Learning how to use a database has been on my if-only-I-had-the-time list for a while too, but processing data with a script is quite easy.

If it helps: I can quite easily make daily/weekly/monthly-versions of only certain columns. If you don't need all data that should make it a lot smaller.
If you can use it, I can gzip the file too: blockdata.lastweek.txt.gz (this sample file is scheduled to be deleted in 7 days).

Thanks again! Update: I'm 2 seconds late Still better than my average

Did a Mod just clean up this topic? Nope, it's just this quiet now: loyce.club/archive/details/topic_5121375

Anyone could do that (including you). The question is:
Why do you need a "trustable" account for this? If I open a topic for you, would you want me to vouch for you?

If you use Electrum to create multisig, it gives you a long list of addresses (starting with 3).

Can't they just send all customers a big sign to put in front of their house? "Ledger owner here!"

Can you see the same address in your Electrum wallet? If so, you should be able to recover the BCH Forkcoins.

Search for your address on Blockchair: does it show any funds on BCH?

---

---

You already have a topic in Altcoin Discussion, which is where this belongs. There's no need to open another topic.

You're going to want to read this: Consolidate your small inputs!

Bitcoin Core tells you the transaction size when you manually select Inputs. See https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#0,30d for fees. In general, Sundays are best. With this many inputs, I would just be patient, set 1 sat/byte, and wait for it. If you enable Coin Control in Settings, you can manually select which Inputs to use for your transaction. It may be worth picking only the largest ones, or creating several transactions with 50-ish inputs.

Yes.

Or in pictures:
You have this, which is slow and annoying to use:


You want this for quick easy payments:

Do I leave out the "re"? See:
Does that also mean I'll have to create a new function for this, so only the Trust list doesn't get cached? All others (like usernames) shouldn't be reloaded each time.

I love the wild theories about this, but couldn't it just be someone who set up (or is testing) some micro payment system?

Even though this is in the wrong topic, I'd like to answer this: the first link is updated when I post it here. If your browser doesn't show it, it may need a hard refresh. The second link has some problems caching, and I don't know how to fix that. It doesn't always update if you visited the same userID before, but if you load the page in a private window it updates just fine.

Lol
Maybe you should explain what you call "crypto friendly". If you mean it's legal to earn money in crypto, and then sell it, then yes, it's a great country for crypto! But if you mean the income tax percentage, it's not that great: you pay either 37.1% or 49.5%. That's not just on crypto, it's on all income.

Yes: I've sold crypto for euro. No: taxes aren't little.

Is that a capital gains tax, or income tax?

That screams "money laundering" indeed!

Even if Admin would care about the GDPR (lol), you'd first need to prove you are "sedeki".

If there's a privacy-reason for it, Admin is probably willing to change your username.

Yes. In fact, just 2 days ago (on another forum) I was pointed at the existence of "sort -mu":
This does exactly what you described. I haven't tested it yet, but I assume it's much faster than "regular" sort.
Update: I'm testing this now.

However, the bigger problem remains: updating 1.5 billion unique addresses in chronological order. Those lists are unsorted, so for example:
Existing long list with 12 years of data:
New daily list:
The end result should be:
It can be done by awk '!a[$0]++', but I don't have that kind of RAM. I'm not sure how efficient this is for large datasets, it might also run into the problem of having to read 30 quadrillion bytes. Either way, I can't test it due to lack of RAM.
I ended up with sort -uk2 | sort -nk1 | cut -f2.
I can think of another option that might work: if I use the sorted list to get the new addresses, I can get those out of the daily update while keeping the chronological order. This way I only have to deal with two 20 MB files which is easy. After this, all I have to do is add them to the total file.

---

---

You did (more or less):
So I guess you missed my reply too:

It is a good offer Currently, disk space isn't the problem. I am looking for a webhost that allows me to abuse the disk for a few hours continuously once in a while. Most VPS providers aren't that happy when I do that, and my (sponsored) AWS server starts throttling I/O when I do this.
I'm (again) short on time to test everything, but after some discussion on another forum I created a RamNode account. This looks promising so far. If I can pull that off by automating everything, it's not that expensive to use it a couple hours per month only.

No.

Thanks for making this list! Pmalek asked me before he created this topic but I didn't have the time.
Considering how many Merit transactions I've sent and received, I'm not disappointed at all with 1.06%, 7.04% and 11.18% within 1, 24 and 48 hours respectively!

The problem with this is that running through a 20 MB list takes a lot of time if you need to do it 1.5 billion times. Keeping the 20 MB in memory isn't the problem, reading 30 quadrillion bytes from RAM still takes much longer than my current system.

I may be able to improve on the sorted list by merging lists, and I may be able to improve on everything by keeping big temp files instead of only compressed files (but as always I need some time to do this).

No, until now download bandwidth isn't a problem. Only a few people have been crazy enough to download these files. If this ever goes viral it would be a great solution though.

I've verified the signatures.

Update: Just to be clear: I didn't verify any amounts. I'll leave that to Vod

Isn't it the other way around? When I started with Bitcoin, broadcasting a double spend was easier than it is now.

Yes.

Even though most nodes reject "classic" double spend transactions nowadays, a miner could always choose which transactions they include when they find a block. That's probably why the thiefs who monitor addresses with known/compromised private keys usually pay a very large transaction fee.