|
Would you be interested in selling me the Raspberry Pi only?
|
|
|
|
How do i add a screen shot?
Just to confirm, is the wallet synchronizing? If not, can you try to change the server? Press the little green bubble on the bottom right and uncheck select server automatically and right click any of the servers and click use as server. Go back to your wallet screen and check if it has synchronized. You can upload the picture to imgur and link it here. |
|
|
|
So basically you need to sync to the point in unix time where the public key was generated in order to retrieve your private key for that particular address or do we get one private key per wallet (wallet.dat) because I am thinking if we do then it does not matter if the wallet is synced or not we will still be able to retrieve our private keys using the command line
You don't need to synchronize your wallet to be able to import your private key. Your private key is simply the private part of your ECDSA key pair and it is not generated based on your unix time, else collisions would be common. You can generate as many addresses as you'd like in a wallet and each address has a corresponding private key stored by your wallet. Bitcoin Core and some other wallet uses BIP38 and the addresses are generated as children from the master key. |
|
|
|
My Dashboard on Blockchain app show 732.2232 BTC nonspendable , what does it means.Is it possible to transfer the bitcoins to another wallet, from where I can get the private key.
It is not possible. You cannot spend any Bitcoins from any addresses without the corresponding private key to it. When the address is generated in a wallet, the corresponding private key is also stored in it. You cannot get it out of thin air. Given that its Blockchain.info, did you enter their demo wallet? They simply attach a random address to their demo wallet without the private key (of course) and it is impossible to spend/sign anything for those addresses. If they belong rightfully to you, then you have to give us more information. |
|
|
|
Ranochigo's Amazon.com Service I'm offering a service to purchase items on Amazon for 15% off the price (only physical items, no Visa cards etc). I'm using my personal Amazon account to purchase the goods and it will be shipped within the US using Amazon Prime (free 2 day shipping). If you are shipping it out of US, you will have to pay me the import fees and the shipping fees. All you have to do is to make a wishlist and attach your address to it. Send me your wishlist and I'll purchase it for you. I accept escrow and you have to pay the escrow fees. *That goes without saying; the funds are 100% clean and legal. I've gotten the GC balance for my Prime Day purchase and I've got loads left over. |
|
|
|
|
I'm looking for someone with webmoney account to pay for something on a website. They don't take other stuff without stupid verification.
Its about 40 USD and I'll pay 5usd extra for the trouble. You must be somewhat trustable.
|
|
|
|
|
mBTC has never been used to represent BTC in the protocol level, BTC is still denoted in fractions and that will likely be the case. It doesn't make sense for the client to have to recalculate the entire blockchain again and convert everything to BTC. It is definitely possible for websites and various wallet client to represent the BTC in smaller units but the protocol shouldn't be changed.
|
|
|
|
|
I do. Every now and then, I consolidate the UTXOs into a single one with a very small fee. I don't need to use it anytime soon and it has opt-in RBF anyways.
The UTXO database isn't the largest concern since its still relatively manageable. Its roughly 2.6GB right now and the blockchain itself is more than 10 times bigger. While it is a good practice to consolidate UTXOs, making transactions when necessary and batching transactions would benefit Bitcoin much more.
The UTXO is indexed when your client synchronizes and constantly updated as long as your client is relaying transactions.
|
|
|
|
|
Its just unfeasible right off the bat.
Whilst your idea could be possible, it doesn't really make sense. By splitting the coin against its value, every single node of the network has to reach a consensus as to the value of the coin at the time and ensure that they are looking at the correct price index and split the coins exactly. Any disagreements will result in clients having different forks.
The fact that it relies on a third party also opens it to the possibility of market manipulation.
|
|
|
|
|
How did you set it up? Did you connect to a pool and mine from there? If you did connect to a pool, then you would most likely have to go to the webpage to obtain your coins since most pools doesn't send the coin directly to your wallet.
|
|
|
|
I have one other question. Is there a difference when it says outbound/inbound connection? If yes, how can I ensure that my wallet will always have inbound connection?
Theoretically, yes. Inbound connections are nodes that has initiated the connection and are connecting to your node. Outbound connections are connections initiated by your node to other nodes. The polarity doesn't really matter; your node and their node are both receiving and relaying information. You can port-forward TCP 8333 and other nodes will be able to find and connect to you. |
|
|
|
Excuse me, these are all the difficulties of translation. I do not know English well, and I use Google as a transporter)
So are you going to read up on Bitcoin and its whitepaper? There are among you those who used the first beliefs of the program for mining bitcoins, and who exactly can answer the question: how easy was it to get the private keys of the entire pool of 100 areas, how was it realized?
Incredibly easy. I can generate a pool of 100 addresses within milli-seconds on my 20 year old computers. Addresses DO NOT come from a centralised pool. Each address is generated randomly with their own randomness generator. Now this is implemented as a function of dumpprivkey "address" but now there are no pools in 100 addresses, which end in 16-17 hours (in 2009).
At that time, private keys could only be kept with a copy of wallet.dat ??
Or painstakingly to do dumpprivkey "address" for each address, but it was necessary to do it peresyanno !!! Why was this logic?
If so, then I think there is some secret (algorithm) of pseudo-random creation of a pool of 100 addresses.
Private keys has always been kept in the wallet.dat. The pool of 100 addresses is generated with randomness on your computer; the wallet does not obtain the address from anywhere else. Satoshi could've literally generated millions and millions of addresses. After satoshi mines a block that sends reward to his first address, he could have easily generated another. If not, the address would generate it to ensure that the number of "invisible" keys in the wallet remains at 100. Why the hell do you need to export your private key for? It's obvious that you're just sprouting nonsense, possibly to pad your post count. Try to read up on Bitcoin please or move this thread to Begineers and Help. |
|
|
|
This thread is open for discussion for these scenarios. I hate to say that but it looks to me Bitcoin network cannot remain functional with diminishing block rewards or solely dependent on transaction fees.
As a bitcoiners, we take pride how robust this network is this network is that doing 51% attack is almost impossible. Do you think that we can keep the Network robust without any block rewards or little block rewards? In current price .006BTC is less than $50 USD and you can add couple of few hundred Dollars as a transaction fees.
Now if you say transaction fees will be high then it means that you are paying a premium price for a convenience of doing peer to peer transaction and doing transaction in traditional banking system will be cheaper.
Lets keep transaction fees same then it means network difficultly should go down so that Bitcoin transaction is profitable for everyone but it will raise the concern of robustness of the network.
Diminishing block reward can trigger a vicious circle of transaction fees vs network difficulty and we are not very far from this point .(may be next 18 years when reward will be less than .5 BTC.
There are several assumptions to be made if you assume that: 1. The efficiency of ASICs and electricity fees remain constant from now till then. 2. The number of transactions per block and the price of Bitcoin remains constant. In 2048 years, if the number of transaction has grown exponentially, I expect us to come up with a better scaling solution. With LN, the transaction has to eventually be in the blockchain. If the coins can be spent off the chain for several times, the transaction fee that the miner would get per transaction could be larger without actually increasing the actual cost per transaction. I don't expect that the network hashrate would be anywhere near the point to which the network is susceptible to 51% attacks. Miners would most likely have ROIed and they would keep their ASICs on for as long as the revenue > cost. |
|
|
|
If you go from another side to this question, then there are these thoughts:
For example, Satoshi understood that bitcoin in the future could cost very much.
In the beginning, it has and uses the client (program) 0.1.0-0.1.5, etc. which, I understand, mined coins and the transfer went every time to a new address from the address pool that the client created (100 addresses are acceptable). As soon as 100 addresses ended, the client automatically added 1 or 100 addresses to its database.
No. The keypool is maintained at 100 addresses everytime its unlocked and opened. But what about the security of the computer before the lightning or short-circuit, coffee, etc.
In fact if the computer with the extracted coins burned, all disappeared. It should also be possible to quickly and / or automatically extract privat keys for printing on paper, for example.
Intuition is good, but everyone knows how to value their work, it was necessary to make such a decision.
It was like that realized?
Among you there is who mined the blocks - coins in on the first versions of the Satoshi client program?!?
Sorry to say but you aren't making any sense at all. Security of the computer only concerns the addresses that satoshi owns. If someone elses got access to his unlocked wallet, they could possibly obtain and control all his addresses. If the computer with the addresses that contained the mined coins somehow got destroyed, it is possible for satoshi to recover the data on it himself using a data recovery software or company with the hard disk. It is NOT possible for anyone (satoshi included) to obtain the private keys to addresses that they lost without access to the private key. You really have to read up on Bitcoin (whitepaper etc). Your questions do not frankly make sense at all. |
|
|
|
The main address as ETF said is the address that is used for recieving and the child address is the change address (nothing to do with master keys)
Oh okay I get what you mean. Hardened ones have a ' at the end of the derivation path don't they (or had I got that wrong)?
Yup. BIP44 states that an apostrophe means that the path is hardened. If your derivation path is hardened, xpub can't be generated. Without the xpub, you cannot use a child private key and the (non-existent) xpub to generate the master private key. |
|
|
|
Meanwhile, if ETF is right, the master public key can be derived from the two private keys (or potentially addresses) of the main and child address.
There's no main or child address. The master private and public keys are the "main" keys while any addresses generated are the child keys. The master public key can't be derived from two addresses or else it would be pretty flawed and we wouldn't be using it anymore. You can, however derive the master private key using one of the child private key and the master public key with little difficulty. It applies to all unhardened keys (ie. those with master public key). |
|
|
|
|
Username: ranochigo
Post Count: 5711
BTC Address (must be SegWit): bc1qwhfkxyjmpyaptvht942ft6wdv5ln6j8kuh5n2t
|
|
|
|
|
Cryptocurrency won't solve the problem with the shipping for physical items. Shipping can get pricey for shipments not within the country of origin. The fees can't be reduced because of cryptocurrency. Its a different story for digital goods though. Given how fast and cheap Bitcoin is, most people are able to purchase goods at a greater convenience. Trade bans probably won't apply in that case. Doesn't really bridge the gap all that much to be honest.
|
|
|
|
|
We can't know unless we know the type of address you're sending it from, the number of inputs you're sending it from, current fees etc.
If you're using a recent version, fill in the fields at the sending tab accordingly. Press preview and you should be able to see the fees that is used for your transaction. You can use the slider at the sending page to adjust. If you're satisfied with it, press sign and then broadcast.
|
|
|
|
Do you know in which version they changed it? Recently I tested a few altcoin wallets and the daemon always states something like generating address 1 .. 100.
It was changed in v0.15.0[1]. Most altcoin wallets are always behind Bitcoin and its not a significant change anyway. If you want, you can increase or decrease the keypool by running it with a flag. [1] https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.15.0#performance-improvements |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
