|
Online wallet used to be more convenient when it was not as convenient for users to access their coins over multiple devices. However, the introduction of HD wallets has largely negate such benefits. With a single seed, it is possible for a user to access the funds from their devices as it allows the user to access the same set of addresses from their different wallet.
Another argument is probably the 2FA provided by web wallet but I don't see it being more secure as compared to desktop wallet. It only provides a security advantage over the other similar web wallets.
|
|
|
|
|
An integer has to be specified in the field, as indicated by your error. Try replacing your string with the vout index of your outputs that you want to deduct the fees from (ie. 0).
|
|
|
|
|
It's important to note that whilst the total theoretical coin cap is 21 million, it will never be 21 million. If it's a graph, the 21 million is an asymptote and the graph will tend towards it.
The reason that it will never be 21 million is because the halving is never exactly accurate; Bitcoin has only 8 decimals and at some point in time, the halving of the rewards will result in a scenario such that the reward extends beyond that 8 decimals, resulting in some coins being lost.
Fun fact, the actual Bitcoin will not go into the full 20.9 million that people estimate.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. The main bottleneck is with the validation of the data.
Bigger blocks means that there are more transactions within the block which also means that there are more signatures to validate. More nodes can make your download faster but since your computer likely cannot validate the data that fast, it wouldn't be of much use.
|
|
|
|
Both public key and address are texts that no one can do something to steal your coins.
Correct. Both public key and address begin from the same string (private key)
If you mean deriving both then yes. But it's important to note that your address is derived from the public key and not the private key. Both public key and address mean the same thing. (If you have the public key you can make the address)
I just don't get why we can't use the address as ”The Box”.
They don't. Address is a public key hash. For ECDSA signatures to work, they need the public key to be able to validate the signature or to decrypt the message (in the case of ECIES). The addresses are a totally new format that is created by one of the earlier Bitcoin contributors and is not a product of the development of ECDSA. An address is useless in the encryption of the message since it is not an ECDSA public key. The main point is: You need the public key. Yes, you can derive the address from a public key but you can't go the other way around. It's just like you can use flour to bake a cake but you can't use the cake to make flour; it's irreversible. |
|
|
|
About electrum:
Can I somehow insert the address itself and not the whole public key? It asks me the public key and it is a small procedure to get the public key from an address.
Its not. You can't get a public key from an address as an address is a hash of the public key. Since the hash is a one way function, you can't get the ECDSA public key from an address. The main trick that people tend to use is to obtain the public key from a transaction that spends UTXOs from that specific address since the script would reveal its public key. |
|
|
|
|
Did you completely wipe and reinstall the system? Windows has an option to reinstall whilst keeping the data in a directory called Windows.old.
If you're lucky enough, you can try using data recovery program like recuva to recover files if they're not overwritten yet. In any case, don't touch the hard drive storing the wallet for the time being and use another computer to use recuva.
|
|
|
|
|
Its highly unlikely that your application would be unusable when you use it at another place. It can't affect it across all the platforms.
Go the addresses tab and check if you can identify any of the addresses that was being used to receive Bitcoins.
|
|
|
|
It's not immediately obvious if an address is a burn address Any address can burn coins (just delete your private keys and it's burned!), but what makes burn addresses special is that it's obviously not randomly generated. I've used an address starting with 166666666 in the past, which wasn't a burn address. But if it would be 20 more sixes, it becomes very unlikely to own it's private key. For fun: Create your own Bitcoin burn address. Yep but I wasn't sure if its easy to create a something to identify a particular pattern within the address that makes it likely to be a burn address. I have doubts about its reliability; addresses with a lot of the same continuous characters would definitely be a burn address but I've seen burn addresses which are a lot more unique (not vanity). |
|
|
|
If you're using 2FA, you have to pay TrustedCoin for the service for them to sign your transactions with their key. The screenshot is correct; the 1mBTC goes to TrustedCoin and it will pay for the next 20 transactions (approx 0.0005BTC 0.00005BTC per transaction). If you don't want to pay for the 2FA, you can restore the wallet using the seeds without enabling the 2FA and send the funds normally. A small correction, it is actually the amount of 0.00005 BTC per transaction which is 5000 satoshis, not 50 000 per transaction. I think 0.01 BTC for 20 transactions would be too much of a fee for the 2FA service  Oops maybe I'm not really good with decimals  |
|
|
|
Do we know any burning addresses that have funds right now? They should be written in the blockchain. I wonder of on LoyceV's csv file exist.
1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr 1111111111111111111114oLvT2 1ChancecoinXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXZELUFD It's not immediately obvious if an address is a burn address but I imagine you can train a script which can identify them to a reasonable accuracy. Burn addresses are not the best way to burn coins as they can introduce UTXO bloat. It's better to use OP_Return. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin address is a hash of public key and public key is a hash of private key.
Public key is not a hash of the private key. Public key is generated from the private key by multiplying it against the generator point.
Addresses already technically exist. You can't determine the creation date cause nothing is communicated when your client generates the address. Without someone keeping track of the address, you can't see the "creation" date of the address per se. How to do?
Import Bitcoin Addresses or Private keys. Choose to import your Bitcoin address to have the Watch Only mode. If you import your Private key, you will have a full wallet, not Watch Only one.
As much as possible, you can try importing the xpub instead of individual addresses. That'll save you the hassle of tracking the individual addresses within the wallet itself. |
|
|
|
88 - ranochigo Thanks for hosting the raffle!  |
|
|
|
|
One of the better ideas that I've discovered so far is the use of multisig.
A 2-of-4 multisig is set up for the user. 2 of the key is held by the owner while one of the key is given to the heir and the other is included inside one of the clause of the will. That way, the heir cannot access the funds without the key being released from the will. There are several services that does this for you for a small fee.
|
|
|
|
While we can't send anything to a customised address like "satoshi" or "bitcoin" because they are of unknown format, what about customised addresses like " 1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE"? We can send funds to the said address, right? Yes you can. They are valid addresses. Those kinds of addresses are specially designed to burn the coins. This means that while they are valid[1], there is a very low chance that someone would have access to those coins. It is obvious that the address is used to burn coins. Typing those addresses out accidentally and not realising that something is amiss is impossible. Yes, because there may be a private key that produces it.
There is. The address is perfectly valid because the checksum checks out. [1] https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1851/how-to-generate-a-valid-bitcoin-address-for-destroying-bitcoins |
|
|
|
|
Nothing will happen.
On a client level, the client should have a check which rejects any addresses that are of an unknown format. If it does filter through, in the case of a typo, the checksum will not checkout and it won't be a valid address.
If you do send to an invalid address, the nodes that receive the transaction will not consider it as valid. As a result, your transaction is not propagated and nothing happens. There is no real danger of accidentally sending to the wrong address through typo either.
|
|
|
|
|
ECDSA allows you to encrypt a message such that with a public key, you'll be able to send it to everyone and only the person that has the correct private key pair would be able to decrypt and read the message. This is useful if you're sending someone sensitive information and you don't want anyone to eavesdrop on it while only the correct recipient could decipher the message.
When Electrum asks for the public key, it's asking for the ECDSA public key and not the public key hash.
It operates similarly to PGP.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
