Originally the first address started with a 1 but this new wallet with random 20 plus addresses in that start with bc1.
Electrum seed versioning is supposed to prevent this situation...  Did you originally create the seed mnemonic (12 words) that you have in Electrum? Or were they originally from another wallet?  |
|
|
|
I want to log a complaint against bitcasino.io for false advertising
...
After depositing and more than $30 000 (lost $12 000) in November while chasing the VIP level, I finally reached it. Guess what milestone rewards are there in the almighty VIP level? FUCKALL! Nothing! No bonus..... I was totally shocked and thought It must be a mistake so I contacted the VIP manager to ask whats happening and her response:
Did they explicitly state that there was a reward for achieving "VIP Level"? Is there a stated list of these rewards and bonuses... or is it just the vague wording like "The higher the level - the more you get rewarded"? If it was explicitly stated that VIP Level == Reward/Bonus (and you can demonstrate that)... and you didn't get the stated Reward/Bonus, then yes "false advertising" and you most certainly have a case. If it didn't, then it is really up to the Casino as to how they want to handle that... For instance, they could decide that 0.00000001 BTC is your "reward"... or simply having access to a "VIP Manager" is a "reward"  Obviously, there has been a disconnect between your expectations of what VIP Level should result in and what the Casino believes is a suitable "reward"... if they were smart they'd probably want to take another look at this... and do the math on what your "loyalty" is actually worth compared to what they're offering. |
|
|
|
Because at some point after splitting your seed in to a number of secrets, those secrets either have to be displayed on screen for you to copy by hand or saved in a file(s) for you to distribute/print, both of which could be accessed by malware and transmitted to a third party if the computer has an internet connection. When generating a paper wallet, it should be done on an airgapped computer in case malware accesses your seed. When generating a secret, it should be done on an airgapped computer in case malware access your seed or secret.
I think the point that Abdussamad is making is that when initially creating your Electrum wallet... the Electrum seed is displayed on the screen... AND you have to then type it back into the computer to complete the process. My issue isn't with Electrum, it's with what happens after Electrum has produced your secret. This should be done in an offline environment, and having a simple button to press that says "Generate a 3-of-5 secret for my seed" or similar will encourage people to do so on an internet enabled computer. So, in effect... your issue IS with Electrum... as it is already doing what you're saying a plugin should not. And I would suspect that most Electrum users are NOT using it in an offline air-gapped way to generate their seeds. Having a plugin to generate Shamir shares isn't likely to change that... and would not be doing anything or encouraging any behaviour that Electrum doesn't already. NOTE: Don't get me wrong... I agree, people should be creating their Electrum seeds/wallets offline to mitigate risk... but I suspect the majority don't. |
|
|
|
So, as I said above I know what *I* am getting myself into and the risks of each. We should be helping others learn that too.
This is probably one of the best attitudes I have seen on this forum in a long time... To often, in too many parts of this forum, people dig their heels in and start arguing about fairly irrelevant stuff. I've even probably been guilty of this on some occasions! It's a bit like ProgrammingLanguageA vs. ProgrammingLanguageB... there isn't a "one size fits all" approach to this stuff. For some people... blockchain.com or Exodus or Coinomi or Coinbase or Binance wallets make the best fit... For others, nothing short of a paper wallet crafted using dice and a 486 laptop running a Linux live OS in a Faraday cage will suffice... and then everything else in between. The first step, is to identify what your needs/goals and use cases are and then find the solution that best matches those, while making sure that you understand the risks of your chosen solution and how to mitigate them. Even hardware wallets and paper wallets can be "useless" if you do something dumb like putting your seed words or private keys in an email draft folder protected by SIM based 2FA I think people should spend more time "playing" on TestNet... get a feel for how things work, experiment and learn... play with paper wallets... try manually creating transactions and learn how it all works. Personally, I think it's fun and you're not going to lose anything of value except a little bit of your time.  |
|
|
|
There is a weird display glitch that shows up if you switch from BTC to LTC and back to BTC... the bet amount reverts to "scientific notation" until you change it (increase/decrease etc)  |
|
|
|
Yes... download the latest version... currently 3.3.8 from https://electrum.org/#downloadThen follow the instructions as outlined above to make sure that you verify that you have indeed downloaded a "real" version of Electrum and not a fake one, by verifying the digital signature of the downloaded file. |
|
|
|
Yeah... the imgur link is actually embedded in the ip.bitcointalk.org URLs... Taking the link to the first image in the OP as an example: https ://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u= https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmBsrI4Z.jpg&t=607&c=1NdT52aa5A3yJw Extract the embedded URL (the bolded section): https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmBsrI4Z.jpg Convert the 'encoded' symbols using the following: %3A => : %2F => / => https://i.imgur.com/mBsrI4Z.jpg |
|
|
|
I just thought it was a neat feature and figured I would post about it here.
Unsure as to the usefulness of this feature... so I'm not sure I'd classify it as "neat"... it is definitely unique tho, I'll give them that! It's also nice to see innovation in a somewhat "same same" space. Did not think it would generate the discussion it did. Most things posted here regarding hardware wallets or paper wallets will generate a "discussion". There are some very "polarised" views on both... and your post is about BOTH   |
|
|
|
However when I tried to add a change address and value into a similar transaction.
bitcoin-cli createrawtransaction "[{\"txid\":\"37d53f65g0568e3fd1e4auu7f30b4i0758e69o257f649de62b352931e402g7654\",\"vout\":0}]" "[{\"1EmGo9SAoYpoXmYH3Hm4LX8mMsyDxyDCkH \":0.0003, \"3L4kHNBgRPf5u875UhTd6N57sw4gc7vLa \":0.00005}]"
This returned an error:
error code: -8
error message:
Invalid parameter, key-value pair must contain exactly one key
You seem to have the exact same issue as this: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/80905/bitcoin-cli-createrawtransaction-with-3-outputs-exampleAlso can anyone recommend where I might find some examples of some raw transactions? Doesn't seem to be too many around that I can find :-/
Coincidentally... I found that above StackExchange question while searching for: "bitcoin cli examples" |
|
|
|
i'm connected to 7 different nodes at once. did i get my addy balances from all 7 and in what proportion? or did i just get them from electrum2.hodlister.co?
All your requests (ie. address balance history, sending transactions etc)... go through whatever is listed in "Server"... so, in your screenshot above "electrum2.hodlister.co" (also highlighted with a * in the node list). The "nodes" you are connected to provide Blockheader information and help determine what Electrum considers to be the "longest chain" etc can one run an ElectrumX server with Bitcoin Core in prune mode?
Short answer... NO. Longer Answer: You must to be running a non-pruning bitcoin daemon with: set in its configuration file. If you have an existing installation of bitcoind and have not previously set this you will need to reindex the blockchain with: which can take some time. Also... try clicking the "?" buttons in Electrum... The "Status" one shows this:  The "Server" one shows this:  |
|
|
|
Version History
1.11 Jan 11, 2017
Added German localization
As you can see, it is VERY old and has not been updated in nearly 3 years!!?!  DO NOT USE THIS WALLET |
|
|
|
You can also learn how to verify signatures of the release on that site too which is recommended to keep your funds safer (you only have to do it once when you install and each time you upgrade).
And there is a very thorough, step by step guide (with screenshots) on how to verify the digital signatures of Electrum releases for Windows available here: https://bitcoinelectrum.com/how-to-verify-your-electrum-download/And it also provides guidance for verifying the signatures on Linux, Android and MacOS |
|
|
|
Electrum claims that their seed generation is better than bip39, so they won't change their eccentric seed .
But I see no reason for this, and it only causes confusion (which we already have too much around here). Why are they doing this?
Did you actually read the link that BitCryptex provided above? It spells it out pretty clearly in the "Motivation" section why they are doing this... Namely... no more reliance on a "fixed" wordlist... and the seed version number helps solves the problem of "what derivation path/address type should I be using to restore?"... so rather than try ALL combinations of address type when restoring, you only need restore the one that is actually needed. They do this at the expense of compatibility with BIP39 wallets... as they consider their method better. Edit: I've forget to write this from start: it was a test for the use case one buys/holds Bitcoin before buying a Ledger. After one has a Ledger, he's going to use that Ledger.
The entire use case is pointless... you'd simply initialise the Ledger, then send the existing funds to your Ledger. The transaction cost is minimal... the "security" increase is not |
|
|
|
Honestly, I haven't had any issues with the 1.6.0 firmware... except for me not realising that Ledger Live doesn't support BCH "CashAddr" address format and thinking something was broken! The update went super smooth, the device wasn't reset and it's been running just fine ever since. Just avoid updating any firmware until some time passed and they fixed the bugs. With every software or hardware..
So how do you ever update anything? You'd need to wait until the update to the update was tested... but wait, that new update might have bugs... so you'd better wait for the update to the update to the update... oh... but what if that update also has bugs? Better wait for the update to the update to the update to the update... ad infinitum! The 1.6.0 firmware has been out for quite a while now... and there haven't been any super critical issues... a few connections issues with a couple of Altcoin wallets is hardly cause for concern. |
|
|
|
When I confirming my transaction it says that it "will spend x.xxxxxxx btc from wallet" even if I sends a mutch smaller amount of btc. Is this x.xxxxxxx btc a payment that I received? Or why that value?
Do you not see a screen like this when you create your send transaction?  It should show all the recipients, the amounts, the transaction fee... and then the total amount leaving the wallet should match the sum of amounts + transaction fee. If the amount leaving the wallet is a lot higher, then something might be wrong. Is there any option in armory that includes the fee in the amount I want to spend (instead of applying it later on my spend amount)? No, it is always in addition to the amount you want to send. Where do I find the setting to use change addresses?
Armory always uses change addresses by default... there isn't an option to turn it on or off, you can only specify the type to use: "File -> Settings... -> Fee and Address Type" |
|
|
|
edit: seems to me one should avoid setting the network server to a specific Electrum node but instead leave it on automatic to hopefully connect to multiple servers for your addy balances (assuming you aren't going to use a personal server or want to use a VPN instead).
Correct... generally the best course of action would be to leave it on "Auto"... and simply use a VPN to hide your IP if that is your sole concern (and you're not wanting to run a personal server etc). |
|
|
|
Just want to say that this does happen with the Ledger Nano S. Unless I create a watch-only address with my Ledger's xpub, I can't see anything about it unless I connect it and unlock with my PIN. After the wallet is unlocked, I can disconnect it.
My Electrum+Nano S combo does not require this... but that is because I explicitly chose not to encrypt the wallet when setting it up!  So, I just get a warning on startup that the Nano isn't connected:  If I choose "No" the wallet is still opened and syncs like a "watching only" wallet. |
|
|
|
Now I'm freaking out even more only one account got recovered and my bitcoins are gone I had like 7 accounts and with one of them having bitcoins
You need to create different wallets and change the derivation path in Electrum if you had multiple "accounts" in Mycelium. Electrum only supports 1 "Mycelium Account" per Electrum "wallet"... when you restore in Electrum, you just increment the "account" number value in the "derivation path" that is displayed on this screen:  try: m/49'/0'/1' m/49'/0'/2' m/49'/0'/3' m/49'/0'/4' m/49'/0'/5' m/49'/0'/6' Note that you might also need to try the other address types (like "Legacy" and "Native Segwit")... if you've used different address types within your Mycelium accounts. Again, change the "account" number in the derivation path: Legacy: m/44'/0'/1' m/44'/0'/2' m/44'/0'/3' m/44'/0'/4' m/44'/0'/5' m/44'/0'/6' Native Segwit: m/84'/0'/1' m/84'/0'/2' m/84'/0'/3' m/84'/0'/4' m/84'/0'/5' m/84'/0'/6' |
|
|
|
What error you are getting when you are verifying Electrum?
Most likely the somewhat "scary" (but not "bad") warning that Kleopatra gives ("The data could not be verified") or the GPG commandline gives ("gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!") that you get by default if you haven't personally "trusted" ThomasV's PGP key and manually added it to your trusted keychain. As long as the signature checks out (ie. you see something like "gpg: Good signature from "Thomas Voegtlin ( https://electrum.org) < thomasv@electrum.org>" [unknown]" on the commandline output (or by clicking "Show Audit Log" button in Kleopatra)... then everything is OK and the "warning" can be ignored. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
