There's no workaround, just check your dbcache is as high as it can be (in the 4000-8000mb region if you can spare that) and wait for it to catch up.

The issue is when core loads it tries to load as quickly as possible and checks only a handful of blocks. It'd make some sense if it stored a way to check double the number of blocks, run the second check and then rewind only to the first detected corruption but that might be harder to find and manage.

Grayscale seems like a bad actor in itself by not doing a lot of things (such as buybacks with the huge premium they have).

DCG seems to be one of the biggest venture capital companies in the cryptospace. They might be able to offer some things such as stability in mining power but they feel a lot more like they're profiting from a lack of competition in the sector.

A lot of centralised companies nowadays look more like they're into profits and exploitation over the original more hobbyistic values that were once employed (it'd seem to me a lot of the hobbyists quietly sold up and left too).

I don't know if this is anyone else's experience but a lot of the older populations that complained about people being on their phones pre-pandemic and now predominantly doing the same thing.

The same seems likely to happen with cryptocurrency or at least a CBDC with good privacy controls.

The dot com bubble made some new companies strong, some old companies stronger/more prepared and lay the groundwork for other companies to emerge once a lot of the original companies crashed.

Airgapping can work out being cheaper than a hardware wallet and might be harder to.make a mistake with.

Also I don't think your keys can be said to be "offline" if they're stored in software wallets. They're generally well encrypted but only as offline as the computer with them on it is.

The average business makes 20% returns a year. A small business in the entertainment or food service industry can make 150+% a year and a large company can still make 10-20% profit over the year. Under all of these circumstances, a loan is still very profitable.

High inflation (as I see it) reduces risk of taking the loan more greatly than it increases profit margins.

A lot of companies seem to target around 60%.debt to assets so it might be that amazon is taking this loan to try to do that (and why their interest is so low) or they could've had something specific they've piqued the banks interest in.

Most governments and companies at least like to pretend they have limited resources available for investments in other areas. Most make investments as close to home as possible because they're not as risky and because they're likely easier to sell - you don't need to go internationally for a sale if you own an oil extraction company in a neighbouring country, you probably would (and would be expected to provide more information) if your company was on another continent instead (for example) or if a potential buyer feared government control over their purchase. I think domestic investments are better protected too by the local government if they're done by an entity they're familiar with.

The UK has odd statistics on this now (it could be similar across Europe). There's a recession on paper but I don't think it's being felt too much as vacancies are apparently high (I assume this means there's lots of legitimate job ads - there might not be though, a lot of companies try to survive with one person doing the job of the team around them that quit for as long as possible).

I don't think the brics were that well coupled anyway. Especially looking at China v India over the past few years, they seem to have diverged quite a bit and grow at different rates. The parity of those countries might remain the same but that can be said of most economies anyway. The last report from the US I looked at which tracked global economies seemed to suggest a weak euro would mean for a strong yen (it only tracked Europe, the UK, Japan and the US but I wonder how far that stretches out to other countries around Japan and who's economy they'll track).

Services pay well. Doing the tings you've mentioned don't because there's too many people doing them at once - well they do still wotj but you have to predict other people's reactions more than fundamentals.

Ideas and services are the way to go. If you get an idea for a company in the cryptospace (or anywhere) you'll make a decent amount of money but it might take some time. A lot of firms like blockchain.com and coinbase.com seemed to go from making no money to large amounts of money pretty quickly (although they both still have years that perform at losses iirc).

Writing for another person's blog and other services can pay very well too or coding for a contact (if you're fast or good at delegating).

Why would you want to do this?

Wallet software puts its version in a wallet file and compatible software can then open it afaik, why would you want to be able to do this and if you did, have you got a backup of an old version?

There's probably a way to change the version string and regress the file to.a form an old wallet will accept but I don't know why you'd want to. Also you can always import private keys into old software (providing it's compatible).

That's part of the reason but I don't know if there's much more CF can get since they've managed to spend a lot of money on making things that'd need Javascript to work to no longer require them (such as recaptcha iirc). At the same time, if they can get other tools to run without Javascript what's to say they can't do that with most other tracking tools they might be using (particularly for anti ddos/legitimate user fingerprinting at least).

Privacy and security are huge industries so it's not surprising mixers do well in this space - much like how VPNs do well - there's so much competition in the vpn sector and most of them seem to survive well.

A mixer might log or try to decode your activity and the best way to mitigate this (like with vpns) is to use multiple hops.

Most mixer ownership remains secret even after the mixer has stopped operating so no one knows who's running these systems - they're likely small teams or individuals themselves (most organised crime groups are penetrated by law enforcement and intelligence services so it's unlikely these mixers would be run out of those).

Most users of mixers use them to hide their activity and break the chain, there are many reasons why someone would want privacy though (most people like keeping their financial situation secret and crypto on its own makes that a hard task).

You can buy it from sites like binance and coinbase (once you've done an identity check).

You might be able to do it at a crypto atm with or without one or find someone who can sell you some (but take caution with that last one if you don't know how to confirm you've been paid by them).

I don't think this is possible. If I'm remembering right the hash of a redeemscript is what is paid to as.the "address" (which would contain the 3 keys that are paid) so you'd have to provide all 3 public keys in order to redeem the funds.

You'd only need that extra zpub though to spend those funds (and the 2 nmemonics you already have). If you had it in mind you were going to use 2 often and have a third as a backup, there's no reason you couldn't put that zpub everywhere you'll find it online (like cloud storage and email) - you'll remain untraceable unless you use that third signature to spend funds and then you'll only be tracked by where you uploaded it to or if that account gets hacked a hacker might see it.

Do you only have the one channel open too?

I think the second message about the fees is because you're sending too small of an amount via too many hops (can you open a channel with the whoever you're sending funds to)?

There might be custodial services that work out cheaper too (you could try sending the funds somewhere else first and see if the fee to withdraw from there is cheaper).

Also who are you paying and what are you paying for. I don't know if it's likely but I think it's possible you could connect your channel to your own node and then charge high fees to receive transactions through that channel (which could've happened here).

The process itself is repeatedly running mathematical operations on "blocks" of data by these miners' chips with some entropy added to each so a block can be solved faster (such as a different random number being placed in the "coinbase" transaction - the one that pays the miner or shuffling where transactions are in the block).

The reward is given if a resulting hash (/the number found) is below a certain target that's set by nodes on the network (most follow the same rules on calculating a target based on how difficult a block can be to solve and this target readjustment has remained  stable at being changed about every 2 weeks so far).

If you've got crypto wallets and they're encrypted with a strong password, they're likely only going to become unsafe if you try to decrypt them. If you have nmemonics you could make a new account on a phone, hardware or an exchange and send the funds there but there's no reason to rush this.

What do.you expect to do? Have you used the system much since then? Have you checked the file's metadata to see if there's anything about who might have made it, do you have antivirus installed (they might be able to run scans for its heuristics).

This list of things you can do extend from deleting and reinstalling your system to backuping your system using a live os like Ubuntu (onto an external drive) and the.not using that drive unless you have something you desperately need and can reinstall your os afterwards to running a backup if you want and risking the results of just continuing to run a potentially infected system.

If you can help it, don't shutdown your machine from this point or restart it for a while as this activates a lot of viruses that would otherwise remain dormant (instead, if you must, use hibernation or sleep - you can access the menu by using alt+F4 on your "desktop" - the screen that shows when all apps are minimised).

Stop running admin accounts when you don't need to if there's a chance you'll do something like this is possibly a great place to end...

Could your internal drive store the extra 450GB?

If it can then you could make a drive partition for it and reinstall your operating system just on main partitions it already used (make sure you actually concentrate when setting things up though as you might overwrite it) - also I don't know if windows or mac like to reinstall over the whole drive so you might have to look up how to make a host protected area (HPA) that they then can't touch.

There's the alternative chance that if you have a few GB free you could make the new partition and slowly move things across and then resize the partition.

Paper wallets with a written down key were considered insecure since a while ago because of things like the ink being damaged/fading and it being transcribed wrong when trying to spend. If you're a software engineer is there a reason you can't take the bip39 wordlist and a private key and get a tool so that one can generate the other? I think it'd then be safe as each word could act as a sort of checksum (there's other - longer - wordlists available too based on best practices for passwords).

A lot of the security and usability of a hardware wallet comes down to how you're printing it and how you're storing it (things you might think would preserve it - such as laminating it - can actually do more harm than good).

Has anyone else got access to your computer, is there a chance they could've made a wallet too?

When did you send the transaction to the new wallet? Was it long enough ago that you forgot about the process of doing it (surely you put a password in then)?

There's not much anyone can help you with without more information as you'll either need your nmemonic or your password to open the wallet (or a private key but I doubt you'd have been shown one of those by Electrum).

My thoughts too. Surely at $18 million if you cared about the funds you'd think twice about storing them online or in any way that'd make them easier to attack. Edit: unless the funds were held by those keys to confirm whether they had been compromised or not - an attacker finding $2 million might be happier with that instant reward over trying harder to mess up more systems.

Also, the lack of signed message doesn't make much sense either - it would be one of the fastest and most reliable ways to prove the key was actually compromised rather than the twitter account.