Bounty Manager: Hhampuz
Platform: casino contest
Highest Payment (BTC or USD): $1200

I like to think outside the box a bit I'm totally okay with not qualifying.

I've been in touch with several campaign managers once in a while (unrelated to this competition), but I like to avoid conflicts of interest. That's why I went "outside the box" with Hhampuz' casino design contest instead of signature campaign.

A few years ago, when I created my account, the limits were much higher (after only registering an email address). It's been lowered a few times, probably because of regulation. Nowadays it is indeed quite useless if you don't want to go through KYC.

That's incorrect. There may be time travel involved, but:

---

---

Bitcoin is designed to be electronic cash. With cash, you can't really schedule payments, unless you create some automated payment system for it.

And that's a good thing! The protocol doesn't need to do things that can be done in another way. The protocol has locktimes, you can for instance create several transactions that will only become valid in the future. Or a wallet can be coded to do exactly this, it could have a separate balance that isn't locked with a password that can be used to schedule sending funds. Even better if that's LN enabled.

This could easily be implemented in a wallet, say in Electrum. The fact that it hasn't been done yet makes me think there's no demand for it: anyone who wants to schedule payments (and those are mainly businesses) has another system to process payments from their wallets.

Spending the funds before the locktime can be seen as a way to cancel your subscription.

When using Locktime, the transaction is not valid before it reaches a certain block (or date). No miner can change that.

Another thing to consider: the amount. If it's $100, it's not really a problem spending it anywhere. But if it's $10 million, you're going to need a car wash in Albuquerque.

That's (kinda) my point: what if they make Bitcoin illegal, they find out you used to buy Bitcoin on Binance, and then ask you where it is now. Can you have a plausible story (other than "a boating accident")?

For me, it's the opposite: banks want to know where the money came from, and the more anonymous it is, the harder this is to explain. Using P2P in combination with a bank account raises more questions than using an established exchange. P2P in person has a whole set of different risks (for $5 wrenches and for privacy).

Is this really worth all the transaction fees, just to "not have KYC coins"? Depending on who you're hiding from, the exchanges you used in the past will still have a pretty good idea you own crypto. They may not know your addresses, but that's it.

I just tested it, and the case doesn't matter. Electrum is smart enough to still understand the word.
OP must have made a different typo.

This famous quote comes to mind:

The amount may not hurt much, but it will hurt a little bit for a lot of people if you're trying to reach $3000.

Bitcointalk isn't the right place for fundraising, there are crowdfunding sites for that.

---

---

You did come to the right place to discuss the idea though, but you'll have to do better than showing a fake picture. You'll have to be serious, which you are not. If you'd be serious, you'd know not to use a legacy address for receiving small transactions. If that's how you think you can run a Bitcoin vending machine, fees will eat up any profit you had.

If you'd be serious, you'd come up with a business plan, cost break down, expected customers, locations, and profit sharing for your investors. Asking for donations for a commercial project is just bad.

Back to the idea of vending machines: If I see one that accepts Bitcoin, I'll buy a cold beverage just to support the initiative. But most potential customers won't have Bitcoin, so you're fishing in a small pool. I also wouldn't use it often: I think we all know the feeling of paying a vending machine, seeing it move, and the product getting stuck up there. I've come to strongly dislike vending machines for this reason, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone. Besides, those convenience-products are generally overpriced. That's great for your profit margin, but makes that I'm usually prepared to not need to buy those items on the road.
So it's a higly competitive market, and if your only USP is accepting something that most people don't carry on them, you may be promoting Bitcoin but you won't be making any money.
And don't even get me started on the inconvenience of waiting for a confirmation, or the risk of accepting zero-confirmation payments.

I misread your post, and didn't realize "Hodl wallet" is a wallet name (and not just referring to your long-term storage). Glad you've solved it already.

If that's the case: what's stopping you from (manually?) finding those few users, and checking their feedback?

I think there may be a bigger source to find though: users who left accurate (negative) feedback, but never made it to DT.

That's a terrible suggestion for privacy! The company behind ChatGPT built a business around plagiarising other people's text. By sharing your PM with them, you can bet they keep it and may at some point share bits and pieces with other people. Or sell it.

Fixed that for you

Thanks again for your flawless timing

Whoever finds your seed phrase can try different derivation paths already. If that's what you're worried about, you can consider a password, I don't think the derivation path should be part of your security.
Depending on how far you hide the seed phrase, adding new information is as simple as just writing on it.

Can't you just write the number of accounts and derivation paths on the same paper with the seed phrase?

As far as I know, "money" or more generic "money problems" are amongst the main causes of divorce. If it wouldn't have been Bitcoin, it would have been something else.

This is where the tricky part starts: I can't know why someone gets excluded from DT, without checking the details.

Maybe. But negative feedback doesn't stop scams either. People should really start thinking for themselves, and red tags are only the first small hint for that.

I can't tell. I know the feedback format is annoying to deal with, and I don't really want to do it again. That's why I never completed my idea of a "feedback change log".

This hasn't changed. Unless you make a transaction (obviously).

As said before: that's incorrect. If you don't want to believe that: fine by me. But before complaining it helps if you know what you're talking about.

TL;DR: Bitcoin transaction fees are based on 2 things: the size (in bytes) and the fee you choose to pay. If your fee is too low, your transaction won't get confirmed any time soon. If you add more different inputs (think about it as a bag of small coins), your transaction gets larger and your fee goes up. That's all there is to it. The address doesn't matter, although the address type does matter. Use Native Segwit for lowest fees.

If you create a new Electrum wallet, and instead of the default choose to only create one private key, you'll have a single address wallet. Mycelium on Android can do the same.

The reason nobody creates this is because there are no benefits and only drawbacks. It's not a feature, it's a limitation.