Anyone having issues with the iphone version of mycelium? I use the android version. But I know a guy with the iphone version who loaded bitcoins to his wallet and has a zero balance showing even tho the coins show several confirmations in his transaction history. So the coins show as confirmed but he can't spend them. I found a reddit thread about how the iphone version is totally different, made by different devs and generally crappy. Any tips for this guy on how to access his btc? Here's the reddit thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/36ke99/mycelium_iphone_vs_android/EDIT: If this issue is not resolved, is there a way to export the private keys from his wallet and spend the btc from another wallet? You can export the master seed, and use that to generate the private keys. Putting the 12 word seed into https://dcpos.github.io/bip39/ should get you the keys you need. You might want to load the page, then disconnect from the Internet if you're worried about the page somehow stealing your seed. Or even copy the page to a USB memory stick and load it on an entirely offline machine, depending on how safe you want to be. You should see the receiving addresses shown by mycelium under 'derived addresses' on the BIP44 tab once you've entered the 12 word seed. If not, try changing the account number to 1 or 2. And if you change the 'external / internal' from 0 to 1, you'll see the change addresses instead of the receiving addresses for that account. |
|
|
|
Be careful trusting new dice sites:  |
|
|
|
About hashnest and bitmain the leader asic bitcoin miner hardware manufaturer, think that they could be scammer is very hard to believe (bitmain has an hero member account with positive trust like you), but hey everything could be. Could be that the CLAMs coin is a scam as well, who knows? Never say never!
I'm not saying they're scammers. I've never looked into their operation, not even a little. What I'm saying is that with cloud mining you have to trust a third party with your funds, and with CLAM staking you don't. So with cloud mining there is *a theoretical possibility* that they can steal your coins, and with CLAM staking there isn't. That's a difference worth pointing out. About the dig actor, pardon my ignorance but what is "digging"? Can I dig as well?
Others already answered. To make it brief, "digging" is the act of claiming the CLAMs that were given to you for free when CLAM first launched. Every BTC, LTC, and DOGE address that had a "non dust" balance on 12th May 2014 was given 4.6 CLAMs. If that includes you, then yes, you can dig as well. |
|
|
|
Back by popular demand: updated dig charts...   |
|
|
|
I have calculated that the return as today is around 0,18% per day (even less if you consider the 8 hours you have to wait after you get a block). You have to keep yor wallet open and online 24/7. With hashnest, for example I can get from 0.3% to 0.35%, if I buy some s5 ghs without the burden of keeping my pc on all the time.
I like your project and how you developed the proof of working stake, but honestly 0.18% that will get lower and lower over time doesn't sounds a good deal to me when the dear old BTCBTC give me almost the double.
Maybe I lost something or I didn't get something.
Some things you may have missed: 1) With hashnest you are trusting them with your money. They could turn out to be a scam and you end up with nothing. With CLAM you can keep control of your coins at all times. You can run the staking locally so that nobody can steal your coins. 2) With hashnest there is presumably a sunk cost. After buying the "s5 ghs" you have presumably made a loss, which it will take you some time to break even from. With CLAM there is no sunk cost, other than the exchange fee (typically 0.2%). It's possible to buy CLAM one day, stake for a day, then sell them again and break even. Is that possible with hashnest? Having said that, I think you're probably right at the moment. CLAM isn't a good investment while there is someone able to dig up huge amounts of CLAM. He's slower his digging over the last few days, but that doesn't change the fact that he has large amounts of CLAM he can dump on the market whenever he likes. Maybe look again after Christmas, by which time he may have finished his long slow dump. |
|
|
|
Just having trouble understanding how the clams stake actually work....
Can you be more specific? Basically each output has a chance of staking that is proportional to its value in CLAMs, and inversely proportional to the total network weight. Unless the output was involved in a transaction in the last 4 hours, or staked in the last 500 blocks, in which case it has 0 chance of staking. My weight has grown slightly but from what I read weight was meant to equal coins but my weight is around triple my coin amount (300 something weight).
I don't see how that is possible. Could you show us a screenshot please, showing your balance and your weight? Something like this:  That is the old JD hot wallet. It has 515 dust outputs in it from faucet users who didn't yet realise that their JD deposit address has changed. It also has an output of around 6 CLAMs that is only 2 hours old. The dust is old enough to have a weight, but its total value is roughly 0, and so the whole wallet's weight is roughly 0, and it is rounded to an integer: 0. In a couple of hours the 6 CLAM deposit will be 4 hours old and will start contributing to the staking weight. But at no point do I expect the staking weight to exceed the wallet balance. Edit: a few hours later the 6 CLAM deposit is 4 hours old and shows up in my staking weight as predicted. Note how the weight isn't greater than my balance:  I'm used to stake coins where you get a weighting from your coin amount input and it grows over time until it hits the approximate network weight at which time you are weighted more than others and you get a stake at some point around that (though I understand it can happen earlier).
CLAM weight doesn't grow over time. It's a constant 1 CLAM = 1 unit of weight. That is so that your rewards are proportional to how long you keep the wallet open for. Other coins let you run the wallet only once per week or once per month, collect all your staking returns, then shut it down again with little to no loss. CLAM rewards you for running the wallet 24/7, contributing to the network security. Why is the network weight so high (in the 800,000 sometimes) and mine so low after 4 days? That's what i'm having trouble grasping... also it always says 4 days or 5 days expected time... is that from when they initially started staking OR from the current point in time?
The network weight is simply an estimate of the total number of CLAMs attempting to stake. There are ~700k CLAMs trying to stake. Your weight is low relative to the total network weight because your CLAM balance is low relative to the total network CLAM balance. Like with Bitcoin mining, the expected time is from right now. The expected time to the next Bitcoin block is "10 minutes", no matter when you ask. Even if it has been an hour since the last block, the expected time to the next block is still "10 minutes". No progress was made towards finding a block in the last hour. A lot of work was done, but it failed, and we're still where we started. It's the same with CLAM staking. If you have 1% of the network weight, you have a 1% chance of staking the next block. If you fail to stake a block and get beaten by the other 99% 1000 blocks in a row, you still have a 1% chance of staking the next block. |
|
|
|
To poke my ugly nose in here, what you did was engage in a reputation building loan. Not only it is the wrong way to go, it is also grounds for receiving -ve rating. Clearly no one has the guts to do that to you, so be a dear and pull me in Level 2 so I can give you one. You're setting a bad precedent here and it will only encourage other to openly declare now 'Hey, the great Dooglus gave a rep building loan so we can engage in it now'.
If you truly believe Tspace to be trustworthy, why not give him a loan which is really risky, instead of some token amount? Give him 100 BTC and see if he returns. If you shy away from doing that it means you were only treading comfortable waters and angling for an excuse to provide trust which is almost as bad as selling trust.
I don't know whether he would steal 100 BTC given the chance or not. I suspect he wouldn't, but am not willing to take that risk. I was pretty confident he wouldn't steal 1 BTC, and was correct about that. 1 BTC is much more than he is accused of stealing from coinchat. Why would he steal dust from coinchat but not steal a whole Bitcoin from me? |
|
|
|
@dooglus - I don't see any evidence that tsp ever received the loan, only that he paid it back. Is there some kind of evidence that he actually received ~320 CLAM from you? I also see that tsp paid you back via a tip on Just-Dice, did he *actually* have the ability to not repay you if he tried not to (if he tried to withdraw the ~320 CLAM, or if he tried to gamble some of the CLAM, would he have been able to?).
The loan happened on Just-Dice.com. What evidence could I provide that would satisfy you? The loan and the repayment both happened off-chain and so could easily be faked. He *actually* had the ability not to repay me. He could have clicked the 'withdraw' button and taken the coins off-site. I really did trust him with the coins, and he really didn't attempt to steal them. For what it's worth, here's a screenshot of the relevant section of my History>Withdrawals report on Just-Dice.com:  tsp will be able to show something similar from his History>Deposits report, no doubt. |
|
|
|
that is a very weird way under the given circumstances to test tsps trustworthiness  not sure what you're really trying to prove there, doog. but it appears you're trying to teach QS a lesson using tsps "case". Testing his trust with a small amount of money was QS' idea. I did as he suggested: Knowing that tspacepilot fraudulently withdrew some amount of money from coin chat, and knowing that he lied about it, would you trust him with a small amount of money, say 4BTC? What about an amount similar that was claimed by TF that tspacepilot stole, say 0.5BTC? What about half that amount, say .25BTC? What if there was a way that would guarantee that you are in fact speaking to tspacepilot but had no way to prove your agreement (e.g. only you would know that you got scammed), would you trust him with any of the above amounts?
What do you think would happen if you accidentally sent any of the above amounts to tspacepilot? What about a greater amount? Do you think he would quickly return the money?
Are any of the above answers impacted on the fact that you know that tspacepilot withdrew money from coin chat that he was not entitled to? Does the fact that tspacepilot lied about withdrawing money from coin chat numerous times affect any of the above answers?
I think a lot of people would trust a hero member who they know is the original owner of their account with .25BTC (I don't think tspacepilot has been sold), but I do not think it would be smart to trust tspacepilot with that small of an amount.
tsp has been on the forums for a long time without apparently ripping anyone off. Other than some trumped up charges from QS over an accident years ago involving a bot and some dust I don't see any reason to suspect he's at all scammy. anyway, publicity stunts like this are exactly why everybody should manage his very own trust list  edit: I have neither doog nor QS on my trust list, so tsp appears neutral to me, which is probably the most correct display of his actual trust. There's no publicity stunt. The loan happened about a week ago, and nobody even mentioned it until QS noticed a screenshot of it linked from my feedback on tsp's profile. If QS is justified in leaving negative feedback about a malfunctioning bot taking some BTC dust against a defunct scam site's terms and conditions that didn't exist at the time when the alleged "crime" happened then surely it's OK for me to leave positive feedback about the fact that I trusted him with 1 BTC worth of value and he didn't attempt to steal it from me. I'm not saying "this guy is great, trust him with your life savings". I'm saying "I loaned him 1 BTC worth of value and he repaid it". That's all. |
|
|
|
Why would someone who has so much bitcoin need this kind of a loan? Why would you think it would be a good idea to lend someone with tspacepilot's trading and trust history 1BTC worth of an altcoin?
I don't think he needed it. I loaned him the 1 BTC worth of CLAM as a test to see if he would pay it back, like you suggested. I have no reason to believe he isn't trustworthy. Sure he has some negative trust ratings but they mostly seem to be from you or suspected sockpuppets of yours. You seem to have some kind of a grudge against him. What I do have however is what this certainly looks like. This looks like that this is an example of selling trust, either for the entire 1BTC amount (assuming there was no loan, only a "repayment"), or for whatever the interest amount was (assuming there actually was a loan). For a number of reasons that I am not going to call you out on (yet), I am leaning towards the former. The selling of trust is highly frowned upon within the community.
I loaned him 123 CLAMs and he repaid it. Other than that nothing of value changed hands. I wouldn't "sell trust" under any circumstance. Call me out on whatever you like. I have nothing to hide. I would ask you, are you really willing to stake your reputation on this person?
I'm not staking my reputation on him. I left positive feedback after he repaid the 1 BTC worth of CLAM I loaned him. I think it would be advisable to remove the positive rating you left on tspacepilot and to remove the exclusion next to my name. Both of which I think it is reasonable to conclude were sold.
I don't think that's a reasonable conclusion at all, since (a) it never happened and (b) there is absolutely no evidence that it did. You can't imagine why tsp would take a 1 BTC loan when he has 5 BTC already, and yet you think it's somehow possible that I would risk my reputation selling trust to tsp for 1 BTC? |
|
|
|
I thought the point of splitting was each input stakes for a potential reward i.e. 1 clam. So if I run 20 per input and all 5 stake in say 3 days by miracle I get more return than if it was in 1 and happened in 24 hours? Am I thinking wrong?
That's right - if you run 20 per input and 5 stake in a day, you get 5 CLAMs. But each of those 20 CLAM pieces is 6 times less likely to stake in any given timeframe than a single 120 CLAM input is. So your expected number of stakes per day is unchanged by splitting. The only difference, as SuperClam just posted, is that when your outputs are split, less value gets put "out of commission" for 8 hours each time you stake. An extreme example that may help: Just-Dice has 700,000 CLAMs trying to stake. It stakes about every 70 seconds or something silly. If all 700,000 CLAMs were in a single output, we would only be able to stake 3 times per day, because the whole 700,000 CLAM output would take 8 hours to mature each time it staked. By having it split up into thousands of smaller pieces, only between 1% and 2% of the pieces are out of commission at any time. Checking the warm wallet right now, I see a balance of 664694.30193479 made up of 656393.76362757 actively trying to stake and 8300.53830722 waiting to mature. I aim for roughly 1% of the balance to be maturing, and set the split size accordingly. Edit: I figure it's OK for 1% of the outputs to be maturing at any point in time, and so I want an average time-to-stake per output of 100*8 hours. With 800k network weight, an 800k CLAM output would stake once per minute, an 800k/60 CLAM output would stake once per hour, and an 800k/60/800 CLAM output would stake every 800 hours. 800e3 / 60 / 800 = 16.666 so 16.666 CLAMs is currently the kind of size output you need if you want 1% of your outputs to be maturing at any given time. Here's a histogram showing how many outputs we have of each size:  The 33.33 CLAM outputs are left over from when I wanted to move coins from one wallet to another quickly. They'll be split by the client automatically when they next stake. I have the wallet set to automatically split outputs into two 13's when they get to 26. Most of these outputs started at size 13.37 and have grown via staking. The most common size is currently 16.37, and I guess that will change to 17.37 with time, as they continue to stake. Edit2: It took me a while to figure out how to get gnuplot to put data into 'bins' for plotting like this. Here's what I ended up using: binwidth = 0.2
bin(x, width) = width * floor(x / width)
set style fill solid 0.5
set grid
set boxwidth 0.8 * binwidth
plot "amounts.txt" using (bin($1,binwidth)):(1.0) title "output sizes" smooth freq with boxes |
|
|
|
I asked for it, but I don't remember getting any reply. * Support for Cold Storage spending from masterseed keys
Very good. Would be better if one could type master seed in the cold storage spending instead of copying it from somewhere else Ah yes, I use master seed QR codes, but we should (and will likely soon) add the ability to just type the seed.
I would like to remind about that. Also, could you add the possibility of sending to/from password protected version of stored (main) master seed? I don't see why I should type/scan master seed when I want password version if it is stored by Mycelium anyway. There is no (or I don't know one) easy way to send to password version of master seed. I have to initialize Mycelium, or use some special tool to generate address. I didn't realise this was all old news. I hope they add the feature we're asking for. |
|
|
|
hey guys/gals I bought 120 clams off cryptsy just to play with (its what I usually do with new stake coins).
I split the main address into 6 inputs of 20 clams each... its been 3 days now and I have the wallet open for staking. I read initially it was 4 hours maturity then 8 hours should get a stake or something but i'm a little confused... my weight after 3 days for a 20 clam input is only 34 but the network weight is like 800,000 or something. It says estimated 4-5 days but its said that for ages...
I guess my question is... if I want to get a stake per day what sort of input size are we looking at based on current clams out there? I looked at just dice inputs which is what I based my size on but just dice has like a shit load of the available coins like 50 percent and if all their inputs are 20 i'm thinking it'll be a long time before I stake.
Depending on return through stake on this is whether its worth me continuing with more or just selling the 120 back. Seems a bit crazy if just dices input splits can dominate the stake potential due to the sheer amount they hold of customer funds :/.
so tldr
How many clams do I need in 1 input to get a stake in 24 hours... or the shortest possible time?
If the network weight is 800k, and 1 CLAM is staked each minute, that's 60*24 = 1440 stakes per day, and 800k/1440 = 555.555 is the number of CLAMs you need to expect to stake once per day. Splitting is kind of irrelevant. It only affects your "recovery time" after staking. If your whole 120 CLAMs was in a single output, the whole 121 CLAMs would be frozen for 8 hours after it staked while it matured. If you split it into 6 sets of 20 each, only 21 CLAMs would get frozen for 8 hours and the other 5 sets of 20 would continue trying to stake. The estimate shouldn't change much. It's not like you make "progress" towards staking. You can expect to stake every 4 or 5 days on average, but it's random. You could stake twice in a single day or you could go 10 days without staking. |
|
|
|
I see you answered most questions yourself already Yeah - so I'm mostly happy now. I can use Mycelium in a secure way, without leaving private keys on the tablet's storage. My only problem now is that I don't see how to get it to show me unused receiving addresses for the password-protected accounts. It would be useful if the app would let me enter a passphrase without scanning a new "seed" phrase, and use it to generate a new temporary account from the main wallet's seed that works just like any other account in the wallet, but which gets wiped from memory when I'm done with it. Then I can use a single seed phrase for encrypted and unencrypted accounts, and not have to carry a QR code with me. I can simply memorize a few different passphrases of varying lengths for the different degrees of security I want. |
|
|
|
If I won 10 <1% odds bets in a row I'd probably chase that dragon pretty hard as well.
Ha! Except I have my filter set to only show bets which win or lose at least 10 CLAMs. So you don't see all the bets of less than 10 that he lost, only the ones that won. |
|
|
|
Just generate a BIP39 word list and put that into a qr code (hint: mycelium entropy can do this).
What's the format of the text to be encoded into the QR code? Just the 12 words separated by spaces? Edit: "Just the 12 words separated by spaces" seems to be exactly what the QR code needs to encode. That seems like a good solution. Stealing the phone gets the thief nothing. Stealing the QR code gets them nothing without the passphrase(s). You can use multiple passphrases and get completely different sets of addresses, so a longer passphrase could be used to store less-frequently used coins. Is it documented how the passphrase modifies the seed? Edit2: the passphrase is the standard BIP39 passphrase. Something like https://dcpos.github.io/bip39/ can be used to generate the addresses to fund the BIP39 accounts. One thing I noticed when spending from a master seed is that the accounts are numbered wrongly: m/44'/0'/0' is called 'Account 1', m/44'/0'/1' is called 'Account 2', m/44'/0'/2' is called 'Account 3', etc. |
|
|
|
it looks like poloniex is digging for clams and also it sells it on the market. Imo this is a huge conflict of interests... Maybe they are the misterious digger. The transaction you linked to is spending a bunch of 4.605 35574 CLAM outputs. Digging gets you 4.605 45574 CLAM outputs. The outputs being spent are each 0.0001 CLAM less than the dig amount. The 0.0001 was spent on a transaction fee as the digger moved the outputs from his wallet to his poloniex deposit address(es). Check the address of the first input: http://khashier.com/address/x9Va3QTU2Rtt9MJtv24ZY1ddUGX9tT6ypoThe digger sent 10 separate 4.6 amounts there. Outputs don't merge when they're sent to the same address. The same is true of every other Bitcoin-like coin I'm aware of. Edit: of course, if you spend multiple outputs in a single transaction then they merge together. But he's sending them individually, in separate transactions, so they don't merge. |
|
|
|
Mycelium is open for anyone to look at and add features to. The only restriction is that you don't publish your own wallet, and whatever is added goes into the official app.
That's not very clear. On the one hand you say I am free to add features, but then you say the features I add must go into the official app. What if the feature I add is rejected by whoever controls the official app? Are you saying I'm free to add features to my local copy of the wallet but not to share my features with anyone else? If so that means it isn't under an open source license, since open source licenses allow users to share changes with each other. |
|
|
|
You can do that with xPriv paper wallet, but unfortunately there's no BIP38 for that. There should be.
So I scan the xpriv QR code into Mycelium, it checks which unspent outputs exist for that xpriv, picks some, and sends change back to another of the addresses generated from the xpriv code? That sounds like a good solution, except that due to the lack of encryption in the xpriv QR code I have now gone from losing all my coins if my phone gets stolen to losing all my coins if the QR code gets stolen. I was hoping for an HD solution where at least some of the information needed to spend the coins is in my head. Like as a passphrase. Edit: Is there any such wallet available for Android? Or any open-source wallet for Android that such a feature could be added to? As I understand it, Mycelium isn't open source and so adding such a feature isn't allowed. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
