I recently did something stupid with my fat chubby fingers. I have a small BTC wallet with not that much in it but still, I wanted to encrypt it as I feel safer that way.
And so I did. With my usual password.
Just out of curiosity... does your "usual password" contain any special characters like , ' " \ / ? | etc? or perhaps any "non english"-type characters with accents like à á ä ø è ê ç etc? |
|
|
|
Well, I guess that's good news... would have been nice to try and figure out why it was not passing the correct datadir through to ArmoryDB... possibly just a weird settings glitch and once ArmoryDB ran once with the proper commandline, it fixed it?  Hopefully you don't have any more issues!  |
|
|
|
Not much going on for the last week since the big loss.  As we can see... just the daily 0.000000xx btc trade to prevent the API bug from crashing the bot. NOTE: There was an attempted trade around the 9th, but the "entry points" didn't get hit (market maker bot)... which was a shame, as it was an attempted short and the price dumped by a couple of hundred and would have made a nice profit  Since then, the bot creator has added a 7th algorithm to the bot to try and prevent a repeat of the 30% loss... apparently this change will mean that the bot is a bit more conservative and likely to trade less often, but is theoretically "safer"... it will also likely mean a reduced return given the lower trading frequency...  #timeWillTell |
|
|
|
Looking at that betting sequence... and the error you are getting, it seems to be breaking here: Look this is my preset list
0.00000001
0.00000003
0.00000007
0.00000015
0.00000031
0.00000063
0.00000127 <--- "invalid"
0.00000255
0.00000511
I'm not sure why it doesn't like 0.00000127... it seems to be a valid bet??!? I was able to use your list and it worked just fine.  NOTE: I was using Crypto-Games.net (not PrimeDice). Perhaps try and clear out the preset list again... and enter copy/paste this list: 0.00000001
0.00000003
0.00000007
0.00000015
0.00000031
0.00000063
0.00000127
0.00000255
0.00000511
0.00001023
0.00002047
0.00004095
0.00008191
0.00016383
0.00032767
0.00065535
0.00131071
0.00262143
0.00524287
0.01048575
0.02097151
0.04194303
0.08388607
0.16777215
0.33554431
0.67108863
1.34217727
2.68435455
5.36870911
|
|
|
|
Update: just tried to import the 12 words in Electrum and it shows us 0 BTC balance. Help anyone?
When you're importing into Electrum... use the BIP39 option and make sure that you select the "Legacy" option when you are prompted for "Script type and Derivation Path":  |
|
|
|
Your reply raises a question for me that can I fastly sync my wallet (with prune or full node) with a blockchain snapshots? I saw that technical term with altcoin but for bitcoin, I don't know.
To answer this specific question... the short answer is "No". Significant advances were made in a few previous versions of Bitcoin Core that made "snapshots" slower than just syncing blocks normally. |
|
|
|
|
no obvious errors output then? Can you please post the output from "dbLog.txt"... as always, put it on pastebin.com and then post the unique pastebin URL here.
|
|
|
|
How can I convert Bits in BIP format 38 to BIP format 44?
This has all the hallmarks of an "XY problem". What exactly is it that you're attempting to achieve? |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Maotezi on bitcointalk.org
Today is 12.10.2019
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNATURE-----
Version: Bitcoin-qt (1.0)
Address: 3QJEwDMp2SMB62vkcdzSz7vt3g3kgJYXME
IPD1Ou00lIcVKce1ICGptnC/37MmD7ZHuSjGQZLAFQsuIq6J0SzLyNEnHTkT9BLUxZduBFJvUS+hLQ6LZ2XEPYo=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNATURE----- Quoted... but I COULD NOT verify it using Trezor, Electrum, Mycelium or the jhoenicke version of BrainwalletX verifier... You have messed something up... possibly extra/missing whitespace in your message. What wallet did you use to create this message? no-bot |
|
|
|
OK, well that explains it but why suddenly it switched to prune mode.
Ive never done that.
That is outside the scope of this forum/thread. You'll need to go take that up with the Bitcoin Core team on their github issues register: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issuesI've not seen/heard of Bitcoin Core automatically switching to pruned mode before... it usually requires that pruning be enabled at startup via .conf or shortcut/commandline or via the GUI setting. Anyway, should be a relatively easy fix if you have a non-pruned copy of the blockchain, you'll just need to copy that over to your pruned node (making sure it's not still set to prune), then make sure it's all synced and Armory should work just fine again. |
|
|
|
Is python not backwards compatible? I thought it would be since all the old modules are the same without them making a python 4 (they just change system libraries and compilation stuff).
Python has a lot of versioning issues... look at all the "Python 2" vs "Python 3" issues... but then 3 was intentionally not backwards compatible. This article explains the new features in Python 3.0, compared to 2.6. Python 3.0, also known as “Python 3000” or “Py3K”, is the first ever intentionally backwards incompatible Python release. There are more changes than in a typical release, and more that are important for all Python users. Nevertheless, after digesting the changes, you’ll find that Python really hasn’t changed all that much – by and large, we’re mostly fixing well-known annoyances and warts, and removing a lot of old cruft. Also, various linux distros all use different "default" versions... which can and do cause problems for users when they are attempting to use various apps that rely on specific versions. There are very good reasons why the Electrum devs put out the "AppImage"  |
|
|
|
This is a demo of using the NATO alphabet and checksums every 5 characters to create a better user experience than bip39 that can be used with bitcoin core and does not require a word dictionary making recovery less complex. A better experience??!? That just looks horrible and clunky... I understand what it is that you're attempting to achieve (that is to say, preventing transcription errors when writing/entering private keys)... but this system is NOT, in my opinion, a "better user experience". Aside from attempting to write words in mixed case... you're also added in extra "checksum" words. So, now my private key of "L1zK6x6HnrT9kjcuqpQf1WQZHYBhucBEuZ5qZdPrFkCgJQ6eh6EN" becomes something like: LIMA one zulu KILO seven six xray six HOTEL GOLF november romeo TANGO nine DELTA kilo juliet charlie uniform delta quebec papa QUEBEC foxtrot sierra one WHISKEY QUEBEC ZULU five HOTEL YANKEE BRAVO hotel ALPHA uniform charlie BRAVO ECHO XRAY uniform ZULU five quebec nine ZULU delta PAPA romeo MIKE FOXTROT kilo CHARLIE GOLF papa JULIET QUEBEC six echo one hotel six ECHO NOVMBER TANGO I'm very familiar with the NATO phonetic alphabet... I use it all day, every day at work... and typing all that just now was painful AF. Not to mention that it is visually quite jarring to look at. Personally, I think that a system similar to BIP39 is the way to go. You'll end up with 24 words instead of 65... and it won't matter about case... because I can guarantee that someone will write them down incorrectly and write them as "lima one zulu kilo seven six xray six hotel golf november romeo tango nine delta..." or vice versa. Make something foolproof, they'll just start making better fools! |
|
|
|
|
The simplest thing to do is to open Electrum, click on the receive tab and copy the address displayed there and give that to CryptoPay. That will guarantee that you are using a receiving address from your own wallet.
The addresses highlighted in YELLOW by Electrum are "change" addresses... they are not "receive" addresses. You should not deliberately attempt to receive a payment to them from an external party for reasons that are outside the scope of this discussion. Note that it will work... and you'll be able to receive the payment... but it is not advised.
|
|
|
|
One of my thoughts was to try and see if there was any way to convert my electrum wallet.dat into another wallet (specifically one supported by btcrecover), and dump the wallet.dat from the new wallet into btcrecover. I have not had any luck so far.
That's not possible unless someone were to write a completely custom piece of code that was able to: 1. Decrypt the electrum wallet 2. Extract either the seed or private keys 3. Import those into the wallet format of another wallet Given you don't have the password to the wallet file, you're going to fail at the first step of "decrypt the electrum wallet"... if you had the password, you wouldn't need to convert the wallet file. My other thought was to see if there was any way to write custom unisource code to fit the parameters of the unsupported wallet. Again i am very new to all of this so i apologize. There is almost $1400 on this wallet, so I am really hoping to get into it. I have already contacted dave several times and he has not responded.
You could try logging an issue on the btcrecover github issue register as Abdussamad suggested, but the original developer isn't very active these days (last commit was 22 Dec 2017  ) or just try editing the btcrecover code and changing the btcrpass.py file... https://github.com/gurnec/btcrecover/blob/master/btcrecover/btcrpass.py#L1630So, on the copy of btcrpass.py that is on your computer, find the code that looks like this: if wallet.get("seed_version") not in (11, 12, 13) and wallet_type != "imported": # all 2.x versions as of Oct 2016
raise NotImplementedError("Unsupported Electrum2 seed version " + unicode(seed_version))
And just add "18" to the list of seed_versions and see what it does... like this: if wallet.get("seed_version") not in (11, 12, 13, 18) and wallet_type != "imported": # all 2.x versions as of Oct 2016
raise NotImplementedError("Unsupported Electrum2 seed version " + unicode(seed_version))
I haven't tested this, so no idea if it will work or if it will blow up your computer! NOTE: you should be working on a copy of your wallet file... not the original!! |
|
|
|
btcrecover is probably best... although, it doesn't work with bech32 addresses... there was a fork that implemented support for the P2WPKH-P2SH (aka Nested SegWit) addresses here: https://github.com/madacol/btcrecover but that doesn't work for bech32 either
Issue n2: I have certainly a bad memory, and i use to be busy in real life, family, work, etc, ,but i was very surprised back in the days when i got a mycelium seed containing the word ''retailer'' twice. This wallet was used and left some cash there, Tried to restore later on but always says: invalid pneumonic..[can even noo longer unblock it in mycelium, ''retailer'' not a valid word''
''retailer'' and appear twice.. 100% sure came from a mycelium. I can not post he whole phrase here tho.. has coin inside
That is what he was saying... the word "retail" IS in the BIP39 wordlist... so instead of trying to type in "retailer", just type in "retail" and see if that works. Mycelium uses BIP39 compatible seed, so it would not have given you the word "retailer".
Issue n3: I have a 9/12 seed just 9 first words, no more tips, address, etc.
There isn't really anything you can do with this... if you don't have at least one address to test against, there is very little chance you'll be able to figure out which combination is the correct one. You would need to test every single valid combination, get an address and see if it has been "used" in a transaction. Even if you assume that the 9 words you have are in the correct order, and you're only missing the last 3 words, you would need to test 2048 * 2048 * 2048 = 8,589,934,592 combinations to find all the valid ones (I think it works out that about one in every 16 combinations of words is a valid seed)... so that's 8,589,934,592 / 16 ~= 536,870,912 valid seeds... you'd need then to generate a few addresses for each seed and see if any of the addresses were "used" by seeing if they're included on the blockchain in any transactions. Even with a fully automated script, that is going to take a "long time" to achieve. |
|
|
|
can you please explain me about the romance scam? I might be in a very similar situation. TIA.
Generally involves "online relationships"... They'll find victims using online dating or facebook/social media or mailorder bride type websites... build up trust using fake pictures, sad stories about their life etc... generally they'll never use voice or video calling and will make up lame excuses about how their internet is bad, or their webcam is broken etc... so it'll be all via text/email/Instant Messaging etc... then, after it looks like the victim considers that they're "in a relationship" with the scammers and starts talking about visiting or getting married etc, the scammers will ask for money to pay for air tickets or passports or because they need to buy school supplies for their children or medical treatment for sick relatives etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_scam#Common_variations |
|
|
|
As soon as I opened bitcoin core to synch the latest blocks, I saw it say something like parsing blocks.
Then my blocks folder under bitcoin core went down in size like 1/3 the size or less.
Hey, great. Its not using 400 gig anymore. But now Armory is stuck
So, you changed Bitcoin Core to PRUNE mode? In Bitcoin Core, under "Settings -> Options -> Main"... is the "Prune" option checked?  If so, the problem isn't Armory, it's the way your node is configured. Armory doesn't work with a pruned node... it never has. You'll need to undo the Prune configuration (you might need to check your "bitcoin.conf" and/or the shortcut you use to start Bitcoin Core to make sure they're not overriding this setting window... look for this warning message in that dialog:  If it says that and shows something like "-prune=550" then it's in the .conf or the commandline/shortcut that is being used to start Bitcoin Core. That change needs to be undone and then you'll need to resync the entire blockchain again. |
|
|
|
This seems like a pretty big problem on either the part of Bitmex, or the bot creator. There shouldn't be any reason why a VPS shouldn't be able to connect to an API endpoint given it has a valid API key/can authenticate.
I believe it is an issue with a particular endpoint of the API and the fact that the bot doesn't trade every single day... bot owner explained it here: Note that the negative PNLs of 0.0001 mBTC ( 0.001$ loss) are created by instant 1 contracts trades necessary to escape a bug in the bitmex websocket's position endpoint. After several days without trades, the position value restores and the endpoint returns error when trying to access it. This causes the bots to crash. What's the solution until bitmex fixes the problem? Make instant 1 contract trades to unlock the endpoint. That 0.001$ loss is the fee paid as taker(necessary to close the "unlock trade" in less than 1 second) and the mathematical loss that come from the 0.5$ of spread between the ask and the bid. I'm unsure as to why BitMEX have not fixed this... or if there is anything else that can be done to work around the problem... in any case, the "losses" from this are ~20 sats per non-trading day... it's not what you would call "huge"... even an entire year of non-trading would only incur around 7300 sats of losses... If you are running a program on a VPS you have access to, you should be able to review the code to see what triggers the bot to make various trades, and have an idea as to what strategy(ies) it is using. There is no 'guaranteed' way to make money trading, and different strategies will have different success in various trading environments.
You pay for the VPS, but you don't have access to it... that is how the owner is protecting his "IP". |
|
|
|
I feel that it actually makes it easier, use one the approved wallets and you don't have to think about fees or settings etc. For the new users all they have to do is click. Don't even have to think about setting fees or anything else.
And what happens when you use Electrum (which is an "approved wallet") and it ignores the "fee" that is prescribed in the invoice and sets whatever you usually use because you have it set to manually set the fee and it has RBF set (also by default)?   It's a ridiculous situation and BitPay need to stop being so "draconian" in what they will and won't accept... I can (maybe) understand RBF as that can cause issues with transaction IDs etc (and to be fair, they do pop up an "RBF warning" at least on the mobile site)... but not accepting a payment because of the fee used? pffft... that's just ridiculous, imo. And looking at the BIP70 specs... "fee" isn't even included in the BIP |
|
|
|
He now makes a risk-free 30%, while the bot-users risk their funds.
Well, he only gets commission if the users actually make a (monthly) profit... if it's a loss, he gets nothing. So, theoretically at least, it is in the bot creators best interests to make sure that the bot works and generates profits. Also, just as an update, the bot has been quiet the last few days... no trading to speak of since the big loss (excluding the daily API bug workaround instatrades for 0.000000xx btc). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
