I didn't reload the page after meriting this post, and when I came back a bit later I merited it again. No big loss, but it feels like I'm getting sloppy trying to get rid of all my source sMerits lately. |
|
|
|
Thanks  I totally forgot it's Wednesday, but luckily your time machine doesn't have that problem. |
|
|
|
LoyceV post the code! This works (on Linux) to display addresses that exist in both lists: # Only once:
cat blockchair_bitcoin_addresses_latest.tsv | cut -f 1 | sort | uniq > alladdresseswithbalance.txt
# Option 1:
comm -12 alladdresseswithbalance.txt <(cat mylist.txt | sort | uniq) # fastest
# Option 2:
cat alladdresseswithbalance.txt <(cat mylist.txt | sort | uniq) | sort | uniq -d # 5 times slower Option 1 takes 6 seconds on my old laptop, checking 300,000 addresses against 30 million addresses with balance.
For various reasons, I'm more interested in transaction history - e.g. "even if the balance is 0, has this public address ever occured on the blockchain?" - and for that you need more input than only Blockchair's list of public addresses that have a positive balance "now". Blockchair also has all outputs, but at 10 kB/s it's going to take a while. If you can get all addresses ever used from your own version of Bitcoin Core, you're good to go. |
|
|
|
I've been waiting for a long time for a large exchange to start accepting LN transactions. I'm curious how they're going to implement it, and I'd love to see their LN features connected to the existing Bitcoin balance. The few online casinos that accept both BTC and LN keep separate balances for each. If Kraken allows deposits in LN directly to your Bitcoin balance, and allows you to withdraw LN from your Bitcoin balance, you can use the exchange to make small and larger payments in LN. No need to run a node if Kraken takes care of it. And it'll be even better when other exchanges follow. I currently use this custodial LN wallet because custodial is easy and I don't mind trusting them with a small amount. But if a large trusted exchange joins this market, it can lead to much larger amounts being paid through LN. |
|
|
|
I don't know with 100% certainty. I only know the wallet is most likely a HD wallet as that is what
1) readily allows for the type of transaction in question to take place
2) is used by the most common wallet providers where one retains control of their private key (Electrum, Mycelium, Coinomi, blockchain.com, Exodus, etc). So if either one of those users can present an xpub that leads to only one of the 2 addresses, does that justify reasonable doubt from being the same person, and make it likely one of the private keys was manually imported? Note: We strongly advise against showing your xPub to third parties. Knowledge of the xPub can enable someone to track your wallet’s entire payment history and possibly disrupt access to your funds |
|
|
|
Even knowing the answer, I still can't find it... I need a red circle  You just need to start a game. So searching this "scroll" among 944 was kinda hard and $66,6 is a fair reward for it Google thought the image looked like a banana, so that's what I was looking for. This explains a lot  Wow! Three correct guesses and all within 30 seconds!! Did you guys discuss before posting, lol. Where this discussion happened, on SwC poker table? See: It took me around 10 mins to find it but it was kinda hard to wait +5 hours before i post my prediction hoping no one else would figure it out. |
|
|
|
Does there any method that i can use to scrap data manually and check edited post? When I have the time, I'll create something to classify all posts in a requested topic as "unedited", "deleted and archived", "edited within 10 minutes" or "edited after 10 minutes". But that will only be for one topic at a time, you can't easily check all posts. |
|
|
|
Full disclosure: I found an inaccuracy in my own profile: I have only one neutral feedback rating from a DT-member, but since I left myself neutral feedback from " LoyceBot" (which I use for scraping), loyce.club shows 2 of them. It took me long enough to think about this, but the fix is very easy: I just added ";dt" to each profile URL Starting next Saturday, "LoyceV" should show with the correct amount of neutral feedback in my Trust list viewer. |
|
|
|
I have a small question here, hope you can answer it I have a habit of publishing my post early, then making necessary edits, such as updating information and data. This process can be 1 time or 2 times, it can be 3 times or more. So, are they all stored? Or just the original post is archived? I only archive the original unedited post. I think it would be interesting if all the edits were saved Have you thought about it yet? There's no way for me to know which posts have been edited. I'd have to check all 50 million posts again. |
|
|
|
Too much too read, too little time  I can have another advertising auction if there's any interest.
also, please participate in the challenge game. It's not much to read :-p
All you do is copy paste the PM contents, let them know that you challengef then to challenge three more users. This chain then will create a massive impact for all to create awareness. Sorry, it sounds too much like a chain letter for me to join. |
|
|
|
In the very off chance that its not the same HD wallet, I just don't understand why "different users" would entrust each other with their private keys unless they were very close, or more likely, the same person. I've been entrusted with private keys on multiple occasions. I can also imagine someone uses someone else's addy to join a certain campaign, for instance because he owes him money, or because he's not interested in weird "tokens". It's all possible, just not very likely. including each other in trust lists is quite bad. I can even understand wanting to see feedback left by your alt account by default, but it's for sure abuse of DT1 voting power using sockpuppets and deserves to be blacklisted from voting if they're owned by the same person: Note that those 3 users all have more than enough votes to reach DT1 with or without votes from vycl87 and koincik. I read up on how Wallet Explorer works (it's a lot simpler than I thought) and I have to retract my use of the word "indeed" -- its just by far the most probable outcome. I think you've missed my point: how do you know the wallet is HD? Related: My assumption was the addresses were random.
No. Pseudorandom at best. Read about derivation paths in HD wallets in detail. You can use the xpub to deterministically derive the children. HD stands for hierarchical deterministic for a reason. I know about xpub (but never memorized the exact details): as far as I know, it's not possible to know addresses are derived from the same xpub unless you know xpub, right? |
|
|
|
However I would suggest an official log on such changes stating clearly the old username and the new one. I believe something of this sort was done by a member That idea ended here: Why are you guys posting the old names of people who clearly needed their names changed for privacy reasons? Obviously any data posted online is going to be quickly archived somewhere, but that doesn't mean that your highlighting/reposting of it has no effect. In some cases you may literally be putting lives in danger. If you were investigating a scam or something, that'd be different, but you seem to just be indiscriminately & recklessly dredging up data that would best be forgotten. If someone wants to publish their name change, they can simply put it in their personal text. My main concern is how it complicates my Trust list viewer, which relies on my list of usernames.
That could be a great feature to have here in the forum but your reason is enough already to not allow to change usernames here in the forum . An easy solution would be to show userIDs instead of user names in trust.txt.xz, but unfortunately it hasn't happened yet. |
|
|
|
It's confusing in a community, but since it doesn't happen that often, I think we can manage My main concern is how it complicates my Trust list viewer, which relies on my list of usernames. |
|
|
|
I want to know if am the only facing this issue or it's normal to happen. It happens when posts are edited. The unedited post didn't have your quote, and that's all I (can) scrape. Checking all posts for edits would require scraping too many pages from the forum. |
|
|
|
The image looked like it was either frame or a symbol, certainly not a game's logo. Imagine going through all 944 games...wow haha
The second clue to me was the origin, ancient piece of paper with some sort of star/pentagram on it.
The Devil's Number (it was also included in "Top Picks") was probably the fifth slot game that i checked, and there it was a perfect match. Even knowing the answer, I still can't find it... I need a red circle Wow! We got 3 correct answers right at the end there in quick succession! I think this brings a problem for a next round: the lazy strategy would be to wait until the last minute, and copy whatever others are posting when they try to snipe this contest. The first one to post the correct answer makes it easier on the rest. |
|
|
|
That being said, I can think of some scenarios in which coins from different users end up in the same transaction. Just out of a desire to be more educated on the subject, I'd like to understand how that could happen... In this case the 2 addresses are indeed part of the same HD wallet -- it seems highly likely they are both owned by the same person. Question: how do you know the bold part? My assumption was the addresses were random. As an example: say you have a wallet filled with small inputs (0.00027 BTC, 0.0003 BTC, and more like this address). Fees are high, and your wallet doesn't allow you to set a low fee. You give the private key for the address to a friend (don't do that!), and he consolidates your small inputs together with his own. Another scenario would be when someone gets their hands on a compromised private key, although it's more likely to instantly sweep those. It's all not very likely to happen though, but can be added to this list: mother/father/sibling/cousin/nephew/uncle/cat/dog/goat/investment management/telegram group. |
|
|
|
We could ask for special API from theymos. I don't expect that to happen. One of the great benefits of user created features is that it doesn't require any server changes. It's less work for theymos, but also more secure by making less changes. |
|
|
|
Which telegram bounty does this:  That's quite convincing. @koincik and I have been meeting since the bountyhive platform. At that time, we worked together on the bounty there. And we had mutual transactions in this way in order not to perform KYC transactions of some exchanges. You can find dozens of linked accounts on Bountyhive that operate like this. I do believe many "bounty users" operate this way, but I also believe many "professional bounty hunters" use many accounts. The math is quite simple: more accounts means more money. That being said, I can think of some scenarios in which coins from different users end up in the same transaction. I've considered starting a "dust claiming service" at some point (but instead made this). I've also helped a few people exchange some altcoins in the past, which means they ended up on my deposit addy on an exchange. And if you look deep enough into Forkcoins, you might find "a connection" that shouldn't be there too. Those scenarios are quite unlikely though, but we can't exclude it for the full 100%. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
