I'm not going to share my own view, but we should realize each married pair have it's own circumstance. For example, i expect people who marry primarily or partly due to peer pressure or to push off certain accusation will say no to this question. While for other people, it comes down to whether their partner willing to take such responsibility or have good security practice. In fact you could even take one step further and create a multi signature wallet with 2 seed phrases, one kept by the man and the other with the woman. That way the bitcoins and the wallet is truly shared.
2 seed phrase which means 2-of-2 multi signature wallet? Sounds risky to me if one of them lose their seed phrase. |
|
|
|
What do you think will happen when the block reward subsidy is 1.5625 BTC in a little over 5 years?
Just like previous halving, some miner will stop their mining activity and sell hardware they no longer use while other's will continue mining with lower profit. LN really hurts BTC in the not so distant future.
I think you're overestimating LN as scaling solution. People who rarely make transaction (usually investor and holder) wouldn't bother use LN, unless they're willing to "lock" their Bitcoin on LN channel. |
|
|
|
It is pretty hard to stay anonymous on the internet. Especially if you are a dev that has to work on a project all the time. Fixing bugs, creating updates all the time, sooner or later you will make a mistake and lose your anonymity. Hell, even if you do everything right, you still may lose your anonymity because some clever bastard may hack you.
That’s one of the weaknesses of crypto imo. Crypto itself is bullet proof but their devs aren’t.
Such problem could be partially migrated with security/privacy oriented OS such as Qubes OS. With proper usage separation between VM/Qube, it's less likely you'll make a mistake. Even if you're hacked, the hacker most likely only have access of the hacked VM/Qube. And considering cryptocurrency is bulletproof could trip you up in the future. |
|
|
|
That answers the OP and my question too so it means bitcoin miners or for a full node you don't need to have the same source code you can run any version of bitcoin core or it could be your own re-written source code based on the rules and standards defined by "Bitcoin". You just need to strictly follow the Bitcoin protocols and Bitcoin standards and must qualify Bitcoin consensus conformance to be part of the network irrespective of your source code.
Additionally, it's likely some exchange and mining pool create their own full node software. --snip--
I would also say that the consensus rules are not enforced by Core, but are enforced by the community. If the community refuse to implement some new change or download new software, then the rules don't change, regardless of what code is published in Bitcoin Core.
Although in reality people who took part on Bitcoin Core development have bigger influence than many people/group. Major update (such as SegWit and Taproot). |
|
|
|
I admit I first chatted with ChatGPT about this before coming here  It said: in order to ignore certain addresses the miners would need to modify the code and hence it would become incompatible with the current version of the network. I don't understand why the ChatGPT answer is considered wrong (technically)?... Technically speaking that's how you will "blacklist" certain addresses. Of course that's not how bitcoin works but since it's open source and considering this big WHAT IF scenario, if I update the source code to exclude certain addresses and let suppose this source code gets accepted and shipped it's all done. Those addresses will not be included in any future transactions. That's what ChatGPT said, it can be translated to "No it's not possible to ignore certain addresses unless bitcoin core source code is modified." To me it's a correct answer. It's not correct since there are multiple Bitcoin full node implementation (such as Bitcoin Core, gocoin and bcoin) out there and people doesn't always update their software. |
|
|
|
If I now generate a new receiving address from the wallet and receive funds on that address, would the private key for that new address (and therefore funds) be available to an opportunistic computer repair guy if he were to dump all addresses and private keys from the un-encrypted wallet.dat? i.e., if he generated all addresses in the pool in the un-encrypted wallet.dat, would my new receiving address and private key eventually show up for him?
Does keypoolrefill replace all old addresses with new addresses in the pool or only just replenish back to the maximum? If replaces, then that one command would insure that I'd get an address that's not in the old wallet.dat.
For old/non-HD wallet, the keypool is refreshed to generate different set of private keys. As for HD wallet, your master private key will be changed. So the repair guy unable to know newly generated private key/address. Should I just create a new wallet, encrypt it and use a receiving address from the new wallet to receive future funds (and transfer the $40 to an address in the new wallet)? This is a simple thing to do, I just want to understand what addresses are in a wallet using this hypothetical situation.
Yes, you should do that immediately for these reason, 1. I would consider your Bitcoin is currently vulnerable. 2. You don't want accidentally re-use Bitcoin address which created before you encrypt the wallet file. |
|
|
|
Apparently, the transaction hash was too unexpected or quite impossible to have been generated randomly and there would be a chance that it could be generated by someone who had enough computational to do so.
This reminds me of problem with RNG where it's hard to prove generated number really random or not. Whatever the txid of that transaction, it's just mere coincidence it has certain pattern.  Source: https://dilbert.com/strip/2001-10-25This generated a lot of theories, one of them being that the transaction could have been generated somewhere in the future by Satoshi himself. Or even by Hal Finney who in the future would have been brought back from its cryogenic state and healed from his illness and capable of sending this transaction back to the past as a message.
Time travel isn't real. |
|
|
|
IIRC it require pool owner to enable such feature manually, so IMO it's not really useful. Yes it requires the pool operator to enable it, but I don't think that means it should be discarded as not useful. Rather, a push to make every major pool operator run it (and specifically to enable the job negotiation protocol) would help to protect against censorship of individual transactions. I doubt we'll see such push since enabling such feature doesn't have direct impact on miner's profit. It might also have some legal benefits for mining pools. If it were to become the default, and some government demands that a mining pool censors some specific UTXOs, then the mining pool can point to the fact that they do not have the power to do this and the miners themselves can choose to include those UTXOs if they choose.
It's interesting speculation, but half-competent government worker could say pool should disable such feature or even switch to different protocol. But looking at this thread ( Stratum v2: After 10 Years, The Most Used Bitcoin Mining Software Gets Facelift), the reaction towards Stratum v2 is rather mixed. |
|
|
|
The hetzner blanket ban on crypto is taking further effect, in accordance to their terms of service. In the last 3 days, 10,000 bitcoin lightning network nodes were cut from the network. It is very likely that this is due to continued enforcement of Hetzner TOS upon its customers.
OP, do you mind sharing link to analysis or discussion about this ban? I do not see major decrease of total node[1] and there are about 162 nodes where it's IP is "Hetzner Online GmbH"[2]. Hopefully we can all find a viable alternative.
Wouldn't many hosting service which accept cryptocurrency as payment method can be viable alternative?
[1] https://mempool.space/lightning[2] https://mempool.space/graphs/lightning/nodes-per-isp |
|
|
|
I don't see anything wrong by make a tweet. Theymos might as well as check security of @bitcointalk twtitter account while he's as it. One of the few uses of the Bitcointalk Twitter account is to notify whether the forum is down. If the forum is down, I'll know when it doesn't load  I don't need Twitter for that. I agree. But it'd be great to know additional information such as expected downtime or any damage/loss (such as recent post is corrupted). |
|
|
|
Rather than proposing complex mechanism, isn't it more practical to revive P2Pool (decentralized pool) and encourage miner to use decentralized pool? the case censorship could be a problem eventually If we're going to have large protocol changes anyway, wouldn't it make more sense to make transactions private by default (like Monero)? You can't censor what you can't see. Monero transaction have bigger size and take more time to be confirmed, so i doubt it'll happen. And how long do those 3 mining pool operators need to doublespend to destroy trust in BTC.
Less than ½ hour,
and if they are on an exchange or markets that lets them short BTC or short companies that own BTC,
they could become insanely rich in a single day, and no longer need to run a mining pool.
1. 0.5 hours would be difficult since some exchange require 6 confirmation. 2. Huge withdraw usually is reviewed manually or checked more thoroughly by the system. 3. Unless they swap BTC for decentralized altcoin, they face risk their fiat or altcoin frozen or reversed. 4. They'll be arrested unless they could secure cooperation with various corrupt government worker. 5. etc. |
|
|
|
1EEoqxSat3 followed by the rest of an address can also be 1EEoqxSat3 followed by the rest of another address with less then a months worth of GPU computing power. And with all the GPU rigs not doing much after ETH went PoS there are a lot of them out there not doing much.
Additionally, there's cheap marketplace to rent CPU/GPU such as vast.ai. However, the topic has started with a question, not a debate on how (un)safe holograms and fistbits are. If one indeed has such a collectible, he will still want a tool to see his funds without taking down the hologram. Yes, it may not be accurate, in some cases the wrong address may be returned/checked, but I don't know of better tools.
Not exactly tool, but you could download list of funded/used address and find address based on "firstbits" either using text editor or grep command. $ wget http://addresses.loyce.club/Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt.gz
$ gzip -dk Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt.gz
$ grep "1EEoqxSat3" Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt
1EEoqxSat3Tg6LkwEYxwHgQUtmHVn8uKwc
|
|
|
|
Makes me think that some (FOSS) software should be designed to do this.
Unfortunately there's no individual willing to create one and no company willing to share their forwarder tool. Preferably with a disclaimer such as "Do not use this tool for illegal purposes. We are not responsible for any action you take with this software" since it would inadvertently make coin theft much easier.
Such disclaimer is probably useless since, 1. Open source license usually have clause which state the author can't be hold liable. 2. Theft or anyone else with bad intention would ignore license, disclaimer or ToS. |
|
|
|
why these trust wallets are being hacked??
Without additional information, we can't simply know why these trust wallet hacked. Although few common reason are, 1. User install malicious app/malware which given lots of permission. 2. The recovery seed phrase is stored on unsecure location (e.g. plain text on external storage or note taking application). isn't trust wallet safe?? if no why??
Since trust wallet is closed source, we don't know how secure is it. And i never see any result of security audit on Trust Wallet either. is there a better wallet for holding my crypto temporarily?? i am asking about mobile wallets guyz, not about cold wallets.
Following theymos past suggestion, you might want to use Electrum, BlueWallet or Unstoppable wallet. |
|
|
|
Hi,
how can i check short crypto adresses?
Like:
LbWKXCVe for LTC
1EEoqxSat3 for BTC
0xF22c60 for ETH
All blockchain Explorers that ive tryed dont work anymore with this short addresses...
Mempool.space block explorer offer auto complete when you doesn't type whole address. You'll have look elsewhere for different coin though. And most importantly, those short incomplete address is deemed invalid.  |
|
|
|
>:(Hello everyone, I had a problem with opening the program, coins got stuck there.
Worked until driver update, then stopped. The software tried to rewrite somehow manually, but nothing happened.
I reinstalled the drivers for the video card, but still dont work
First of all, which wallet/program you're talking about? What can be done? [suspicious website]/help/1.exe
This file is may contain malware/virus according to VirusTotal[1].  [1] https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/6b6246cde54df2559bc0edfbb4e4c1d7e68aa42c879e739d48469a6b5264ebbd |
|
|
|
I have to say electrum perosnal server (EPS) has major limitation and definitely bad choice if OP's friend decide connect to OP's Electrum server. EPS require you to add xpub/address manually on configuration file and each time you add new xpub/address, EPS have to send rescan request to Bitcoin Core which take some time. |
|
|
|
If the mentioned on the page is not what you are doing, then you might be using TOR? or having multiple tab opens?
I am using TOR and not multiple tab opened. It was so annoying that I had to log out and now logged in again after long time. There was something with the server, let's see how the next hour works for me. I use Tor browser, but doesn't experience such problem even when i open few tabs. Or maybe someone uses the same Tor exit node to spam the forum.
This forum use CloudFlare Onion service though, so it shouldn't be due to exit node. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
