And what did I find out when examining the zombie coins. Not much, except that during this year(2017) there have been quite many zombie coins from the beginning of 2011 that have come back to life. I thought that was unexpected, because I would assume that coins that have not been touched since 2011 most probable newer would.
Might have been a little wrong with my assumption...
Can you show a list of addresses that became active after 6 years? Cant show the complete list, because I didn't save it, but here is a list of addresses that have been created in January and February of 2011, and which have become active recently. (I only examined addresses having more than 100 BTC in them) BTC when activated address -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 450 2016-2017 1EXMbzUdJAzsimm2ALzwRW3JnahSXuayuJ 200 2017 1J1TpQjCizvH8TfnCMKoz1qh75nPoua23M 200 2017 12XafG5uejzEvTUD1p2fwECFDfpL94B4mb 10000 2015 1Le6MkiTvkorvC1JwYXzQUSfqA3ebzGW7N 332 2017 19t4yqHj3YQTmQr22Y5ffEFPpNb2h4kkPM 2270 2015-2017 1GDCa1L4Z8DBZQv8gWK8k1HZkMdFy4mbGU 700 2017 155BWJVfvVhUXsHG6nKu9ZFswv3oEbJJMk 988 2017 1rqA6iteBVryQV3yjF7DHR3Mew8PhxNV8 5185 2017 1kmGdkFoLatLh92EBBLkVPNT4sKbc3ryq 3192 2017 19QDGMRKdZ9BpDZP2Re6yaDqNQ7zN4wo1D 347 2016-2017 1PVgK7vJff3ftdbNukkWQFk2Qx5HzXNeXx 250 2017 1A7UjtqmZdW67daZcbTFzU8qtnCapUFuhd 1000 2017 12Xds1x9wMgJSAmpnchFQrg5BUPHbwJ3ec 1000 2017 12wHYjaPmCtAyorBMQcnJx24ifjZPSy7L2 I would say it is surprising how many BTC, came back to life. |
|
|
|
Wow. Excellent detective work, and also very interesting links. Thanks  |
|
|
|
this is a relaly interesting issue you got there. How did you find this address and why did you start looking for the balance in different block explorers? I'm just curious. Anyway, I thought at first this was a recently transaction and should need to "stabilize" in the network to show the real value but this is a transaction from 2010 !  Wow. Good replies to this thread. I now realized, that I should have googled the address before posting. I thought I had found something new. I was going through a list of old zombie-bitcoins using a script that uses blockchain.info instead of downloading the full blockchain and examining it locally. Just to see how many zombie bitcoins have come to life after the list was made in 2014. (The script is quite bad, as it takes a long time to check the list of addresses) But anyhow among the differences between when the address-list was made and now, there were some odd looking numbers. Among them the address: "16va6NxJrMGe5d2LP6wUzuVnzBBoKQZKom", where in the list it had 100 BTC and now it only had 50 BTC and this had happened without a single send action. (I did also notice the other one) I checked it with other blockchain-explorers, because bitcoin.info handles some other things uniquely too. Eg. If there is a send action from an address to the same address, blockchain.info counts it as moving 0 BTC and it not being a send action from the address ??, whereas other explorers show the actual amount moved and it being a send action. Increasing both the amount of coins send and received. So basically I trust blockchain.info less when there is a difference among blockchain-explorers And what did I find out when examining the zombie coins. Not much, except that during this year(2017) there have been quite many zombie coins from the beginning of 2011 that have come back to life. I thought that was unexpected, because I would assume that coins that have not been touched since 2011 most probable newer would. Might have been a little wrong with my assumption... |
|
|
|
if you withdraw a huge amount, your bank may freeze your acount.
I do not know what country you are living, but I expect that even if they do freeze your account, you can probably unfreeze it if you can explain where the bitcoins came from. I am assuming you got them legally by eg. mining them a long time ago, or something. At least if you have proofs backing your claims. |
|
|
|
That "Birthday Problem" only partially applies here.
There can never be more than 2099999997690000 addresses that have any value stored in them at any moment in time.
Ha, that's cool. I never thought about the actual money supply. So Bitcoin is safe from the UniverseAttack™ by design. That is the theoretical upper limit. In practice >3.000.000 bitcoins are permanently lost in addresses, that contain lots of bitcoins. And the biggest addresses eg. coldfinex exchange has over 100.000 coins in it, and exchanges are probably always going to have lots of coins in same address. Just trying to say, that there will always be a lot less addresses with balance than the theoretical upper limit. Or who knows. Maybe bitcoin value will someday get so high, that we will have to divide bitcoins to even smaller parts. How about 0.001 Satoshi = 1mS |
|
|
|
Hello Fellow Bitcointalk members. Please explain this. Keep in mind I am not good in maths, so please don't be harsh.  Lets say an item costs $100, and we want to increase its price by 30% on the current price, The right way would have been ($100x30)/100 + $100 = 130$ right..? Shorter way to write the same calculation is: 1,3*100$= 130$ and 1,3 comes from 0,3+1 which is the same as (30%+100%)/100 |
|
|
|
|
I have read, that it is no problem to change a 1.000.000$ worth of bitcoins to cash in one day.
But with that kind of sums, you need to identify yourself, and when you get the money, you will probably have to pay taxes for it too. Can't really avoid that, if the exchange knows your ID. That is if your country taxes bitcoin profits. (mine takes 30% tax of profits made with bitcoin)
But would you really trust a bitcoin exchange so much, that you would like to deposit 20.000.000$ worth of bitcoins there in one go? What if they steal your coins?
Better to do it in smaller pieces. First try to change 50 Bitcoins and see how it works. Then maybe 100.... and so on.
Selling 20.000.000$ worth of bitcoins in one go could even affect bitcoin price.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the info.
Luckily this wont endanger your private keys, but it does leak all addresses you have in your wallet.
|
|
|
|
|
öööö..
What is it you are trying to do?
Electrum is available for ubuntu. Why do you want to use the windows version?
It is safer to use the version in the repository.
|
|
|
|
Because some People doesn't care about pollution.
Global warming. When is it coming. Can't wait. This year has been way too cold so far. The whole summer it rained a LOT, and it was cold too. It is like there was no summer this year. SO what can we do to make this global warming happen faster? |
|
|
|
|
Not an expert in your problem, but...
Easiest thing would be to create a new address in your new wallet, and just transfer the coins to the new address.
The only drawback is that you will have to pay the transfer fee, which is currently quite small.
|
|
|
|
|
Where did you get your numbers?
I remember, that in the summer of 2010, 30$ bought almost 20000 BTC,
and 100$ would have bought 60000BTC:s, which would be about 240.000.000$ today
Maybe your numbers are from the end of 2010?
|
|
|
|
|
I find it most amazing, that bitcoin has not been broken yet.
The design and encryption is so strong, that no-one has been able to destroy it.
|
|
|
|
I don't see how any standard private key could get hacked in today's world.
I mean, in the future when quantum computing comes around we will definitely need to take that into consideration, but in the meanwhile there is not much to worry about if you use the standard private keys.
Even a quantum computer CAN'T get a private key from a bitcoin address because sha256 hash algorithm is quantum resistant. However a quantum computer can get the private key from the public key, which is visible if you use bitcoin incorrectly and re-use your address. Public key becomes visible, when you have made a single spend action from your address. All keys are "standard" private keys. Some of them can be weak. eg. "1", or any key that is too simple. If you generate a key truly randomly, then you can get a weak or a strong key. |
|
|
|
I think that some are compared to others. some have brain wallet phrases attached to them that may be easy to guess.
Yes. Many brain wallet addresses have already been "guessed". Also some human selected keys have been found. And there has been bad random number generators in use, which have ended in weaker keys. And a collision is super duper unlikely, but not impossible. |
|
|
|
I have not done the exact math before responding, but to get a collision is far beyond the scale of getting hit by lightning multiple times. I think it would be more like getting struck by lightning every day for a year or a decade kind of thing.
Yep. It is very unlikely. There are awfully lots and lots of numbers in a private key. But, anything can happen. And sometimes amazing things do happen. |
|
|
|
There are millions of addresses and there was never a collision and there never will be if mathematics about it hold up. Checking for couple of numbers (even a million is considered a couple of numbers) is unreasonable to say the least. Chances are just so low, that you might as well not waste your time or start worrying for all the more likely things to happen, like getting hit by a lightning a thousand times in a row.
Humans are just not good at understanding such huge numbers so people naturally worry about address collisions and similar stupid things.
Don't worry, your key will not be in the first or the last million keys. It is simply not going to happen if your random number generator is any good.
Would not be so sure about the never will be a collision -partYes. It is extremely unlikely, but unlikely things can an do happen. There are several people, who have won the lottery twice. Unlikely, but it happens. There are also people that have been hit by lightning multiple times. |
|
|
|
There have been reports that the government of Kim Jong-Un have started mining bitcoins, as a way of overcome the global economic ban of his country. Which brings us to the question: How could this affect cryptocurrencies' image to the average citizen, giving the fact that other governments could use this to enforce regulation on the matter?
LOL. What are they going to use for bitcoin mining? old 386-processors or something. Do they even have modern computers? Probably would be much more efficient, if they sell something in exchange for bitcoins. Eg. missile technology. On the same note, should we stop using dollars, because criminals are using it much more then bitcoins? |
|
|
|
Of course small keys aren't safe. There are no checks for key nor for the seed words. Only important thing is that it was randomly generated.
If it was, then it would be pointless to check if it some small key due to the huge possible range of numbers it could be. If there was any realistic chance for a key to be small, then random number generator is not doing a good job in the first place and that would be the actual problem to solve.
If it is truly random, then your randomly generated private key could be 1 just as probably as anything else. I prefer to check that my randomly generated key is NOT very small or close to the biggest possible number. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
