- Any stranger which messages you to sell you something for your benefit in the Internet is a scammer. (Life motto)
- Any stranger which sells wallets is a scammer. (That applies to real life too, unless they are empty  )
- Any stranger which wants your addresses, probably wants to impersonate you.

Absolutely not. First of all you can't send coins to a burning looking address by mistake. It's something you need to do deliberately. In fact, there are reasons sometimes to send coins there, like supposedly Proof-of-burn mechanisms like Counterparty. Secondly, not relaying such transactions would introduce censorship.

As for falsely written scripts, we already have non-standardness. Be cautious from that point on.

Which are represented in hex?

But seed is supposed to be in hex. Seed phrase is in text.

It sounds very weird that you have a master private key in hex, as it always comes in base58.

It seems to me your situation is an XY problem.

If you're in just for the profit, you're NGMI. I prefer a future wherein I won't have to convert my bitcoin to fiat, with little inflation, than live rich in a world with crap money.

I advice you to be very careful when reading about the adoption and the total users. Nobody can know such thing with certainty, it's like asking how many people possess gold. I doubt you can even approach that number.

Age is irrelevant to me. What I find crazy is that we've accepted the fact that one entity can decide how the economy will go-- as if they are Gods who know everything and don't do mistakes. And the tragic part is that they will never pay for any potential mistakes they make; fiat is fundamentally prone to failure, because there is no financial incentive to protect it from.

The fact that the power consumption increases means that it's profitable to happen, which in a completely free market translates to inevitable to happen. If you lower the cost to mine bitcoin, then you increase the profitability, and set this barrier even higher. Therefore, while with an invention which lowered the cost of energy (or made better usage of an energy unit) you would expect less energy consumed, you'd have opposite results.

This is just so vague. What's "good for Bitcoin" is very relative. Miners will tell you that any transaction which pays a fee is good for Bitcoin. Regular users who don't want to even give a cent will tell you that any transaction which takes their priority is bad-- especially if it's a transaction that isn't compliant with their moral standard, or whatever.

Ordinals being good or not is irrelevant. What's relevant is if it's good or not to prevent someone from using Ordinals.

What do you mean you want to decipher an xprv / seed? If you have the keystore and the password to unlock it, then you can decrypt everything encrypted in it.

Something tells me you bought someone else's wallet which supposedly have coins you try to gain access to. If that's the case, it's most certainly a scam.

I find it neutral to post about Bitcoin, how good it does etc. You're not making a difference, or very little. We have lots of Bitcoin theory, we need more practice. If you're not a merchant, the best thing you can do is to ask merchants if they accept it, so they can see it's demanded.

We don't need a lot of social media activity around Bitcoin. Only if there are some fake news that need to be debunked.

Depends on which country you live. If it's somewhere where using bitcoin is illegal, then running a node in clearnet is plain dumb. Your Internet provider can figure out you do easily as messages aren't encrypted. In that case, you should just run via Tor.

There aren't lots of disadvantages with Tor. Only speed. If you sync for the first time, it might take a few days to finish syncing. Consider adding onlynet=onion to go full Tor.

Where did he state that the majority supports Ordinals, and since when is bitcointalk the gate to the majority?

It's roughly what's happening, I guess. Miners follow profit, but there is concern on whether short-term profit is greater than long-term, or if excessive fee rate is more desirable in the end. I can guess the miners don't care a lot about the long-term, but a mining expert can give us some better insight.

Comparably to the rest, I'll have to disagree with the common opinion, that the Bitcoin network can't handle larger blocks. The main reason I see, is that increasing the block size breaks backwards compatibility.

Completely your opinion. Price is high enough apparently; difficulty is in ATHs lots of months now. Also, running a node is cheap enough.

Depends on what third party you mean. Third parties like BlueWallet or Wallet of Satoshi that act as middlemen, do indeed hurt, not only decentralization, but in the ability to control custody of your funds.

It is complex, in comparison with a simple on-chain wallet like Electrum. Yes, it works well for low-value transactions; in fact, it's specially designed for those.

The discussion reminds me of the sustainability problem. On one extreme, if all moved to lightning there would be minimum incentive to mine. On the other extreme, if all moved on-chain, there would be minimum incentive to use due to the excessive cost. Obviously we'll find an equilibrium.

Forget coffees and teas. This could happen if millions joined the network and wanted to open just one lightning channel.

There is no better way than an airgapped device. I don't want to sound absolute, but there just isn't. If you know to properly install a live OS offline, with Electrum pre-installed, in an airgapped machine, then you have everything needed to generate a seed phrase securely. From that point on, it's what you do with the seed that affects your security.

Bitcoin wallet is no account, new blockchains are irrelevant, and hackers generally don't intervene in math and cryptography to gain access to a wallet.

Επικό meme:


Ρατσισμό στο bitcoin; Τι εννοείς;

Αυτή η τρέλα έχει ξεκινήσει στις ΗΠΑ, αλλά έχω παρατηρήσει πως έχουν αρχίζει να εμφανίζονται παρόμοια "κουσούρια" και στην Ελλάδα. Πρώτα πρώτα οι "ήρωες" των social, που οτιδήποτε συμβαίνει μάλλον νιώθουν πως βοηθούν με reposting.

It is the process of finding a block header such that if hashed twice with SHA256 (or as it's called in the community, hash256), it will result in a number below the target. While searching for such block header, the parameters that change are nonce, extraNonce and the timestamp as said above.

Τώρα που το έστειλες το είδα αυτό. Άλλο ένα stablecoin που γελοιοποιεί το όνομα stablecoin. Πόσο μ' αρέσει να βλέπω αυτά να παίρνουν την κατηφόρα...

Ο Milton Friedman πιστεύω είναι από τους πιο υποτιμημένους οικονομολόγους. Οι ιδέες του έχουν χαρακτηριστεί από αριστερούς ως "βλαβερές για την κοινωνία" λόγω της ισότητας που την βάζει δευτερεύουσα μετά την ελευθερία. Εγώ έχω να πω πως όταν ήταν το δεξί χέρι πρωθυπουργού, τα πράγματα στην Αμερική ήταν πολύ πιο ισόνομα. Όπως λέει και ο ίδιος:

Lightning doesn't work like a blockchain, no. Transaction data is shared only between channel partners, and is updated throughout. The only history lightning leaves on-chain is the opening and closing channel transactions.

Are offense, spelling mistakes and missing punctuation parts of your dialect? Don't expect every Internet user to understand your unique dialect. British and American are the two dialects most understand. I don't know what English you speak of, nor do I care. If you'd like to communicate, select either British or American.

I think that you misunderstanding my point is a more likely case.

Vote for what? Everybody can be in favor of the change by running a Bitcoin client with that particular change enforced.

@HmmMAA, σου προτείνω να διαβάσεις το: The Blocksize War: The battle over who controls Bitcoin’s protocol rules.

Safe heaven; Μα πως είναι δυνατόν, αφού είναι πολύ καινούργιο αυτό το bitcoin! 

Global adoption loading...