Each output adds 180 bytes of weight to transaction,
180 is true only if his keys are the old version (the uncompressed which old wallets automatically created). now that compressed keys are common each output adds 148 bytes. https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1195/how-to-calculate-transaction-size-before-sending (see its edit) so if you'll take 1sat/byte as fee
1.5 sat/byte is better To get the best possible returns out of your dust, you need to wait for a moment when mempool is empty, you don't need to wait, you can send it anytime and it will stay in the mempool and if dropped out, you just resend it again. |
|
|
|
|
the thing about arbitrage is, if there is a chance then somebody faster than you and with a bot is already doing it. and if there is a chance for a big profit because of a big difference then there must be something wrong with the exchange.
for example when bitfinex fiat problems started the price of bitcoin went up because nobody could make any fiat deposits but they could make a bitcoin withdrawal so they bought bitcoin and withdrew that.
this may seem like a good arbitrage problem at first sight (eg $1250 @bitfinex while $1130 @coinbase) but in reality because of what i said it was impossible to perform it. so make sure to check everything first before jumping in.
|
|
|
|
|
can anyone update me on the issue with legacy accounts, i have one and i have never verified it, will i encounter problems when i want to make a withdrawal?
i am asking this because i can't check, my funds are all tied up in altcoins right now.
|
|
|
|
most of the article is the author seeing what he wants to see not what really happens. spoofing has been happening everywhere and forever, and it is not restricted to bitfinex. it is available in all markets, and also it doesn't necessarily have to be bitfinex itself. as someone who has watched the orderbooks for hours and monitored their changes i can tell you that these "walls" are a very common thing and sometimes they ever get filled (partially or completely) no matter how big they are. i am not denying the shenanigans that different exchanges pull but i don't get why bitfinex is the only one under magnifying glass these days! i mean have you even seen poloniex  what they do is absurd at times! |
|
|
|
the first problem is, electrum (which is working on bitcoin chain) signs transactions differently than electron cash (which is working on bitcoin cash chain). it is the sighash flag they each use. the electron cash one has a sighash of SIGHASH_FORKID (i think appended to the SIGHASH_ALL). that means you need a cash wallet to sign it properly. the second problem is that electrum is working on bitcoin chain  you can not push a bitcoin cash transaction to a bitcoin chain and electrum (the online one) does not connect to the other nodes. |
|
|
|
there is no reason for it to go down but with bitcoin we never know, the market maker decides so probably down for a little while (maybe even half a day) just to manipulate and get some cheap coins in accumulation and then up fast enough. |
|
|
|
Was the dip today related to the segwit lock in? People speculating on some drama to prevent lockin at this moment?
Great news nonetheless. A big step forward!
that wasn't really a dip, it was more of a tiny correction in price and it was only because price has gone up about $600-$700 in less than 5 days! and there must be some correction after a crazy rise like that. and surely enough there was, but in bitcoin a correction (when price comes down a little) will always cause some panic too (for no logical reason) so it becomes bigger than it should be before it bounces back up an back on track. something like this: $2800 > $3490 > $3300 > $3380 |
|
|
|
Thanks for your response. Yeah some of my examples are bad but they were the first ones that came to my head when I was posting the thread. Im embarrassed to say, I don't have the slightest clue how to write a script  i was curious myself so i wrote a quick console app in Visual Studio using C# and tested it. you can see it in my edit of my previous comment. I looked at the link you sent, are those all the possible words that could be in a valid seed? I thought that could be any word in the English language, but I didn't know.
I see "begin" on that list, does that mean "beginner" and "beginners" could not be a seed word? The only reason I'm asking is because every wallet that I have seen automatically generates the seed for you at the start of wallet, you don't manually choose your seed, you know what I mean?
yes that link are all the possible words for electrum (may be different for other clients though) and no, it can't be any word. there are fixed number of words (2048 here) to reach the desired entropy and these words should follow certain rules. i am not sure what they are, for that you need to read the relative BIP. read this for example: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki#Wordlist the section b) of it actually answers your question |
|
|
|
your examples are bad because you are practically using the same word. but i get your point. and to make sure just take a look at some of the "Seed Word Lists" out there for different seed BIPs and see if what you say is true. you can write a simple script to check the strings too. here is an example from electrum: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/lib/wordlist/english.txtyou see there are not 2 words sharing the same first 4 letters edit: i was curious too so i wrote this: just put the seeds in a .txt file called seeds on your desktop and run it. it returns nothing for electrum seeds using System;
using System.IO;
namespace SeedCheck
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string seedPath = Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.Desktop);
string[] words = File.ReadAllLines(seedPath + @"\seed.txt");
foreach (var word in words)
{
string first4 = (word.Length >= 4) ? word.Substring(0, 4) : word;
foreach (var w in words)
{
string first4_2 = (w.Length >= 4) ? w.Substring(0, 4) : w;
if (first4_2 == first4 && word != w)
{
Console.WriteLine(w);
}
}
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
}
|
|
|
|
Just the end of yesterdays stocks exchange japan right now is leading the market. It shows that japan was not being so quite when it comes to crypto currency. What are your thoughts about this?
where do you get this data from? i only know 2 tools: coinmarketcap which is excluding the JPY markets, and in that list there is only 1 exchange with 0 fees and a high volume. and also this: https://data.bitcoinity.org/markets/volume/30d?c=c&t=bwhich is showing JPY to be 9.55% of total while USD is 56.78% of total volume. also what do you mean by "Stock exchange Japan"? are you by any chance talking about the xcoin (Click Security) which is a forex exchange? |
|
|
|
~
Why should Julie have used a separate address for each payment she received? ~
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Address_reuse...
you can never know who the other addresses belong to (this is what bitcoin anonymity means).
otherwise if you know 1CrEP9s... belongs to Jack and 3Q8euJ... belongs to Jill you can see they have also been paid. and you can guess that the only left address receiving the biggest amount (1Km5tu....) belongs to Julie (sender) and that is her change.
Thank you, yes, I see the last part is where the veil can get lifted - when you can match an address to a person. So, in theory, you can break the anonymity if a digital currency is issued by governmental authority and allows/requires embedding unique individual IDs into the receiving addresses as they are generated. well that is not how bitcoin works. a bitcoin transaction has a clear structure and each part of it is clear: https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#transactionsnone of these has anything to do with individual ID. but technically you can create a new cryptocurrency, a government issued one if you will, and have that option in it. for example after LockTime, add a new 4 byte thing called ID that requires you to include an unique ID or even your IP address before signing the whole thing. i don't know who would use such a thing and what would be the point of it but i suppose it is possible. |
|
|
|
~
Good for you. Keep using your USB stick and paper wallets - we will see you in this forum when you claim that to have been robbed... You believe in those very first technologies, it is your right.
The part that you may fail to understand, is that the hardware wallet is nothing. It is only a vehicle. The assets are in the 12 or 24 words seed.... Those are worth protecting - not the hardware.
the hardware wallet is using the same technology as a USB stick as far as its hardware goes. the seed is also the same BIP that wallets use and it has the same stregth the encryption is also the same none of these are some hidden weird alien created technologies, these are the same things open to us to also use for own purposes. you just have to know how to use them properly. as i said hardware wallet is for those that are lazy  |
|
|
|
If it is not too complicated, can you explain why letting the wallet choose is better?
because it complicates things, you selecting outputs manually, calculating if it is enough, making sure the transaction is confirmed that you are spending, and generally things like that. Also held down CMD (on a Mac) and selected the coins to spend, and both showed up in a "From" box on the send tab as you said. I stopped there. Address A was 2 coins and (change) address B was say 0.84 and I wanted to send you 2 coins even. If I did go through with the send, would it automatically send you 2 coins from address A and take the fee from the change address B? If Electrum starts by taking out the fees first, I would end up with change in A and B would be empty. A little arcane... and a tad OCD perhaps!
this is how a transaction and fee works: when you spend bitcoin you are spending transactions, these transactions have a value. for example here is my bitcoin address: https://blockchain.info/address/1PHLkjiXvvUfw7AtZoPC6hhnNg6jZ836kw0a927f86e75129a312d1e756cc1ded476fae6855aadec801c9885ed7c2f290f0 has a 0.03 value 13a4c5470acd599743073873294d64c5234a98281b4df9db9c0ec9a5471ad6a0 has a 0.0225 value and so on. my total balance is currently 0.16023 BTC if i wanted to send you 0.01 BTC i usually choose one of these outputs (for priority the oldest one is chosen = e506d3..... which is 0.035) and in the transaction that i make i put 0.01 BTC in front of your bitcoin address to pay you that much and i am left with 0.025 BTC. now comes the fee part. i can send this 0.025 BTC back to my original address or a new (change) address and how much i send there determines the fee. if can sent the whole thing and fee will be 0 or send 0.02 and fee will be 0.005 in other words there is no variable in a transaction saying fee is XX. instead it is calculated automatically based on leftover. the other thing i can do is i can select all the outputs (all 6 of them total of 0.16023) and make a big transaction and send you your 0.01 BTC and be left with 0.15023 BTC which i can send 0.15 to a new address and fee will be 0.00023 BTCnow what i mean by this is that it doesn't matter where those transactions are coming from (0a927f86e75.... and 13a4c5470a.... can belong to different addresses) in the end you are left with that total anyways and you can send the leftover to address A or address B or a new address C makes sense? |
|
|
|
this is what you see when you receive a transaction:  lets say you were waiting to get paid 0.1 BTC and your address is 15z4u.... obviously you now know that 1FqxiUs..... belongs to person who was supposed to pay you (Julie). you can never know who the other addresses belong to (this is what bitcoin anonymity means). otherwise if you know 1CrEP9s... belongs to Jack and 3Q8euJ... belongs to Jill you can see they have also been paid. and you can guess that the only left address receiving the biggest amount (1Km5tu....) belongs to Julie (sender) and that is her change. |
|
|
|
I remember the risk about SegWit and SegWit2x is gone after August 1st, maybe I'm mistaken? Because after BIP141 active in August 1st, the schedule SegWit Bitcoin going to soft fork and not need split chain as SegWit2x.
the proposed 2 mb hard fork in november is the real reason why this coin was created. it'll be used by jihan wu to apply pressure for it. this is what i am genuinely afraid of. when the 2 MB hard fork comes, there is a good chance that core devs will start denying it (i still don't completely know why) and that gives that 80% of the hashrate a good reason to switch to BCC. and it all comes down to price in the end. by that time the major dumping is over and price is at the bottom, a simple pump (specially if they deny 2 MB and drama peaks) will give miners enough incentive to switch. |
|
|
|
Are you excited?
my excitement was for back when everyone was panicking and hitting their heads on the walls while i was buying their coins cheap. price was nearly half the current price (~$1800) 2 weeks ago. and from now on there will only be rises and nothing more. and at least for 2 or 3 months tops this will continue as a big rally. and with SegWit there will continue to be more news of new features, the LN for instance, and all that coming out means continuous price rise. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin price still remains strong and has grown significantly throughout the weekend despite the hard fork.
the hardfork didn't do anything to bitcoin because it was a meaningless hardfork with no support. and it was also a rushed movement. things could have been very different if it wasn't rushed, had more support and was actually fixing something! Though coin transaction fee's from local to international wallets are still at high. Many investors, miners and developers are still using the old Bitcoin. Will developers fix the ever slowing and expensive transaction fee's from the old blockchain or just try to attract old bitcoin users to jump to the Bitcoin Cash blockchain? BTC
maybe you need to make a transaction before giving opinions like this. yesterday i made a transaction with 1.5 satoshi/Byte (total fee was about 800 satoshi) and my transaction was confirmed in about 20 seconds! Unfortunately I did, coins.ph wallet to coinbase, the fee was more than the amount I was to send in my coinbase account. the normal amount of fee that wallets should suggest now (and many of them do) is about 100 satoshi per bytes. this means a normal bitcoin transaction should have about 0.00022600 BTC fee (22,600 sat). if you paid too much fee it is either because your transaction was huge (had a lot of inputs) or your wallet is giving you a bad fee/byte suggestion. |
|
|
|
I am in the camp where Electrum stays with BTC solely. Thomas can do whatever he desires with HIS software and I'll support his call. In my world of thinking I would rather see a separate piece of code that properly handles BCC in order to avoid mixups where new users make so many mistakes. I have not heard of any seasoned "holders" with over 100 coins making these simple errors. Has anyone?
Holders of over only 1 bitcoins have a hardware wallet like Trezor, Ledger Nano or KeepKey. If they don't, they are just careless. Even holders with paper wallets are careless, since they are vulnerable the minute they will convert their paper wallet to a software wallet. The top-of-class technology at the moment is hardware wallet - not paper wallet. So if you have a hardware wallet, it doesn't matter if a clone of Electrum is attempting to steal your seed - because you don't have to enter it or private keys to make it work. And if you have converted your Trezor wallet to a BIP44 wallet, i.e.: a wallet with m'/44'/145'/0'/0 derivation - you are good to go with Electron-cash - just mention it on the "soft-software" creation of you Trezor wallet, which stores only the PUBLIC keys of your device on your PC. those who are using hardware wallets are not "careful" they are uneducated and lazy to educate themselves. and a hardware wallet is also easily damaged in other ways. but people only know how "paper can be damaged" and not "how a hardware can" so they assume there is no way to lose anything if you use hardware wallet. i personally prefer paper wallet and my own hardware wallet which i know the code and can see it. have already done it too. i have a simple USB which i have set up with the open source electrum and open source linux and have my whole stash there with appropriate back ups. |
|
|
|
LOL, it took me a long time to make this in photoshop. ah well i might as well post it: here is what has happened. after block 478558 on August 1 bitcoin cash (BCH) fork appeared. and their blocks started building on top of #478558  now these two chains are separate from each other but they both recognize the old blocks. this means the BCH chain and BTC chain both recognize any block smaller and equal to 478558 but will only recognize blocks on their own chain after that point. for example this means any coin on block #478556 is valid on both BTC and BCH. but a coin on #478561 is only valid on one of these chains. |
|
|
|
|
there is nothing wrong with hard fork. bitcoin already had 1 hard fork in the past.
but there are a lot of things wrong about how that hard fork is performed. when something is this big and decentralized, like bitcoin, you can't just decide one day to want to "change" something and do it irregardless of what the majority of the users want. that causes a split and will harm things more than it fixes them.
also in a hard fork, because of not being backward compatible, there is always a higher risk of split. and for that ALL the network must upgrade which is hard and will take a long time.
but with a soft fork the risks are lower, specially with the backward compatibility and the fact that if you don't upgrade you still are able to use the old software.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
