Well yes.. almost all 'analysts' are just people who have fun drawing some lines.
BTC could pump to 100k$ within a month, but it could also drop to 100$ in the same timeframe.

The probability for both is pretty low, but still possible tho.




And which currency is that ?

I am not aware of a single FIAT currency with almost 0 inflation within the last 10 years.




Well.. the average lifespan of a FIAT currency is 27 years.
And this fact doesn't sound very satisfying to me.

Another banned account belonging to the same person: Tryto


(archived)




I think the phrase you were looking for is cheap excuse ? 




Ban evasion is against the forum rules, so mods should ban him. A negative rating should not be needed in this case.

BTC price quotes:

01.06.2015: ~230 $
01.06.2016: ~530 $
01.06.2017: ~2.350 $
01.06.2018: ~7.500 $
01.06.2019: ~8.500 $


I don't know man.. doesn't seem like a long term price decrease to me.

Maybe we have different definitions of a price decrease and/or long term ?


You just draw some lines on a chart since the ATH.


I mean.. look, i can draw lines too:




Seems like 1.1k $ in 11/2013 was the highest bitcoin will ever reach. Clear downtrend, don't expect BTC to break 1.1k$ anymore.. oh.. wait.




Same applies to FIAT currencies.
The USD is not backed by anything either.

And both can be created out of thin air without any maximum supply.. oh wait.. this only applies to FIAT currencies 

In addition to that, it should be clear that every electrum server one is connecting to is able to gather the transaction history too.

I don't know whether electrum saves the last connected server and connects to the same after closing / restarting the application, but i can very well imagine you connect to quite a lot server when using electrum regularly.


@OP:
Just don't freakin install a wallet without properly checking the source of it and without verifying its signature.

Why would you care about a fake phishing message popping up in a fixed version (yes, this has been fixed, and there are countless threads and other sources regarding this topic), if you don't even have any funds on electrum but on your hardware wallet ?

Only in the reality of all brainwashed, abusing and mentally ill accounts.  

In his reality, he is a very trusted person who enforced claims worth multiple million dollars and no one could prove that he is a scammer for 3.5 years.
Everyone who wants him to escrow the 5BTC for the proof of a scam just tries to deceive the escrow to steal the bounty.


You can't argue with game minus protect. At least not until he has been in therapy.

They do not have anything to do with BTC at all.
Those are the ETH-/token- stamps OP was referring to in the initial post:



Maybe read the OP next time before spamming a thread.

No, there isn't.
There is not a single lossless compression algorithm which could efficiently compress random data.

I mean.. of course you could save a few bits or bytes (depending on the size of the file / data), because some iterations might appear in the random data (it is random after all, might appear, might not).
But that's not really compression.


For example, i created a ZIP archive of 10 MB of random data:

Create 10MB of random data:

Create a ZIP archive:

Verify the filetype:

Now, compare the size of both files:


As you can see, the zipped ("compressed") file is 4 bytes larger than the original one, because it contains additional information (i.e. "this is a zip archive").


You simply cannot compress random data lossless.
It doesn't matter which algorithm you use. Random data can not be compressed.

Yes, BitCryptex already pointed that out.
My mistake that i didn't realize it was a notepad on paper (that's probably the first time i see notepad without meaning the windows-notepad).




That's wrong.

Everyone with access to your computer (theoretically at any time after the installation of your OS) could gain access to your private keys.
The developer do not have any way to access them. This is a fact.

You can continue blaming everyone else. But it would be more helpful for you if you try to find out how someone gained access to your private keys / seed. You are the only one to blame here.
If you don't change your habits and don't make yourself familiar with securing digital information, i can guarantee you that you will lose your coins again if you decide to store them the same way (the actual wallet software doesn't matter).

Well, but this is only possible if either 1) the person attacking you doesn't know the magnitude of BTC's you own or 2) you have an amount large enough accessible without the passphrase.

If an attacker knows (e.g. because you are telling everyone, or because you are some known person in the community) that you own about X - Y bitcoins, he won't be happy with seeing 1/10 X or even less of that in your non-password protected wallet.
I mean.. you might be able to deceive attacker which aren't familiar with BTC and wallets, but in any other case it will be pretty obvious that the full amount is protected with an additional password.

This might be useful for plausible deniability regarding a person which doesn't know how much you own, but it won't protect you if he knows how much approximately own.

They just need to support bech32.

P2SH was introduced more than 7 years ago, in 2012. If a service didn't yet implement support for P2SH, you can consider them worthless.
P2WPKH nested into P2SH doesn't play a difference here.
Most (if not all) do support P2SH.

They should just finally update their software to accept bech32 type addresses. They got introduced ~ 1.5 years ago. That's not that new anymore.

It still works.

The mnemonic code is always all you need to recover your private keys.
It is just a different derivation path. Electrum chooses the correct derivation path the moment you are choosing which address type you want to derive from the seed.




No.

You can activate it by going to 'Tools' -> 'Preferences' -> Tick 'Use Replace-by-Fee'.
But i believe it is activated by default.

Yes. Compression is not a magic algorithm.

Compression works by removing redundancy of data.

Lets look at the following string for example:

You would compress it roughly like this:


With random data, you don't have such patterns. And therefore you can't compress much at all (at least not if it isn't an extremely shitty PRNG).
Same applies to encrypted data, because it will look like random data.

By the way, that's also one easy way to find encrypted data. Search a drive for data with high entropy.
If you find very high entropy -> most likely encrypted data.

This graphics is quite inaccurate.


P2PKH type addresses always start with 1.. and P2SH always start with 3...




P2SH has been here since ( almost) the beginning.
P2SH (and therefore multisig addresses) got introduced 2012.

Each wallet supports these. At least it should if it is considered a somewhat proper wallet.

P2SH is nothing new.
P2WPKH nested into P2SH (nested segwit) is somewhat new, but the addresses are not distinguishable until one has used its private key to create a transaction.


Additionally i am missing a few pros/cons for each type on that graphic.

But it was a token on the ethereum blockchain.
And not simply an address owning 0.X ETH (which would be quite senseless IMO).

Those BTC stamps basically would be small paper wallets containing an insignificant amount of BTC ?

I mean.. those stamps would be kind of a gimmick, but far away from the token-stamp. Or am i missing something ?





With 1 input and 1000 outputs, your transaction would be roughly 34000 bytes large.
With 1 sat/B, that would be roughly 4.20 USD in fees.

Whether you are using legacy or segwit doesn't play a role with so many outputs.

You can use this site to calculate transaction fees.




This depends on the wallet you are using.
Most wallets have the ability to insert the addresses and amounts in a so-called "pay-to-many" transaction. That's at least the name for it in electrum

Bevorzugt wäre nested segwit (P2SH) zu wählen.

Legacy ist veraltet (hohe fees, transaction malleability, etc.. ).


@OP
Litebit scheint deren Software seit rund 1,5 jahren nicht mehr auf dem neusten Stand zu sein.
Alte websites/services erkennen (native) segwit Adressen nicht als BTC Adressen.

Beim Eingeben der Adresse prüft der Server ob es sich um eine gültige Adresse handelt. Da es bech32 (startet mit bc1..) "erst" seit rund 1,5 Jahren gibt, wird diese bei vielen (veralteten) Services nicht als valide angesehen.

Erstelle einfach ein neues Wallet in electrum und wähle segwit (P2SH) aus (Adresse startet mit 3..). Diese werden dann überall akzeptiert.

You would simply generate 1k private keys, and derive the public keys and addresses out of it and create 1 or multiple pay-to-many transactions with your input and 10k satoshi output for each address.

To create a few thousand addresses, you can either use an own script or a wallet like electrum. Electrum needs roughly 1 second per 1k addresses (depending on your machine).


But the important question is.. what would be the sense of funding the address with 10k satoshi ?
Would you print the public-key or address as QR on the stamp ? This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. What would the owner of the stamp do with it ? Import the private key ?

Ethereum wasn't chosen because the fees are lower or because it is easier to create so many addresses, but because it is a platform to create tokens on it.

The crypto stamp is an ERC-721 token.

You can't really reproduce this with bitcoin.


Regarding your other questions, generating 1k - 1000k addresses shouldn't take too long. A few minutes at maximum.
Depending on the implementation it might or might not save on fees with the lightning network.

How would you want to build it ? If everyone has to open a channel first, your are paying more fees (opening + closing channels = 2 TX instead of simply 1 to fund it).
And additionally the LN is still in beta and shouldn't be used with more funds than you can stand losing.


The way, the cryptostamp has been designed, it is not feasible using the bitcoin network.

Usually it is not recommended to do that.

Such problems can appear when mixing distribution manager (apt-get) and other tools to update software (in this case pip itself).

Did it say that there is a new version and you should update or that it is mandatory ?


Anyway, i would try to uninstall it and reinstall the package-manager version of pip, and then try it again without updating pip:

Using python3 -m pip install -r requirements.txt should work afterwards.


By the way, which version of python3 and pip are you using?

Did you upgrade pip3 outside of your distributions package manager (i.e. using pip3 --upgrade) ?
That's not really recommended.

If you however still want to use the up-do-date (and not supported by your OS) version of pip, try it with the following command: