Yes, and services which cover fees for their customers and want customers to be happy would want to have transactions that have lower transaction fees.

btc1 is literally incapable of going past block 494782 because that is when they forked (they also forked a block too early) and no one is even mining their blockchain and producing valid blocks to go past that height. You are synced as far as btc1 is able to go.

Install Core and do

Bitcoin Core downloads and stores in blocks in the order that they are received, not the order that they are in the blockchain. Bitcoin Core downloads multiple blocks simultaneously, so it is likely that blocks will be received and written to disk in a different order from the actual blockchain and in a different order from node to node.

It's likely because large services like Coinbase, Bitpay, and Blockchain.info have not yet implemented segwit.

Yes.

For services, yes. It will cost them and their users less in fees. For other wallet software developers, the incentive is to avoid technical debt and have the latest and greatest.

It is possible that the outputs that you have that Bitcoin Core can spend from are numerous and low valued, thus causing your transaction to be very large and require a high transaction thus making you unable to make the transaction.

Can you post the output of listunspent?

No, it will not return to your wallet unless the merchant sends the Bitcoin back. Having an order being canceled has nothing to do with the Bitcoin network entirely.

It's not stuck, you can still spend it.

In LN, you need to create a funding transaction which sends the money you want to put into the channel into a special 2-of-2 multisig address. From there, you can do microtransactions with the money you deposited.

It sits in a special 2-of-2 multisig address which can only be spent from if the 2 parties in the payment channel agree to it. You should read up on how payment channels and LN works.

It depends, depending on your wallet, you may not see the new address or the Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin Core wallet (and most other wallets) have this thing called the keypool. The keypool is just several (Bitcoin Core defaults to 1000) keys and their addresses that are pregenerated. When you get a new address, you are given a key from the keypool and a new key is generated and placed into the keypool. This is useful for encrypted wallets where you can get addresses and public keys without needing to decrypt your wallet first.

So if your wallet has a full keypool, then yes, you would see the new address and the Bitcoin on your other computer as it would see the transaction for a key in your keypool.

However your keypool may not be full. You could have taken all the keys from the keypool. If your wallet is not an HD wallet (so Bitcoin Core wallets made prior to Bitcoin Core 0.13.0), then once you have retrieved the keys from the keypool, all keys after that will not be the same (aka any newly generated keys are not the same). This is because they are randomly generated.

If your wallet is an HD wallet (Bitcoin Core wallets make with Bitcoin Core 0.13.0 and later) then you will be able to get the same keys after the keypool is exhausted. This is because the wallet generates keys in a deterministic manner from a given seed that is stored in the wallet. So you will generate the same keys when the keypool is refreshed.

No, it will not. LN requires you to make an on chain transaction to be able to begin using LN, so if you don't/can't make an onchain transaction with those coins, then you cannot use LN.

This is expected behavior. 478558 is the last block in the Bitcoin blockchain which is also part of the Bitcoin Cash blockchain. In order to fix this, you will need to delete the Bitcoin blockchain following this block and reindex. This will then cause Bitcoin ABC to not know about the Bitcoin blocks which it thinks are invalid and download the Bitcoin Cash blockchain.

These commands are really not for the average user. They are for interacting with a bitcoind that's running on a server with a script or from the command line. They're also used for testing.

It would not make sense to add that to listunspent. You could add it somewhere else though, like getwalletinfo.

I don't think that is possible, but you can just pass the output of the listunspent command to a JSON parser and have the JSON parser tell you how many elements are in the array.

This topic has been moved to Trashcan.

Duplicate of https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2416146.msg24716247#msg24716247

Yes. IIRC there have been several forks of Bitcoin but no one hears about them nor cares about them.

No, there is no way to force peers be a certain version. However you can write a script which checks the list of connected peers and bans any peer which is not a certain version. Note that the user agent string which announces the version number can be faked, so it is not necessarily reliable to trust that.

Anyone can create a chain split and hard fork. You do so by releasing software which has incompatible consensus rules with the current consensus rules.

It is not "the development community" but rather a specific group of developers. As I said, anyone can do whatever they want; it's an open source project, they can fork the source code and change it.

Consensus is not required to make a fork and an altcoin. Consensus is required to make a fork and have everyone agree that that fork is still called Bitcoin.

A transaction with a timelock means that the transaction itself cannot confirm before the timelock (either a block height or a timestamp). However a conflicting transaction (one that spends the same inputs) could be created and that transaction can still confirm.

In order to make coins that are unspendable until after a certain time or block height, you will need to create an address that uses OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY. Only coins sent to such an address are guaranteed to be only spendable after a certain time.

The rest of the network does not know nor does it care what data you have in your bootstrap.dat file. It isn't a file that nodes create and give to other nodes; it's a file created by humans and given to other humans.

An altered bootstrap.dat file is an attack on you, and whoever else has that file. It is not an attack on the network. At the very least, it could result in you having a completely different blockchain and then having to download the blockchain again from your peers when your node realizes that that chain it has has less work than the chain that other nodes have.

Using the bootstrap.dat is slower because you have to download then verify all of the blocks after the download. It is faster to let it sync normally because you are downloading and verifying blocks at the same time.

That's not at all how Bitcoin works. Anyone can just give you data; it's not like the bootstrap.dat is some magic file that can't be altered. Your node still must verify that the blocks provided are correct. 51% of nodes has nothing to do with that.

This thread is being locked because it is being spammed with "Sorry for your loss".