I reviewed your post history and have concluded that you are putting in a decent amount of effort into your posts. I have given you merit, and you will rank up to a junior member.

If I am not mistaken, Coinbase allows "instant" purchases when a credit/debit card is attached to a users' account.

It sounds like you purchased some coin before a recent deposit cleared the banking system, and the deposit ultimately failed. It sounds like as a result, you have a negative fiat balance, and Coinbase will sell any coin in your account to cover the negative fiat balance. My suggestion would be to make a deposit to cover your negative fiat balance, if you can.

Internet connection is an important factor in being able to effectively use a full node. If you cannot quickly receive a block, none of your bullet points matter because your node will not even start verifying if a block is valid in a timely manner.

Regarding your 1st point, a user will need a CPU that can quickly validate a block.

Regarding your 2nd point, the UTXO set is held in RAM (I believe). The UTXO set is generally increasing over time, and if the maximum block size were to be increased, the UTXO set will increase at a faster rate. In theory, a portion of the UTXO set could be stored on disk based on certain criteria, and this would result in blocks that spend a UTXO stored on disk to take longer to validate. It would also potentially expose nodes to a DDoS attack if an attacker were to send many invalid blocks to nodes.

I think the biggest hint as to why he left the forum is in his second to last post:
Satoshi obviously wanted to remain anonymous, and he knew the attention that WikiLeaks attracted was not going to be positive. My best guess is that satoshi believed it would be difficult to remain anonymous with the additional attention that WikiLeaks was bringing Bitcoin (and the forum).

It is not an uncommon occurrence for there to be over an hour between found blocks when the average is supposed to be 10 minutes.

If you are running a full node, there is a good chance that you are connecting to other nodes via google infrastructure. If you are running a full node, you are certainly relying on a centralized ISP to connect to the internet.

Decentralization has its purposes, but it is not the solution to everything. The overall performance of google products is likely greater than a hypothetical decentralized service that can help with similar tasks.

You are assuming that when there are two contradictory statements, that Trump is automatically wrong.

Trump has access to more intelligence than Pompeo and a wider range of people are advising Trump. There is the obvious incentive for Trump to blame China versus Russia for the hack, considering that China is in bed with Biden and the Democrats.

Without concrete evidence one way or another, I would not assume that either party is wrong based solely on their word.

I would think the opposite. An exchange facilitating LN deposits/withdrawals will want to keep the amounts low because large transactions have the potential to make LN channels become unbalanced, and will need to be closed. Very small transactions may be prohibited to avoid database bloat.

I don't think exchanges will have especially high fees either. Deposit/withdrawal fees charged by exchanges are generally in line with actual costs associated with receiving/sending a deposit/withdrawals.

I don't think LN will cause much additional arbitrage trading. Today, traders can hold both BTC and USDt on both exchange A and exchange B, execute trades on both exchanges once the price deviates by a predefined threshold, and transfer coin between exchanges after both arb trades are executed.

I think something like this would be a good compromise if theymos doesn't like the negative connotation associated with red links as OgNasty says.

An intermediary page would be only a minor inconvenience, and this could even be turned off via individualized settings (that is by default, on), and certain long-standing bitcoin/crypto-related domains could be white-listed that would not initially direct to an intermediary page.

The purpose of changing a link's color is to prevent forum members from being tricked into visiting phishing sites. I think the above should generally prevent members from being tricked into visiting most phishing sites.

It looks like your "proof of authentication" post is currently post #1929, which is on page 97 of the bounty thread.

Post 1918 of a thread will be on page 96. There are 20 posts per page.

You would run a series of RPC commands to get the transactions contained in each block. I have pseudo code describing how to import transactions into a database below:

#run for loop through each block
    #run for loop to get the txid of each transaction in the blook you are looking at
        #get the inputs, outputs, and amounts of inputs/outputs for each transaction
        #update database accordingly

Once you have updated your database with existing blocks, you can create a script to run lines 2-4 each time your node receives a new block. You will also need to account for orphaned blocks once your database matches the current blockchain.

I doubt that the Trump campaign has that much debt. I also understand that a candidate is not personally responsible for any debt that their campaign incurs.

Some of the $200MM Trump has raised since the election has gone into his leadership PAC, and I do not doubt that this is a substantial amount, however, I also understand that Trump personally put hundreds of millions of his own dollars into getting elected in 2016 and that he entered office being a multimillionaire. If Trump wanted to exert influence on the Republican party with a lot of money, he already has the means of doing so.

I would not be surprised to see Trump hold rallies throughout the Biden/Harris Presidency, and he will probably campaign for Republicans in the 2022 midterms, who are expected to retake the House, which Trump will take credit for.

I do think that Trump had legitimate concerns about the 2020 election, but I don't think his legal team was very serious.

If memory serves me correctly, he grew and sold Mushrooms on the Silk Road platform in its very early days. It is difficult to say if this continued as it would have been trivial for him to create a sock puppet seller account.

He was not tried for the selling of Mushrooms, but I believe there is evidence he did so.

There is also the issue of the murder for hire plots that Ulbright allegedly paid for. Again, he wasn’t tried for this, and there may be entrapment issues with one of the plots, but it is a reason why I would be hesitant to pardon him.

Using a block explorer in addition to a SPV client will incrementally increase security. If it is being buggy, it would give a false indication that you should not rely upon a transaction that the SPV client is saying was received. At worst, you would have the same security as relying on a SPV client alone.

You are correct in saying that using a block explorer may result in reduced privacy, but this is something you would need to weigh with the potential impact on security.

I was describing the risk to using a SPV client. Using a block explorer may be one way to mitigate that risk. However as ETF said, it is atypical for someone to check a block explorer if it doesn’t appear that anything is wrong.

The address 1HZwkjkeaoZfTSaJxDw6aKkxp45agDiEzN has received over 59 btc over hundreds of transactions. It is unlikely that the 11 people are the only ones that have made this mistake.



This is hardly the only private key that is publicly known (I would disagree with the description of "leaked" to describe this private key) that presumably new users use. There is an argument to require any signing address have a nominal unspent output in order to accept the signature.

I also believe a signed message is only one data point the recovery team looks at when deciding if they will recover an account or not. I believe they also look at things like your ISP, browser fingerprint, and possibly some other things.

Having a $200mm + war chest before he even leaves office gives him a huge advantage in the 2024 general election, and I doubt he will have serious competition in the primaries if he decides to run.

I didn't say that Trump should concede the election, I said he should acknowledge that Biden will be the next president. There were irregularities in multiple states, voting rules were changed without the state legislatures (despite the constitution requiring that state legislatures set voting rules), and rules were applied unevenly. This was why I made this bet with DaveF, as I thought that Trump had a pretty solid argument.

I think Trump's strategy was to make outlandish claims via proxies (Sydney Powell, and Rudy Giuliani) in order to get republican controlled state legislatures to send republican electoral college voters to the EC despite the results showing that Biden won their state's election. I think the problem was that the claims were too outlandish, and were not supported by facts. Trump's legal team never made a serious effort into having the courts address what I believe were serious deficiencies in the election. I think Trump was afraid the SC would be hesitant to throw out a deficient Presidential election on fairly minor issues, even though they were large enough to swing the election in Biden's favor.

First, it was a pleasure working with you.

I paid early because I don’t see any realistic path for Trump to be president in 2021, and I think that Trump should acknowledge that Biden will be president (legitimate or otherwise) next year, and he can start his next Presidential campaign if he do chooses.

For the good of the country.

I have not heard any elected Republican official, nor any official in the Republican party call for Trump to invoke the insurrection act. I also have not heard of any mainstream right-leaning person call for Trump to use the military to stay in power.

Obviously, there will always be people calling for rather extreme things to happen.

I would point out that Obama weaponized the IRS in the 2012 election season to harass right-leaning interest groups. The Obama administration also used/abused the FISA court to spy on an opposition party presidential campaign.

I would also point out that Clinton supporters had called for Trump's electrical college electors to vote for someone other than Trump in order to prevent him from becoming president.

Obama never declared martial law, but the record does show he acted corruptly in order to keep himself and his party in power. 

There are obviously limits to that principle. I don’t think Trump invoking the insurrection act is a good idea right now. I don’t see many options for him to challenge the results of the election.

I think Trump should acknowledge that Biden will be President in January (even if illegitimately) and start his 2024 campaign.