I don't understand the last part about using public key only twice, in particular once to receive a payment and once to spend that payment I mean the public key isn't only used by the receiver to say the address towards which sending the payment? Why does the article say that the public key is used also by the sender, so by the spender? I think you might be misunderstanding what it is saying. It isn't saying "receiver" and "sender"... as in two different parties (aka Alice is "receiver" and Bob is "sender") of one transaction... it is saying it is using to "receive" a given payment and then it is used (by the same party) to "spend" the payment that they had received. Maybe this explanation might help clear it up: 1. Bob sends 0.01 BTC to AlicePubkey1 - This is use #1... AlicePubkey1 is used to "receive" a payment. 2. Alice wishes to send 0.01 BTC to Steve, so she spends the UTXO assigned to AlicePubkey1 - This is use #2... AlicePubkey1 is used to "spend" the payment from 1. If Alice NEVER uses that same address/pubkey (aka NO address reuse) and Bob never sends to it again... that pubkey will only be recorded in those 2 transactions on the blockchain. Once to "receive", once to "spend". |
|
|
|
we award you full value voucher for 178 mBTC.
 Although, to be honest, not at all surprised by the actions of ChipMixer in this case. They have a pretty solid reputation for being fair and helpful. Excellent result for all concerned it would seem? |
|
|
|
|
As one last piece of advice... once you have disabled the 2fa and restored your wallet, I would recommend that you DO NOT continue to use that wallet going forward. Instead, create a completely new "standard" wallet and then forward all the funds from the "disabled" 2fa wallet to the new "standard" wallet.
You'll want to do that, because your "disabled" 2fa wallet is still technically a "MultiSig" wallet... you will just have access to 2 of the 3 sets of private keys that give you the ability to sign transactions. However, being a multisig wallet, it will create larger transactions == more fees. Additionally, it will complicate matters should you ever need to sign a message from one of your addresses and/or need access to a "private key" (claiming forks etc).
By creating a new standard wallet, and moving your funds to it, you'll avoid some of those issues.
|
|
|
|
I never created a direct channel to CoinPlaza. You can try sending to BlueWallet first, and from there to CoinPlaza. You'll just have to pay more fees (0.3-1%).
Me neither. It's not a direct channel... It's a route that goes from my node, through 1ml.com to 10c.cz to CoinPlaza. As far as I can tell, the channels it should be routing by have enough capacity. So I'm not really sure what is broken. I don't have the time at the moment to really deep dive into the tech side of Lighting to figure out what the issue is. In the meantime, I'll just close the "giant" channel that I opened with 1ml and claim the sats back that way  |
|
|
|
To be fair, the bot was offline for nearly 2 weeks... but having said that, since that first big loss, when the first of the new "algo's" was added, the bot was not active (as you can see from around 5th Dec until the 2nd big loss when it got taken offline)... Will be interesting to see how it runs until the end of this month... but I still think my "slow motion trainwreck" analogy holds #suckerForPunishment |
|
|
|
The exchange in my signature accepts 100,000 sat minimum, and less if you exchange to an altcoin.
Both yourself and Timelord2067 have recommended CoinPlaza... and sadly, I can't seem to send to them. Despite appearing to have active channels/routes to them... When I try and send a payment after setting up an exchange, I keep getting multiple errors like the following in LND: Attempt to send payment 30035xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx6799fd failed: TemporaryChannelFailure(update=(*lnwire.ChannelUpdate)(0xc0012a68f0)({
Signature: (lnwire.Sig) (len=64 cap=64) {
*****REDACTED*****
},
ChainHash: (chainhash.Hash) (len=32 cap=32) 000000000019d6689c08xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxa8ce26f,
ShortChannelID: (lnwire.ShortChannelID) 565538:2086:0,
Timestamp: (uint32) 1578754515,
MessageFlags: (lnwire.ChanUpdateMsgFlags) 00000001,
ChannelFlags: (lnwire.ChanUpdateChanFlags) 00000000,
TimeLockDelta: (uint16) 144,
HtlcMinimumMsat: (lnwire.MilliSatoshi) 1000 mSAT,
BaseFee: (uint32) 1000,
FeeRate: (uint32) 1,
HtlcMaximumMsat: (lnwire.MilliSatoshi) 354218000 mSAT,
ExtraOpaqueData: ([]uint8) <nil>
})
)
and then eventually... 2020-01-12 11:37:14.544 [WRN] RPCS: Unable to send payment: payment attempt not completed before timeout I've tried 250000 sats, 200000 sats and the minimum 101010 sats. I'm guessing something is broken downroute from me and the payment just cannot be made  |
|
|
|
After the first instance, the script went into making basebet one after another. We need to do something else.
2 options... First option: change it to "if currentstreak == -50 then" However, if the loss streak continues to 100+, it won't reset again on the next "50", it'll just keep going! Second option: Use your own counter like I put in the 2nd code snippet. (I edited that in after my initial post, so you might not have seen it) |
|
|
|
Liverpool now hold the record across the top five leagues in Europe for the best start to a season after 21 games... 61 points from a possible 63!! After Leicester stumbled at home to Southampton, we're 16 points clear of Leicester (with a game in hand)... and 17 points clear of City! The commentator on the NBC stream I was watching used the word "juggernaut" to describe the Liverpool team after the game... He's not wrong!  Hope Villa can muster up a draw (or better!) tomorrow... But realistically, City should stream roll them  |
|
|
|
I want the script to start from the beginning after 50 losses in a row.
check the streak variable... "currentstreak"... if it's a positive number it is a winning streak, if it is a negative number, it is a losing streak... so something like: ....
function dobet()
...
if (win) then
..do win stuff..
else
-- check if we're on a >= 50 losing streak
if currentstreak <= -50 then
-- yes? time to reset to basebet
nextbet = basebet
else
-- no? keep raising!
nextbet = previousbet * 1.25
end
end
end
Basically... "If it's a loss, is it loss #50 (or higher) in a row? If so, reset to basebet, else increase by 1.25 and continue" NOTE: The bot won't reset the currentstreak variable until you have a win... so, if you continue to lose, the bot won't reset the counter and you'll be constantly betting at basebet. Theoretically you could get an endless streak of losses without it resetting. If you need it to reset the count at 50, then I'd use my own counter variable and not rely on the internal variable: ....
losscount = 0
...
function dobet()
...
if (win) then
losscount = 0
..do win stuff..
else
losscount = losscount + 1
-- check if we're on a >= 50 losing streak
if losscount >= 50 then
-- yes? time to reset to basebet
nextbet = basebet
losscount = 0
else
-- no? keep raising!
nextbet = previousbet * 1.25
end
end
end
|
|
|
|
The problem is that the deposited funds were converted to chips and then swept by someone... You claim that it wasn't you, but that could be tricky to either prove or disprove As LoyceV has suggested, the timestamps on the messages sent to you might be key to this... if the message was sent after the funds were swept, then it couldn't possibly be you. If it was sent before, then it's possible your mailbox has been compromised and someone else got the session key, created the chips and then swept the keys. |
|
|
|
Where is the Italian stallion?
Beavering away on the "Platform" as far as I can tell... In other news, the bot had a small 1.35% win yesterday (0.00082142 in BTC)... and also attempted a trade last night but didn't get filled and the price pumped, then just as the price started to dump again, the trades were cancelled by the bot.     Just need another 35 wins like that and I'll be back near even |
|
|
|
Here is a question for y'all... how many of you have a "new topic" as your first post as opposed to just dropping a post in an existing thread?  Hi,
I am relatively new to the Bitcoin world (have been dipping my toes in the water for a week or so) and have a couple of things I'd like to get clarified, as I'd like to get a bit more "serious" about Bitcoin going forward.
Firstly, as I understand it, an 'online' wallet is essentially software (either desktop or web) that stores all the information about my bitcoins, whereas an offline wallet would be like a paper one, with all the info printed onto paper and stored (hopefully) somewhere secure. Is that correct?
Secondly, a 'desktop' wallet is software like bitcoin core that I run on my own hardware... and I have full control (and responsibility for maintaining security)... whereas a web wallet, I'm essentially letting someone else hold onto my coins, as they theoretically have access to my private keys etc?
In the case of web wallets... are any of them trustworthy?? Like Xapo looks nice and convenient and all, but there doesn't seem to be a way to control your keys... Blockchain.info seems to offer you all that information, but then, that means they still have access to my keys right??
Thanks in advance for your help/suggestions/information...
Shit, I even put it in B&H! But OMG... I want to go back in time and smack myself... "Xapo looks nice"  This exercise is what I would imagine it would be like having to watch myself as a teenager... "You dumbarse, are you blind? That girl you're 'just friends'™ with is totally into you and you're busy fantasising about that senior who doesn't even know you exist!" |
|
|
|
Are you going to be putting any analysis regarding BTC price into your thread and/or base your decisions on 'normal' trading indicators? Or are you just going to pick "high" or "low" and see what happens? If the latter, then maybe consider the " gambling" board... or " gambling discussion" board |
|
|
|
Is there any evidence of the link between Jumanji1 and the Telegram account in the screenshots? I can't seem to see a conclusive link other than the similarity in name? I suspect that the bitcoin account linked in the OP has been wiped clean as far as I can tell. It currently has "0 posts". I'd like to support the flag etc, but without a link between those 2 accounts I am hesitant to do so. |
|
|
|
So, you didn't read the "Terms of Service" properly... and are effectively breaking the ToS by accessing the service from a "banned" county, but somehow Paxful enforcing their ToS (which were published and to which you no doubt agreed to when signing up) makes them a scam? I know people like to simply tick boxes when signing up to accounts because they just want to trade/gamble/play etc, but I hope anyone reading this starts taking the time to actually read the Terms of Service (ToS) and/or "Rules" properly on sites they are signing up for, lest you find yourself in a similar predicament! |
|
|
|
Electrum is great, fast and easy to use. The seed can be later imported into any other wallet.
While I like and recommend Electrum, it should be noted that Electrum seed mnemonics are NOT compatible with other wallets. They are NOT BIP39 compatible. At this time, I don't know of any other wallet that will accept an Electrum seed mnemonic. |
|
|
|
i have tried Electrum but the protocol methods is limited. i want to make notification when there have receive transaction on my child address. if i am using Electrum or third party API, i must get transaction in every block and compare there is such address in my database, that's could have more resource if block have more than 1000+ tx. in bitcoin-cli i think that's possible using method "listtransaction" to get only latest transaction in my child address. or do you have any suggest?. Thanks for response  If you're wanting "notifications"... you should probably be using walletnotify. That will trigger the specified script to execute whenever a transaction is received (or confirms etc) that relates to your wallet (and any of the addresses in it). -walletnotify=<cmd>
Execute command when a wallet transaction changes (%s in cmd is replaced
by TxID)
As noted, you can pass in the TxID to that script by using the %s value... and you could then retrieve the information for that specific transaction using gettransaction and parse the JSON returned, instead of returning a bunch of transactions for ALL your addresses using listtransactions and trying to figure out which transaction is "new" etc. |
|
|
|
Yes, here is the screenshot of the wallet file opened in a text editor, it looks really weird:
www1.xup.in/exec/ximg.php?fid=20463319
The wallet file is from October 2018, maybe I should use exactly the same version of Electrum at this time?
Yeah... it does look wierd. I'm fairly sure that isn't an Electrum encrypted wallet, or it is a very badly corrupted one. There are a number of non-ASCII looking characters in the screenshot you have provided (likely a text representation of binary data):  Whereas an Electrum encrypted wallet looks like this: 
Do you remember which Electrum version you use before? If it is below Electrum 2.7 version the old wallet file will not work in the latest version base on my experience you may need to use the old version first(You can use portable version if you don't want to replace your latest version) and get the seed phrase since it's encrypted it will ask for the password.
For the record, Full wallet file encryption was only added in version 2.8.0 # Release 2.8.0 (March 9, 2017)
* Wallet file encryption using ECIES: A keypair is derived from the
wallet password. Once the wallet is decrypted, only the public key
is retained in memory, in order to save the encrypted file.
Earlier versions only encrypted "sensitive" data within the file (like private keys/seeds etc), but the structure of the file itself was still in "plaintext"... like this 2.7.0 wallet:  |
|
|
|
Great you got it "working"... For the record, I did a little test while I was away, and left my node to fall behind by a hundred blocks or so to test what it would do while syncing a larger number of blocks. I too then got the intermittent "not responding" issue (and associated 100% disk usage on the disk with the blocks folder)! I had not noticed this issue on previous versions (granted I don't remember the last time my node was out of sync by any more than 3 or 4 blocks following a reset/temp shutdown)... and had not noticed it on 0.19.0.1 until I let it get to 100+ blocks behind. So, I'm wondering if there is indeed some new "performance tweak(s)" in 0.19.0.1 that are driving up the HDD usage and causing the 'not responding' issues on Windows? Also, one small gripe, please avoid multiple consecutive posts like that... if you need to post an "update", then just use the "EDIT" button on your previous post and add/update it as required. |
|
|
|
I want to change the adress in my bitcointalk profile since I am finally using electrum now, so would you please be so kind to quote and verify my new adress?
Just a quick note... DON'T wrap the message, address and signature in < >'s when you're creating a signed message. Most of the message verification tools will choke on those characters and give errors. Having said that, it isn't a huge deal in this case, because you can't simply copy/paste a "bc1" signed message from Electrum into some of the online tools anyway, but it's still a good practise to make sure your message format follows the "standard" |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
