Ahh, I noticed you weren't selling adds for next month. I wondered what you had up your sleeve.

Do you have a system in place to prevent duplicates?

Apart from when they were hacked for thousands of bitcoin earlier this year. Oh and when they were hacked for thousands of users' KYC documents, also earlier this year.

You can read the breakdown of the calculation here: https://beincrypto.com/binance-earns-more-than-20000-per-day-overcharging-on-transaction-fees/

Binance made 7 transactions in an hour, each transaction containing 36 outputs, paying a total of 0.01 BTC in mining fees. With their withdrawal fee of 0.0005, 0.0005*36*7 = 0.126 BTC charged to customers, leaving Binance with a profit of 0.116 BTC in a single hour. Multiply that by 24 to get close to 3 BTC per day. Now add in a similar calculation for all the different coins they list, and that $20k a day suddenly becomes much higher.

It's disgusting really, and Binance are probably far from being the worst offenders here. If you don't want to continue to be ripped off, then you should consider trading peer-to-peer on a DEX instead.

Which address is yours? Which address are you trying to send to? Who owns the address you are sending to? Who sent you the email?

The address you've listed as "received" 14b5EfgrLHkANk3YoabhW4ZT1Th7GiHHRh received 0.01500815 BTC in transaction 43388016fe4bd069def076882a1a7cbf3da8956e0aed0710ffd89d352024032c.

28 minutes later, that address then moved that 0.01500815 BTC out to address 1NrKyL9RTXTW8rJ7sx88QJiUZmyAAgWg2G in transaction 0e0f4bd8d5732883609088d8f6ae2a882eee7e617b2740e20c6f111ba19c267e.

Those addresses aren't directly linked to the address you listed as "sending". However, the first transaction above (43388016fe4bd069def076882a1a7cbf3da8956e0aed0710ffd89d352024032c) also sent 0.00532533 BTC to 1DaMm1S7cadFCdH5LBUPH7gdf4mhrej2Vp, which 50 minutes later sent the full amount to the other address you listed, 31yRCBXFnGbPXQrmJhXuvtA8RfECKtCkiU in transaction 0b62a3053f28e6c3cf9410e9a20c54c02a1d22f1fdc5d2fba321fe17342d8023.

Lots of transactions on an address usually just means the address belongs to an exchange or other service which is processing large volumes, but yes, sometimes it could be operated by a scammer.

No problem. As long as you transfer the entire amount from your paper wallet to your blockchain.com wallet, then you don't have to worry about change addresses. The blockchain.com wallet will handle them all for you in the background, much like it will with your private keys. As long as you have a secure password, your 12 word phrase backed up on paper somewhere safe, and ideally 2FA on the account to help prevent anyone else from accessing it, you'll be fine.

Although Electrum is safer than using a web wallet, if you are concerned about getting confused or doing something wrong, and you have some familiarity with blockchain.com as you said you have used them before, then it would probably be better for you just stick with them for now. If you do want to use Electrum, then it would be wise to practice creating a wallet, and then deleting it and restoring it from the back up phrase just to be sure you did it all correctly. Only ever download from the official site (electrum.org - there are many phishing sites out there), and ideally verify your download before installing it (instructions here: https://bitcoinelectrum.com/how-to-verify-your-electrum-download/).

You could have them, if you wanted them, but there is no need to have them with a blockchain.com wallet. The wallet stores them for you and signs any transaction you want with them automatically in the background.

Yes. Provided you have correctly written down the 12 mnemonic words that blockchain.com generates for you, you can use these 12 words to derive your wallet's seed, all therefore all its private keys, and all its addresses, if you so wish.

You don't actually need to "know" the private key, but you would need to have access to the private key to be able to spend the coins from the change address. The private key would be automatically generated and stored for you by blockchain.com, and you would be able to use it to sign a transaction simply by logging in to your blockchain.com account. The change address is part of the same wallet you would be spending from - each wallet can contain many addresses.

The step where you could potentially lose a portion of your money is going from paper wallet to blockchain wallet, not transferring out of the blockchain wallet.

Paper wallets only have one address. They do not have a change address to send to change to. If you try to transfer a portion of your funds out of a paper wallet, you may inadvertently transfer the change to an address you can't access. You can easily avoid this simply by sweeping the entire amount from your paper wallet to your blockchain wallet.

Transferring out of your blockchain wallet is safe from a change address point of view. Their software will automatically generate a new change address for you, which you control, inside your current wallet. Anything you don't spend will be automatically transferred back to this change address. From the point of view of your wallet interface, your change will never leave your wallet.

I'll say again though, I wouldn't be sweeping paper wallets to a web wallet. Choose a good desktop wallet instead.

The other 1 BTC would return to your Blockchain account and be available to you to send or spend elsewhere. If would automatically be returned to a newly generated change address within your wallet. There is no such thing as a "change wallet", only "change addresses" within a wallet. You can read the blockchain.com support page on this here: https://support.blockchain.com/hc/en-us/articles/360018566291-Change-addresses

Change addresses are most important to pay attention to when using a paper wallet. Since a paper wallet only contains one address, there is no "change address" to return unspent coins to, and some users have lost their change when only spending part of a paper wallet. It is generally best practice when using a paper wallet to spend it all at once.

Blockchain is a web wallet, and is generally a poor choice to use to store your funds though. A better option would be to use a hardware wallet, or failing that, a desktop wallet such as Electrum. With Electrum you can have full control over your change addresses, you can see them all, and even choose which ones to send to.

Loyce crunched some numbers on that a few months ago. At the time, it would have shrunk the list of DT2 from 229 to 63.

63 was probably a bit on the low side, considering we have 100 DT1s (or usually around 95 if you exclude the handful who are excluded). However, given the DT2 list has now almost doubled to 434, if the ratios were to stay the same (I'm not saying they would, but as a ballpark) we would be looking at around 110-120 DT2 users, which I think is entirely reasonable.

I think you are far less likely to have someone who is trusted by 2 DT1s "doing something stupid" than someone who has a single inclusion, as per OP's concerns. It also gives you two users rather than one you can appeal to if they do - they only have to lose one of their inclusions to drop off of DT2.

Since merit was introduced.

A link was included on theymos' announcement post here: Merit & new rank requirements

I'm not sure how this would work, in practice. Let's say you are included by 3 DT1 members and 5 DT2 members, but you are also excluded by 10 DT2 members. At DT1 you have +3 and so are included. But at DT2 you would have -5 and so would be excluded. Overall between DT1 and DT2 you have -2, so although you are net included by DT1 (+3), are DT2 now able to overrule DT1?

I think this over-complicates things. If someone on DT2 is doing something stupid, simply appeal to their DT1 "sponsor(s)", and if that doesn't work, open a thread to appeal to other DT1 members to exclude them.

I am a big proponent of DT2 members requiring inclusions from 2 different DT1 members prior to becoming DT2 at all.

I still post like that, and I suspect many of the other top merit earners do too. It is pretty easy to spot people who are posting in topics they have no knowledge or interest in for the sole reason of spamming their signature or phishing for merits. My biggest tip for earning merit has always been to forget merit exists and simply use the forum as it is intended - to learn, read, ask questions, and discuss.

There's actually a fair few of us (myself included) who spend time and go out of our way to track down good newbies to give merit to, which you can see from this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5034141.msg52227889#msg52227889. I have no issues ranking up a newbie to a junior member and giving them signature privileges as long as it is clear to me that they are here primarily for the reason I outlined above - to learn and discuss - and they aren't here solely to abuse that signature. As Loyce says, utilize his thread to report any good posts you think are doing unmerited.

You can use Kraken's REST API as documented here: https://support.kraken.com/hc/en-us/articles/218198197-How-to-retrieve-historical-time-and-sales-trading-history-using-the-REST-API-Trades-endpoint-

The command you are looking for is https://api.kraken.com/0/public/Trades?pair=zecxbt&since=0, which will return all ZEC-BTC trades ever made on Kraken.

Looking at the first result, it has a timestamp of 1477684943.1142 in UNIX, which converts to October 28th 2016, 20:02:23 UTC. It was a market buy order for 158.6 ZEC at 0.00003152 sats each.

+1 for this. Passphrases are great, and everyone should be using one (one long and random enough that it can't be easily bruteforced).

I prefer to use "Set temporary passphrase" rather than "Attach to PIN code", for a couple of reasons. Firstly, if you use "set temporary", then you have to physically enter it each time you use it. Since most people (incorrectly) don't back up their passphrase on paper, it serves as a memory aid every time you enter it. There have been a couple of posts I've seen on this forum of users attaching passphrases to PINs, forgetting the passphrase having never had to use it in months, and then losing access to their coins.

Secondly, this article: https://ledger-donjon.github.io/Unfixable-Key-Extraction-Attack-on-Trezor/. I appreciate this article is about a Trezor device, but the premise is the same. This attack on the Trezor device is now possible with around $100 of equipment. Given enough time, money, equipment, and expertise, it is conceivable that an attacker would be able to extract your seed from a Ledger device. If you have your passphrase attached to a PIN, then your passphrase must be stored somewhere within the secure element, and therefore available as an attack target. If you set the passphrase temporarily each time, then (as far as I am aware) it is used to generate your keys, but is not stored on your device and is wiped after you unplug, therefore protecting you against an attack such as this.

The obvious downside to this is the time it takes to enter your passphrase every time can non trivial (5-10 minutes if you are using a long and random passphrase as you should). However, given that my passphrase protected wallets are used for long-term cold storage, I'm not accessing them often enough that this becomes too much of an issue for me.

Why not? They did it before en masse only last year, when they locked without warning the accounts of users from Egypt, Russia, and Iran. You can read the story about it here: https://coinvigilance.com/bittrex-exchange-unsafe-your-funds-are-locked-without-an-id-they-like/. They do it to individual accounts all the time, when they lock them for arbitrary or non-specific reasons, or demand more KYC documents and information, all without warning. You can see plenty of posts on here, on reddit, on twitter, of users who have had their accounts locked suddenly and had zero response from Bittrex for weeks or even months.

This is by no means unique to Bittrex. All centralized exchanges engage in this behavior. Keeping your coins on a centralized exchange is a daily gamble as to whether or not you will be allowed to access your own money. I have no idea why people still do it after all the shady stuff they've done over the years.

I buy food in person on pretty much a weekly basis with bitcoin at my local farmers' market. The stall I usually buy from had no idea what bitcoin was. I asked the family repeatedly over several months if I could pay in bitcoin, and eventually they obliged. They now accept I think about 8 different cryptocurrencies (although I continue to only use bitcoin), and there are two other stalls at the market which have started accepting bitcoin too. My usually stall tells me they now have about 5 customers each week (the stall market only runs one day a week), myself included, who pay in bitcoin.

The first step to being able to pay for things in bitcoin is to create demand for it. You can't do this with huge corporations, but you can absolutely do it with small, independent retailers or merchants. If they don't know people want to pay in bitcoin, then they won't go to the effort of setting up a wallet and training staff on how to accept it. They want your business; it's in their own interests to facilitate you. I think too many people are passively just waiting for bitcoin to be accepted. Go out there and create demand for bitcoin payments, and you might be pleasantly surprised.

The English Premier League is the most widely watched sport in the world, is broadcast in almost every country and territory in the world, and has a potential audience of almost 5 billion people. It is a fantastic advertising tool for any company. This year, sponsors include airlines, car and tire companies, supermarkets, ISPs, as well as financial institutions.

Seems like there might be some "regulatory uncertainty" in Malta as well. Just spotted this on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bittrex/comments/dl59ht/bittrex_international_update_bittrex_global_launch/

Essentially they are shutting down "Bittrex International" which is headquartered in Malta, and launching instead "Bittrex Global" which will be headquartered in Liechtenstein.

Funny that the say they want to be the "premier global exchange" only 24 hours after withdrawing service from 31 countries...

The statement that all customers "must accept" their new Terms of Service makes me suspect there is something in those Terms of Service that people aren't going to like very much.

He was actually incorrect.

The Watford shirt sponsor is bitcoin betting site sportsbet.io. You can read the announcement on sportsbet here (https://sportsbet.io/promotions/watford-fc-sponsorship), and on Watford's website here (https://www.watfordfc.com/club/partners/official-sportsbetio-becomes-new-front-shirt-sponsor). Their shirt has the sportsbet.io logo across the chest, with the bitcoin logo on the sleeve. You can also see both the sportsbet logo and the bitcoin symbol in various places around their stadium. Example:



BtcTurk have sponsored Yeni Malatyaspor, a Turkish club. They have simply put their BtcTurk logo across the chest.

The trades you make on an exchange are not recorded on a block. Centralized exchanges have their own internal ledgers/databases to monitor exchanges made on the exchange. The only things which are recorded in a block are when you deposit or withdraw from the exchange.

Think of it like this. I send your department a letter in the post (making a deposit, which is recorded on the blockchain). The staff in your department spend some time drafting a reply, emailing it back and forth to each other, changing and editing it (internal transactions, which don't touch the blockchain). They then print it off their reply and post it to me (making a withdrawal, which is recorded on the blockchain).

Sometimes it does, but the gap rapidly closes. Very occasionally you will see a "flash crash" on one exchange, triggered by a single large sell off, a series of bots all triggering each other, someone missing out a zero when inputting a price, or something similar. The price can drop markedly, but it rapidly closes as users takes advantage of this lower price. The majority of trading on exchanges is done by other pre-set orders or by bots. They react almost instantly to any big swings in the price.

Take any standard USB cable with a male USB A end (the normal PC/laptop connector). If you look in the end of it you will see 4 metal pins embedded in the white plastic part, inside the outer metal casing. The two outer pins transmit power, the two inner pins transmit data. If you cover or remove the two inner pins, then you have made yourself a power only cable.

This is fairly easily done, in one of two ways. You can simply cut a piece of tape to size and cover the two inner pins to make a reversible power only cable, but be absolutely sure you have entirely covered the pins, as if any connection remains (however small) data can still be transmitted. More securely, but irreversibly, you can remove the two pins without much hassle. You don't need to open the casing at all - simply use a small flat-head screwdriver or similar to prise the two middle pins up, and a pair of pliers to pull them out.