I believe this is the part that you're looking for: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/pow.cpp#L54-L59

If the actual time is less than 1/4 of the expected time, then it will be equal to 1/4 of it, not any lower.
If the actual time is more than x4 of the expected time, then it will be equal to x4 of it, not any higher.

There's no other way to test a transaction but to actually send a small amount.

For your peace of mind, you can say the name of the "hot wallet" and the Exchange or Service where you'll buy the bitcoins.
If both are legit, you can safely assume that you'll receive the bitcoins as long as you copied the receiving address correctly.

I'm not using Mac but the best way to find out which will work is to try them.
Use it the way you're using bitcoin-cli, just fix the last part (the json object) where you missed a few quotation marks.

Or the other one.

I suppose he's not using Windows CMD because his original command starts with "./" which wont work in it.
AFAIK the first example won't work in PowerShell either, just the other option but instead of "{\"fee_rate\":20}", should be: '{\"fee_rate\":20}' in PowerShell.

It's better if he mentioned his OS, right?

The error indicates that the json object was constructed incorrectly.

If you want to add an optional "fee_rate", you just have to enclose it with either a single quotation marks or alternate the use of \" and ".
Examples:

---

Chainquery's bitcoin RPC is based from v0.18, which is quite outdated.
You can refer to: https://bitcoincore.org/en/doc/0.21.0/rpc/wallet/bumpfee/ for the updated options.

Certainly yes. Forcing to connect to a server will disable Electrum's auto server selection.
So you won't be needing "auto_connect": false in that case; --oneserver isn't needed in the shortcut though since it's already in the config.

The disappearance of those two lines from the config file baffles me though, it doesn't happen in my config file.

Maybe the "lost" one are input incorrectly or just moved to another line?
If the line is valid, it should stay and Electrum will just rearrange them.

Those lines sould be written as (insert to your config file, skip the ones that're already in the config file):
Your "server" doesn't end with "," and may invalidate the rest of the config.
The lines "<-- this is important if your node is pruned" and similar shouldn't be added to the config.

I think those are all essential for your use-case.

Like I've said in the other thread:

You already created a thread in "Beginners and Help" one hour ago (link), there's no need to repost it.
I believe it was moved to this board.

I have a reply to that thread, have you tried it already?

Ahh, maybe because that's not the reason why these type of programs are written? 

Based from your description, it's far from vanitysearch's main purpose: "generating vanity addresses"

You should just edit your config file's existing values into those list's values.
Example: find "auto_connect" and set the value to "false", do the same to the rest.

If it's not available, your can add it to the next line.
Example: if "oneserver" isn't yet configured, add a line containing "oneserver": true,


Note: Do not forget to add "," if it's not the last line or it will result with the same behavior.

---

BTW, that happens when there's an error in the config file or if Electrum can't parse it.

AFAIK, no it can't.
You can try Bitcrack, it has a --keyspace option that may be what you're looking for: BitCrack - A tool for brute-forcing private keys

There's a reference in "difficulty" article from the Bitcoin wiki that might answer your question: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty#Related_Links
The actual link: old Reddit link

Whoa, that's unexpected.
If the used 'console' tab is from the same wallet where the addresses are copied, then the addresses truly changed,
ismine: "false" means that the address doesn't belong to the wallet or wasn't in the keypool yet.

If you can check all of the 20 "receiving" in the address tab and all result with "false", then there's certainly something wrong with that wallet.
Thankfully, you haven't used it.

Since you're uncertain when you've created the wallet, there wont be enough info to create a bug report in github.

Number four in this list mentioned "no referral links spam": Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ
But in general, you'd want to avoid posting referral links at all, refer to the topic link's replies for references; signature is the way to go.

An alternative way to enable signature as a newbie is to pay for "Copper Membership": Newbies can now pay a small fee to enable images (Thread by the forum admin)

Okay, there's one instance that it could happen but that's for version <3.3.4 : electrum/issues/5082#issuecomment-461428986
But It won't fix itself to display the correct addresses after an update or next restart.
Try to check some of the addresses i they belong to your master key, open the console (View->Show Console) and type:
(including the quotation marks) and if the results are "true", then those are your seed's addresses and there's nothing wrong with the wallet.

Since you can't remember, let's leave it as "human error" because it's not logical to find a bug without enough/accurate info.

If you can't find it, you may have installed the ".dmg" file.
To get it, you need to use the ".tar.gz" file instead which contains the other binaries including bitcoin-wallet.

On which version did you created the wallet?
Because I'm thinking that this might be what happened if you're using Electrum v4.1.0+: In the "Install wizard", you typed "Non Segwit" as the wallet name due to the intention of creating a legacy Electrum wallet.
After selecting "Standard wallet->Create a new seed", there's no 'seed type' options since it was removed in that version but finished creating the wallet anyways.
Since it's v4.1.0, the created wallet is native SegWit regardless of the "Non Segwit" wallet name.

Perhaps you mistook the option "Standard wallet" as the option to create legacy wallet at that time?
Memory of seeing legacy addresses in the 'Addresses' tab may be a vague memory of you checking your other wallet.

Partly correct, except the node isn't something that's created, you run a lightning node just like running a cryptocurrency node.
Some SPV wallets have their own implementation of a "light" lightning client.
To create a channel, the bitcoins will be locked through a special "funding transaction", that involves another node.

After a lightning transaction, the user may choose not to close the channel; the user can use it for more LN payments up to the channel's capacity (funds).
The channel should only be closed when the user want to claim his part into on-chain funds.

There's more to that and the info should be available in various sources like for example: The Lightning Network FAQ
And specially from this site: http://lightning.network/how-it-works/ | http://lightning.network/docs/
Lastly, it's getting off-topic, here are some documentations you will need: https://developer.bitcoin.org/

The problem with those networks is even though the value is the same in the Exchange,
your customers will be limited since technically, it's not related to Bitcoin and [BTC] holders can't send nor receive from your app's Binance chain bitcoin [BTCB].

I agree with the above, a number of payment options will be a good feature.
If you can implement lightning payments into your app, that'll be great.

What do you mean by "legacy deposits"?
Because the android version of Electrum like the PC version can always accept both non-SegWit and SegWit transactions.