you should never expect "payments" for contributing to something that is open source and is released under MIT license. that is not how that world works and this should never change.
if you want to earn money, then there are a ton of other things you can do. there are lots of jobs that require programmers and even those who are familiar with bitcoin and can implement things for them.

ok, in theory this sounds very cool but theoretically a lot of other things sound cool too. but when it comes to practice you see that things weren't even close to what you built in your head. for example the topic of Artificial intelligence and blockchain has been discussed many times before, specially in 2017 that the hype of "blockchain" was huge. but so far i have not seen any project that even tries to combine the two together. some claimed but were doing the same thing as any other altcoin.

to be honest i don't agree with that wiki article. i have argued about it on reddit too when it was posted there. basically i believe that it is saying "since people are using it wrong, then the method should be considered bad!"

simply encrypt everything you want to print and that solves multiple issues including the printer memory, and physical access to the paper containing the keys.

correct call.

it is about "privacy" and that is something most users don't care that much about. for example there are a lot of users already using Electrum so they are already relying on Electrum nodes, one more address is not a big concern to them. if you want privacy then you run your own full node and since paper wallets is something you use once when you are spending, the time rescan takes in your full node is not a big concern either compared to the privacy you gain.

the point that this is trying to make is when for instance you have a paper wallet containing 1BTC and want to sell 0.9BTC of it. you will be left with 0.1BTC which if you send back, it will be address reuse and if not you will have to create a new wallet from scratch which is time consuming and hard. (using mnemonic helps solve this)

use BIP38 encryption and create more than one backup of it and you will be fine.

JavaScript is known to have many bugs and issues. there has been a lot of exploits in it too. and if you look at one of these tools (like bitaddress) history you can see some of these bugs that were found and fixed. generally it is considered unsafe.

this again is repetition of "users use these tools the wrong way" argument. the "website" is meant for the preview not for usage. the correct way is to download the source code from GitHub and transfer it to a clean offline computer and use it there.

actually not all traders see the same thing on the same charts! that is the reason why when you look at speculation sites with lots of technical analysis like tradingview.com you see all kinds of speculation and different lines drawn on the same exact chart by different people!
and that is why many consider TA to be pseudo-science and "self fulfilling prophecy". and that is why it isn't the reason for price change.

usually when you report a vulnerability in an application it is best to include the affected version(s) in your title or the opening post. this helps users reading the board in the future to quickly check their app's version and see if it concerns them or not.
in this case versions below 67.0.3 are vulnerable.

P.S. this is just another case of "cold storage not affected" which shows importance of using it.

instead of focusing on HODL, profit, when to buy, when to sell,... as a beginner you should learn which wallet type and which wallet in that category suits your need and  how to set it up correctly to achieve a high security so that you don't just lose your bitcoins due to lack of initial research.

i don't know you but i have seen many newcomers be blinded by greed so much that they forget these very basic things. they end up storing their bitcoins on exchanges, in web wallets,... and sometimes get hacked and lose all of them!

lol, that is not even important
the biggest difference is its centralization which means you have to sign up with Facebook in order to be able to use this coin and also since they are controlling the network (mining and nodes and supply and....) they control your money like a bank does. so they can decide to "close your account" if they see fit, like for example if they suspect your activities.

remove cryptocurrency and bitcoin from this news (i placed [blank] in their place) and you can see this is not new for any country. this has been going on for as long as Anti Money Laundry laws existed. the law forces businesses to report any money transfer that is higher than a certain value specially when it is a place of trading like an exchange where money keeps going in and out with large volumes.

no they don't "enter" together because it is like comparing something like BMW with Samsung and say two companies enter and only one leaves! they don't even do the same thing or eve are in the same category to want to be compared with each other.
the Facebook crap is just another online payment processor that is closed sourced (both source code and running node is owned by the company), centralized, and owned by a company that has no respect for user's privacy. meanwhile bitcoin is decentralized, open source and anybody can run a node on his own and nobody can control it or censor some people from using it and some others not.

all those people were right about corrections but the problem is not with expecting correction itself. that is normal and corrections do happen as we already know.
the problem is with the size of the so called "corrections" that some people expect! for example this topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5149809.0 the starter was on point with the correction but was far off about the size of it. as i argued there such big  drops are "crashes" not corrections and they can't happen for no reason.

don't even begin to compare ICO and IPO. just because they are both "initial blank offering" it doesn't mean they have anything in common. in IPOs there is still some level of legitimacy involved and it is not all scam but an ICO is purely scam and the people creating them don't do any work, they just copy some code and spend a minimum amount of time to create a useless token which they sell for millions! and then they go away for good doing nothing else.

most probably you misclicked the option and it froze that address by accident.

the receive tab is to make things easier and avoid causing confusing for new users. it also automatically avoids address reuse by giving you an unused address from your wallet to receive coins in.
if you want to have full control yourself then you can enable the address tab and then select any address you want. add labels to them to know where you used them and things like that.

you think exchanges don't scam their users? they do. and there are no "good" exchanges out there. there are only worse exchanges and bad exchanges that we choose bad ones because we have no other choice. otherwise they are not trusted either.
of course it is not as bad as finding random shady dudes on the internet but you shouldn't also be blind to their risks.

he grew to this because there are many people who wanted to take advantage of him. all these companies and the shitcoins he was and is involved in were like that. for example bitcoin-cash guys were using him (before he split off) and praised him just because they wanted to use his lie about being Satoshi to push for their own shitcoin and get it pumped. you can see how quickly they dumped him and changed their stance as soon as he stopped being beneficial for them.

Test Vectors can only tell you whether your final result is correct not if you missed a step.

for j from 0 to cofactor (which is 1):
   x = r + jn
   find y using 0x02|x as the compressed point
   check R=(x,y) is on curve
   for k from 1 to 2:
      Q = r^-1(sR-eG) {Q is a point}
      check Q is on curve
           => if true -> return as one of the result
              if not -> R=-R

03f0cabd53153b1bce21e2ef45d31d6043abccc59305db5d27f5e3b40cf17e5e3b <- the correct pubkey
0259eafa3c2a9dedce9a4b7723cab126b259ca5f9d1f537efa73880b33b96199fd

when recovering public keys for this signature posted here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg51506455#msg51506455 i come up with 2 public keys Q using Q = r^-1(sR-eG) where r and s are from signature (r,s) and R is a point calculated from x = r + jn   j∈[0,1] and n and G are curve parameters.

The problem is that when i use first Q with signature, i can verify the signature. but when i use the second Q the verification fails.
so i am wondering whether this is normal or is my calculations incorrect (missing a step)?

the big altcoins aren't capable of pumping EXACTLY BECAUSE people have been predicting their boom! you see the only reason why people come on social media to hype some shitcoin and talk about how it is going to get pumped is because they are bag holding it (and usually are in a big loss) and want to see it pumped so they can dump and get their money out. and that is exactly what they do whenever there is a small pump, they dump to recover something like 10% of the 80% loss they sustained.

meanwhile small altcoins don't have that problem since there are not that many smallcoin bag holders as there are bag holders of coins like ETH, XRP,.... so they can easily get pumped without much resistance.

first of all you can't keep talking about "analysis" and synonyms of it without actually including them here! i think everyone would love to see your "methodologies".
secondly you are putting too much faith in some supposed analysis that anybody who has ever actually analyzed bitcoin market knows won't work.

and finally we are not in a place for any kind of crash as you are expecting here. there is just no reason for it and whether you do technical analysis or fundamental analysis you could figure that out easily too. there are corrections just like there are in any healthy market and we just had one this past week with the fall down to $7k levels. you can't expect another correction every day and back to back!

these two are the same thing. Hierarchical Deterministic wallets or in short Deterministic or in shorter HD wallets are wallets that use one seed (don't confuse with mnemonic) to derive all their child keys using HMAC-SHA512 as their one way hash function.
the term "Hierarchy" is used to show there is an order or ranking to the keys where there are parents and children and children of children,...
the term "Deterministic" is used to show that all the child keys are obtained without using randomness. *the randomness is only used once to get the initial seed.

haha, price started rising again and everyone became "experts" in predicting bitcoin price. literary every bitcoin related news outlet out there are publishing optimistic speculations about how price is going to be such and such high-prices next phase. i wonder where were all these "expert" speculators when price was at the bottom and we were saying it is time to accumulate and price is going to the moon soon? by then all the same news outlets were publishing pessimistic price speculations talking about how price is going to fall to $1000 soon most of them from the same people!