That thread is about Atomic wallet, this about Electrum.

Generals are paid to be paranoid.  It's their job.
Doctors are paid to heal, and they should stick to it.
Scientists should be paid to research facts, but ours are paid to arrive at politicized conclusions.
Politicians are obligated to minimize the impact, yet it appears they attempted to do the opposite.
The media was supposed to tell us the truth, but instead festered a vendetta.

These are only a few of the things that got us here.  If that was the plan, imagine trying to convince your coconspirators that it could happen.  No really, it could happen.

Based on those words alone I can tell you right now, I'm not a fan.  I reckon I'm not the target demographic, however, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.  If the focus security and ease-of-use, and it's offered by a trustworthy established company then I can see it attracting more people to crypto.  And that is specifically a good thing.


I'm not sure about that.  Hal Finny once wrote (here on the forum) that he believed Bitcoin will become the backing currency for several independent currencies.  I have a feeling he's right.  As more and more companies start acknowledging the benefits of bitcoin, they'll see their are also benefits to having their own custom currencies.  I suspect that some day Amazon gift-cards will give way to Amazon Alt-Coin.   Any retailers or bank can start offering incentives to using their custom cryptocurrency.  In fact, I'd be surprised if the credit-card issuers like Visa and MasterCard aren't already working on such a thing.  If they're not, they're being short-sighted.

Unless bitcoin's fee volatility becomes more stable and more affordable when mempool is busy, I suspect Hal's prediction is more likely than not.  

Don't be so hard on yourself, but yeah that was a boneheaded move.  The funding address would likely have sufficed.  I always got the impression that ChipMixer is a one-man operation, I could be wrong.  If so, then it really doesn't matter since the owner must have full access to the wallet anyway.  Regardless, their reputation is impeccable, so I imagine you'll be fine.

Do us a favor, and please let us know when your issue is resolved.

That's weird, I wasn't aware of that limitation.  It must only apply to "Brand New" accounts.  I have a newbie account I use on unsecured devices to read the forum, and I'm able to report posts from that account.  Now that you've made a post and upgraded to "newbie," you should be able to use the report link.

I've been here for over three years and I've seen nothing of the sort.  Not a signal shred of evidence suggesting sportsbet.io is scamming people.  They have addressed complaints professionally and transparently.  So please, present some evidence if you can.  Lame responses in bold caps won't convince rational people.

Not from any bank that I know of.  You can buy a lot of different coins, including USDT from Binance.US, Coinbase and Coinbase Pro, and Bitstamp.  All three outfits allow you transfer USD from your bank using ACH and wire transfers.

Don't quote the post and contribute in spreading malware.  Use the "report to moderator" link in the lower right hand corner of the offending post.

a)  9 b)  1:35
a) 12 b)  1:18

Should we listen to you?  How can we be sure you're not trying to defame sportsbet.io?  If you're so sure they're scammers it should be easy for you to prove it.  Show us the evidence and DT will handle the rest.  There are 100 DT1 members, and only a handful of them are employed by Bitcasino/Sportsbet.Io, there's no way these promoters could protect the casinos from legitimate scam accusations, supported by valid evidence.  Assuming they would even try.

Full disclosure: I am employed by Sportsbet.io.

If you're confident your computer is safe then I might not be an issue.  The question is how confident are you that the computer wasn't infected before creating your wallet?  I've had a hot wallet on my main PC for years, and haven't had any issues.   But I'm extremely careful, and even more paranoid.

If you want a truly "cold" wallet, then the best approach is to take every precaution you can.  My favorite method is to use a machine with a newly installed, open-source OS (Ubuntu.)  Once the OS is set up the way I like it I will install Electrum, but before I create or restore a wallet I will disable all the networking hardware and USB ports in the bios, then lock the bios with a password.  Once I'm confident the machine is secure, only then will I restore or create a wallet.  The machine will never get connected to internet or any other computer again unless it gets purged first.  If I need to sign a transaction it will be transferred between my online machine and the off-line machine using cameras and QR codes.

As far as I know there's no way to add SSL to your node.  I haven't seen anything in the commands or options to suggest that Core is compatible with a SSL cert.  Honestly I don't know enough to determine if it would be a valuable addition.  If it was I imagine it would have been discussed and implemented long before now.

I would guess that most electrum servers have self-signed SSL certs, which does little to prove the trustworthiness of the operator, but it does encrypt the data.  That makes sense for electrum because a lot of personal information is transmitted to the server, including master public keys if I'm not mistaken.  The privacy concerns for using an unencrypted electrum server are far more severe than sending a single transaction to a node.

The most obvious solution is to run your own full node.  Then you wouldn't be transmitting anything through your ISP.

FIFY, don't let me catch you dreaming again.  


They split with City in the EPL, and took the UCL cup from them in a convincing win.  If the first half of their season looked anything like the second half we very likely would be having a different discussion right now.  ManU fans probably don't want to hear it, but I think Chelsea was the strongest team towards the end the season.  Chelsea had a lot to play for, so they couldn't afford to go on cruise control the way City and United seemed to do.

I heard a rumor that Guardiola is heading out of EPL, possibly to coach in Serie A.  Of course it was a ManU fan that told me that, so it could be more dreaming (he'hem) than rumor.

You may have named the file something other than "wallet."  It may be worth taking the time to search for "bitcoin" or "crypto" or "electrum" or anything else that you may have named the file but since forgot.  But that seems like a longshot at this point, I think you need focus on finding that seed.  If someone else finds it before you do they can steal you coins.

I probably don't need to say this, but I would advise against sharing any personal information with anyone here.  Be especially wary of anyone who sends you personal message offering to help, odds are they're trying to scam you.

Electrum has some default wallet names, the first wallet it creates will be called "default_wallet" and the subsequent wallets will be called "wallet_1", "wallet_2", so on and so forth.  Electrum does not add extensions to the wallet names.  Search for something like that on your USB stick but barring any luck there, you'll need to find that seed phrase.

a)  8  b)  1:51
a)  14  b)  2:20

The reason one has to earn merit before he can send merit is prevent abuse.  Many newbies are likely abuse their sMerit by sharing it amongst their newbie buddies (or sockpuppets,) thus undermining the point of having a merit system.  The premise is that if you've earned the merit, you're likely to know how to send sMerit.

If you find a post worthy of merit, but don't have enough to send yourself, report it here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5093271.0

I don't think it's the hardware specifically that causes this behavior.  I've used MEW and MetaMask with the Leger and the KeepKey, and they display the same ETH wallets with the addresses in identical order.  I've always assumed it's the order of derivation, but I don't know that for a fact.

None of the wallets automatically display funded addresses, unless the first address in your hd path happens to be funded.

I downloaded VeraCrypt (maybe from sourceforge?) years ago, and the installer was full of a bunch of shit I had to decline.  I missed one and it took over my browser, the registry entries kept repairing themselves after I manually deleted them, and I had to purge the whole system to clean up the fucking mess.  Needless to say, it left a bad taste in my mouth, and haven't tried it again. 

Are partitions encrypted with VeraCrypt compatible with LUKS/cryptsetup?