Electrum server via Tor. The server would be able to see all the other addresses in your wallet, but provided you are never going to use them for anything then that is irrelevant. It does mean using a new wallet for each trade you make, though, otherwise the server would be able to link all your trades to the same person. Did further research on this and turns out there's another option, Replicant OS: https://www.replicant.us/freedom-privacy-security-issues.phpMobile devices such as phones and tablets are taking and increasingly important part in our computing, hence they are particularly subject to freedom and security concerns. These devices are actually full computers with powerful hardware, running complete operating systems that allow for updates, software changes and installable applications: this makes it easy to run free software on them. Mobile devices are often used for communications and provide hardware features that are sensitive when it comes to privacy and security: GPS, camera, microphone, etc, in addition to storing the user's data. Hence, they are particularly subject to being used to spy on the user. I don't think it gets as anymore free as in freedom than Replicant for the mobile phone, the problem is, just like how it happens with computers, you are limited to a tiny amount of devices that meet the requirements. So you would need to find some ancient S3 phone. Would Electrum run there? Note that even if you get the higher open source levels here, the last security update for Android 6 is was from October 2017, so that's another compromise, so at some point you have to wonder where is the balance there. |
|
|
|
Recently I've heard some statements from the SEC's side that they are pointing they have no reason to stop the approval.
what it actually means there is no ability anymore for SEC to just decline without reason anymore.. (the courts sorted that out due to the grayscale case, however they can deny ETF that dont meet the criteria That was nothing new from the 17th November's development,it was clear SEC has no issue with the spot ETF of the Bitcoin, and they are just looking for a good time why? even I'm not sure about it.
out of the 12 not all of them do. so some can be denied the november 17th event was not a deadline to announce any approvals it was a date of communication with some etf's applicants where the SEC gave some advice to some etf applicants about some obvious issues the SEC found I just find it amazing that the SEC would approve a Bitcoin ETF at all considering the Tether problem was never really addressed, there wasn't a proper audit as far as I can tell. If you check the Blackrock fillings they included on the pdf what's basically disclaimers about the risk of tetherings going on that could cause in loses for investors. So if they approve this they don't really care about that. I've always thought that if they approve a Bitcoin ETF, is because they have a plan to try to use it to control it in some way, probably via liquidity, then try to influence exchanges and miners into a Blackcoin of sorts. |
|
|
|
--snip--
I see a problem with this: This is one of the most noticeable differences. With descriptor wallets, you cannot export the private key for one address. This is because a child private key combined with the parent public key can be used to compute the parent private key (and hence all other child private keys). This is a risk inherent in BIP 32's unhardened derivation. As such, descriptor wallets disallow the export of child private keys in order to mitigate the risk of accidentally exposing the parent private key.
But you shouldn't be exporting individual private keys anyways. The wallet does not use just one private key, so having an individual child private key is really not that useful. If you want to export a private key that contains a reasonable amount to carry on a phone and import it into the phones Electrum wallet or whatever, then with the new format you wouldn't be able to do this, because apparently you will not be able to export individual private keys due the new format. I get your point. But importing Bitcoin private keys to another device/wallet usually isn't recommended. Just create new wallet on your phone and send some Bitcoin to it. Look at the fees, not really great to waste money on fees when you are looking at current rates, and we aren't talking settling big amounts, but small amounts to use on a phone number, so it's really not worth it. Importing and exporting private keys could be reasonable if were you hold your keys is an airgapped device, and you could use a QR code reader so nothing is leaked, and we are talking private keys that don't hold some huge amount so it shouldn't be a problem. I'll need to evaluate what is the best way. At least I've seen an achow interview where he says they will keep support for old wallets for at least 3 years, beyond that you'll have to convert the format |
|
|
|
Is there any problems at all if I just keep the legacy format?
achow101 mentioned legacy wallet support will be dropped on Bitcoin Core 27.0[1]. If you decide to use that version in future, you must convert legacy wallet to descriptor wallet. Also this always sounded more secure to me even if you required to make backups each time you generated new addresses to keep them: The original Bitcoin Core wallet was a collection of unrelated private keys. I don't see how it's more secure unless you assume master private key alone could be brute-forced or stolen. [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5469585.msg62962204#msg62962204I see a problem with this: This is one of the most noticeable differences. With descriptor wallets, you cannot export the private key for one address. This is because a child private key combined with the parent public key can be used to compute the parent private key (and hence all other child private keys). This is a risk inherent in BIP 32's unhardened derivation. As such, descriptor wallets disallow the export of child private keys in order to mitigate the risk of accidentally exposing the parent private key.
But you shouldn't be exporting individual private keys anyways. The wallet does not use just one private key, so having an individual child private key is really not that useful. If you want to export a private key that contains a reasonable amount to carry on a phone and import it into the phones Electrum wallet or whatever, then with the new format you wouldn't be able to do this, because apparently you will not be able to export individual private keys due the new format. What I've read is that it makes watch only wallet creation much easier. Also can you finally have a seed that generates the wallet safely like on Electrum if on a worst case scenario you lose your wallet file or that's not possible? From what I read this wasn't really secure but I only use Electrum for phone with small amounts anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
