I've chosen Proton VPN over others due to BTC payment option. Now. Let's see the midterm results. I've paid 120 Euros (in BTC!) say one year back. And that amount turned to be like 430 Euros by 2024. But amount in BTC did fall back to same sum in Euros! Did I overspend my assets? I remember the days I would spend 0.001 BTC to use Mullvad VPN for a day. Nowadays, that buys you more than a year. Since Bitcoin is at a new All Time High, every piece of Bitcoin I ever spent or sold can be thought of as a bad decision. But that's in hindsight. On the other hand, it also helped support the Bitcoin economy. Bitcoin can't be a currency if nobody uses it. So as long as you don't spend everything, you're still on the winning end. Let me tell quote you a story: In 2017 I bought my wife and I a trip to Hawaii using Bitcoin... cheapair.com. I wonder if they kept any of their profits in BTC. I hope so... My wife was surprised I had done it. But it was one of the only ways to buy it without her knowing. "Why would you spend the REAL money on this trip instead of the worthless money we have in the bank?", she asked. She's a good one. "Well, I look at it this way... If bitcoin fails for some reason we got a trip to Hawaii from it... and if it doesn't? Well that's exactly the problem we WANT to have
Trip worth like $30k today. Lol. But I replaced nearly all that bitcoin in March of 2020 for about the same USD cost as the trip.
~
I knew in the midst of that beauty and happiness that someday it would be the "million dollar trip"...". |
|
|
|
I'm quite surprised to see that, despite a new ATH of BTC, altcoins don't seem to be really taking off at the moment, with the exception of Doge and a few memecoins..  I (mistakenly) checked last year's list, and there are a few surprises: |
|
|
|
I'm close to agreeing with Igebotz, although I wouldn't say that the flag system has never been abused. There have been attempts, but mostly every unjustified flag ends up as inactive. I'm pretty sure we all agree  See the Flag on my account: someone tried to abuse it, but it didn't work. Or look at the Flag on your account. The Flag system works quite well |
|
|
|
next victim: google   How did NVIDIA go up 1961.91% in the past 5 years? In 10 years, they went from $4.49 to $875. That's 10 times more than their revenue increased. I don't get it. |
|
|
|
Looks like Blackrock is determined to become one of the biggest holders in Bitcoin. I'm starting to wonder how secure this is. Many exchanges have been hacked in the past. Given enough ETFs with enough people with inside access and enough money to be stolen, at some point an ETF could be drained on-chain. |
|
|
|
The only useful system left on the forum is the flag system. Never seen it abused. The Flag system gets abused a lot, but it doesn't stick. I guess it was designed to avoid the flaws in the feedback system. |
|
|
|
Once consolidations are over, and all this inscription speculation is over, fees must go down. (and 12 is already a good price) Once fees drop more, I expect many more consolidations. Transactions are basically half the block? I'm avoiding small transactions, and I'm probably not the only one. I don't like paying more than a dollar to buy a coffee. So if fees get low enough again, I expect the transaction volume to increase. |
|
|
|
but it seems so strange that on the block explorer it seems wrong too - its a brand new wallet and I added 5.8 tBTC and its reporting received: 40.39202354 and sent: 34.65246190 Go to the block explorer, and CTRL-F "tb1q0puk6v8sm8zhcteyfm707f740g99kwztn7n57k" so your browser highlights the address. That shows what happened: you've sent small amounts several times, and the change was sent back to the original address. That counts as "received" again, and 7 times (almost) 5.8 makes it just over 40 in total. |
|
|
|
do you think I can try once to see if it's the right seed Yes. You'll know soon enough if it's the correct seed. For what it's worth: I've used Electrum's appimage on Linux for years. |
|
|
|
~he's above all the petty nonsense that goes on here, so he's not prone to engage in personal attacks (of which I've seen many through the years). I guess you could call that thick skin but when you're the boss, criticism has a much different level of effect than it would if you were just a regular member. Well said. People here with no power at all who let attacks slide off them as if they were nothing get more respect from me than someone who's essentially unaffected in any meaningful way by jabs, insults, trolling, etc. You have a point. As a Newbie, Bitcointalk was a scary place with tags flying around for almost anything. He is fighting with LoyceV Lol. See my personal text for how much I care. Or this: 2. The Thick-Skinned GangSupreme Leader: LoyceV |
|
|
|
I would have been highly disappointed if theymos were to smite Vod because of a tag. How do you define smite? Something like ` mv Vod > /dev/null`. He posted repeatedly how Theymos could verify the PM. The easy way to verify a PM would be by asking reporting it to a Global Mods, and ask them to confirm authenticity. But that goes off-topic here. How can I report a PM I didn't send? That's what whoever makes the claim could do. |
|
|
|
Just noticed this today. I got 2 extremely similar private keys. Does anyone know if this could be a sign of a security issue with the PRNG?
Probably not Yes! This should not happen. Unless you altered the source to search from a specific starting point. I've never used VanitySearch (because I hardly trust any new software), and I don't know how it works internally, but I would expect it to generate a new random private key after finding a match. I think it's okay to add "+1" from a random number to search the next one (which I expect to be much faster than generating new private keys all the time), but two similar private keys shouldn't happen. |
|
|
|
but instead something like "The site lists every condition that would enable them to freeze or seize assets as part of the registration and/or deposit process." I don't think sites will agree to that. There will always be border cases, or cases where there is doubt. The last time I thoroughly read through a casino's terms, I noticed a lot of things I didn't like: 8.8 You acknowledge that the Casino shall be the final decision-maker of whether you have violated the Casino’s Terms and Conditions in a manner that results in your suspension or permanent barring from participation in the Website. If this happens, what happens to the player's balance? I'm asking this because I've seen many topics in the past where casino Terms were very user-unfriendly. 10. If the Player is suspected of ~ the Company reserves the right to terminate such a Player Account and suspend and/or cancel all payouts to the player. ~ the Player will not be notified or informed about the reasons for such actions. This seems like one of those rules that will destroy your reputation when applied. When someone is found guilty, sure. But it doesn't seem right to cancel payouts based on a suspicion without even telling the player why. 10.5 To prevent any fraudulent activities concerning cryptocurrency transactions, we lay down the following rule: in case the transaction is marked as replaceable - Opt-in Replace-by-Fee (RBF), the Casino reserves the right to close such accounts immediately and withhold any wins. WHY?! RBF is a normal part of a Bitcoin transaction, and the default behaviour of many wallets. It's much, much better if you don't accept unconfirmed transactions, so the user can bump the fee when his deposit takes too long to confirm. Ultimately, all Bitcoin transactions are replaceable as long as they're unconfirmed. 11.1 The Website offers Coinspaid as payment method only.
~
11.4 Kindly note that due to the nature of cryptocurrencies, deposit limits cannot be applied to the deposits made through CoinsPaid payment system. If you want to limit your gambling in the casino, please, use any other available option. In 11.4 you're referring to other options that, according to 11.1, don't exist. 12.9.1 is the same as 12.1, and 12.9.2 is almost the same as 14.4. I think there are 2 basic problems: companies all over the world create far too many conditions to agree with, which leads to the next problem: most users just click "Accept" without reading it. Cookie warnings alone would fill my day if I wanted to read them all. If users would read the existing Terms, they should not even signup if they don't like them. |
|
|
|
Anyone who sends merit to enough users will eventually sent some merit to some dodgy member who abuses/break forum rules. If said dodgy member posts a good post, the Merit is deserved. Let the Mods deal with rule breakers, that's not what the Merit system is for. I sometimes think of Meriting a plagiarising Newbie right before he gets banned, just to make it hurt more. But that would be Merit abuse so I don't do it. |
|
|
|
I though you needed to place the wallet.dat file AND then provide the seed, but apparently I only need the seed? Is this the case? First: Electrum doesn't use " wallet.dat", that's Bitcoin Core. If you have the correct seed, you can skip 2FA. But: you used 2FA for a reason! Don't just disable 2FA on an online device, you'll risk losing everything in case the device is compromised. Since you're talking about a significant amount of money, you should make sure you do it correctly the first time. I wrote this years ago: Online:Install Electrum on your PC. Import your address to create a watch-only wallet. Preview the transaction, Copy the unsigned transaction. Put it on a USB stick. Offline and running without hard drive storage:Get a Linux LIVE DVD. Use Knoppix or Tails for instance, or any other distribution that comes with Electrum pre-installed. Unplug your internet cable. Close the curtains. Reboot your computer and start up from that DVD. Don't enter any wireless connection password. Keep it offline. Start Electrum. Import your private key. Copy your unsigned transaction from the USB stick, load it into Electrum. CHECK the transaction in Electrum. Check the fees, check the amount, check all destination addresses ( character by character). If all is okay, sign the transaction. Copy it back to your USB stick. Turn off the computer. That wipes the Live LINUX from memory and all traces are gone. Online:Use your normal online Electrum to (check again and) broadcast the transaction. Bonus:After moving all your Bitcoin, and once the transaction confirmed, check if you own Forkcoins. This explanation is tailored for a private key, not a seed phrase, so you'll need to make some adjustments. But it should give you a good idea of what you need to sign a transaction offline. It's been a while, and I don't remember exactly how multisig influences this. |
|
|
|
I also changed the permissions of log files of Bitcoin Core folder! Just checking: you didn't give logrotate access to your wallet, right? My debug.log is 12 MB since last September, but I'm not doing anything else with it. Even if you rotate them more often, 1.5 or more GB per day is a lot! What do you use them for? |
|
|
|
It was 19 members last week and 18 this week - who got his red tag removed? I think the previous week's data was scraped before theymos reshuffled DT1. So it's better to compare this week with 2 weeks ago. So the forum administrator is fine moving with a red wow! Who is this theymos? The more you attempt to figure out who he is, the more difficult it gets. Theymos is the ultimate thick skin leader. Which reminds me I should nominate him: 2. The Thick-Skinned Gang Allow me to nominate theymos to be part of this gang. What other forum allows users to tag Admin and keep their tagging power? Theymos cares more about what he stands for than his personal reputation. I would have been highly disappointed if theymos were to smite Vod because of a tag. |
|
|
|
2. The Thick-Skinned Gang Allow me to nominate theymos to be part of this gang. What other forum allows users to tag Admin and keep their tagging power? Theymos cares more about what he stands for than his personal reputation. |
|
|
|
Imagine a scenario where a sudden and prolonged decrease in hash rate occurs due to a global catastrophe, such as widespread infrastructure and or hardware damage (f.e. because of an atomic war, an unforeseen solar storm, etc). In such cases, it could take many months or even years to rebuild and restore the hardware necessary to reach previous hash rate levels. During this time, the network could essentially become unusable, as no blocks would be found until hash rate levels return to normal. Let's be realistic: in those scenarios, Bitcoin is the last thing on my mind. Without global network, you'll end up with separate Bitcoin chains: Chinese miners will mine their own blocks, European miners will use other blocks, and American miners will also have their own chain. Once global communications get restored, the longest chain will force a reorganisation on all other continents. Unless there's a manual intervention, for instance because the interests have become too big. In that case Bitcoin may Fork into different versions for each continent. the network would automatically adjust the difficulty level If for some reason 99% of all hashrate gets destroyed, a manual intervention can adjust the algorithm with support of the community when needed. In such extreme scenario, i expect people would try to trade their money for physical goods which makes money no longer valuable. It's probably going to be gold, cigarettes and booze that's traded for food. Unless the other guy has a gun, then you lose. |
|
|
|
But of course, just change the regex to only include today's date? You'll need some from yesterday too. I usually convert the "Today" on the forum to a real date first, then get everything from the last 24 hours. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
