How can I lock a thread? Bottom left. |
|
|
|
I haven't seen a result from those reports in years. Google doesn't care, and I gave up. Maybe they will remove it from their search results if many people report it. Reporting bad sites shouldn't be a petition that needs to be signed many times. |
|
|
|
it's really a challenge to keep track + sometimes search or quote, what my PM people wrote me and what I've replied back only weeks ago, for members getting usually quite a few PM's every week. I know your pain. My inbox is 235 pages, my outbox 186 pages. Have you considered downloading your PMs and managing them locally? See Backup/Sort Private Messages/PM/DM (I haven't tried this). |
|
|
|
My favourite drink:  Last time, it was discounted for €5.99. That means I can get 4446 bottles for 1 BTC. I may be able to get a bulk discount, but I'd also need to get a truck, and since I buy them in Germany and alcohol imports aren't taxed as long as it is for your own consumption, I may have some explaining to do too  In short, your favorite usual drink, no it doesn't really have to be an alcoholic beverage!!!, its price, and how many of them you have to forget and leave in the shop before check-out till you save for one BTC. Let's face it: this is never going to save me a whole Bitcoin! I will never be able to finish 4446 bottles of 38% 0.7l Ouzo in my life. It would kill me long before I finish the last one, but at least I'd be able to say it's enough to give me a terrible headache for the rest of my life. Come to think of it: when Bitcoin was worth €59.000, my Ouzo was even cheaper! I could have bought 10746 bottles back then, and resell them for 2.4 BTC now. I've been going at this all wrong 
I'm starting to think Jet Cash is on to something: Heath is such a broad topic, but here are a few of my gidelines.
- Don't drink cheap alcohol. |
|
|
|
is there a way to extract from Bitcoin Core some stats about the totale number of wallets? There's software out there that extracts this (current) information from chainstate, so it should also work on a pruned node. like an historical series of how the number of addresses with greater than zero balance evolved over time?
or just a snapshots of all the addresses balance at a given period of time... This is more work, it requires processing the actual blockchain. There's software out there for this too. But: or to export the DB in CSV or something readable... Blockchair did this already, and you can easily download it! It's slow, so I created a mirror. You may like: I have snapshots going back a year (second link), or data dumps per day (last link). If you only want to count funded addresses, I have data since September 2020: total_number_of_funded_addresses.txt. |
|
|
|
It's also a substantial commitment in storage, bandwidth and increased need for security. You need security for your funds, but it's less important if you only run a node to support the network. If it gets compromised, nothing is lost. there's also a possibility of network somehow compensating those who maintain full ledger. I wonder if this has ever been pondered : can it be done in a way that would incentivize it for individual, independent users vs corporate agents with quasi-unlimited resources ? What are the downsides and upsides beyond obvious ? This has been discussed before, and my response is the same: I'd spin up thousands of cloud nodes for profit  Currently (2023) full ledger is about 435 Gb. Actually, it's 100 GB more by now. Bandwidth consumption of 200G/month in UPLOADS is reported norm, if left unchecked. I have a full node limited to 0.5 TB per day (as a precaution) in uploads. Since May 8, it has uploaded only 2.17 TB. That's 800 GB per month. This tells me Bitcoin doesn't have a shortage in upload bandwidth. On other hand, how critical is most of that data to stability and security of the blockchain ? Perhaps my concerns are out of ignorance and it will do just fine when less then 0.01% of all self-hosted nodes maintain a full copy. I expect a much larger percentage of Bitcoin users to keep a full node. Obviously, I'm not counting the "Bitcoin users" who only buy and keep Bitcoin on exchanges. One of the options I have considered in the past is to find a way to distribute the original/full copy of the Bitcoin blockchain on cheap storage devices for offline sharing worldwide. People can just buy or get them for free, install on their computers and join the Bitcoin Network. But I think it would be necessary for the offline copies to be verified as authentic before they are allowed to become part of the Network. Maybe hashing the full copy of the Blockchain and verifying the hash, or/and resyncing would solve this. That would only be useful in places with limited internet access, and for those places, downloading up to 0.5 GB per day just to keep the node updated may be too much already. so concentrate on debates about bringing the cost of using bitcoin down becasue the cost of storing bitcoin is not unmanageable It goes hand in hand though: if Bitcoin blocks would be an order of magnitude larger, transactions would be cheap for a while, but the required storage would grow much faster. |
|
|
|
also regularly update the backups to include any changes or new addresses generated by the wallet. That's not needed for HD-wallets. But you may want to backup your address labels once in a while. |
|
|
|
Still, I can't figure out why it is a bad idea. It's a trade-off between paying a transaction fee, or doubling the risk of using a compromised wallet. In this case, with a small wallet, I wouldn't have moved the funds, but instead use both wallets (the new one for receiving funds, the old one for paying until it's empty). Every app on your phone has access to your keyboard inputs. Really? Even when they're at the background? That would be a terrible flaw in Android! |
|
|
|
I purposely said post title search space and not post content search space. I can get you a 113 MB text file with all known titles, it will tell you this: 5177960:🚀 ⭐ MegaEther.co ⭐ Lottery Game Based On The Ethereum Blockchain Platform 🚀
5177981:[BOUNTY]🚀 ⭐ MegaEther.co ⭐ Lottery Game Based On The ETH Blockchain Platform
5177993:⭐ MegaEther.co ⭐ Lottery Swap Token Swap Event
5178036:MegaEther.co - fake team and plagiarized whitepaper |
|
|
|
In my opinion the most likely scenarios are (3), (4). I guess it's #4. #3 would mean many more people would lose much larger amounts. So backup your data, factory reset your phone, and start over. |
|
|
|
There is this close up of the upcoming Keystone 3, which really resembles a smartphone.  I really hate it when companies try to hype their product by showing a picture of an insignificant corner of the device. If they need that, it makes me think the device itself isn't impressive enough. I doubt that anyone would want to use some old piece of hardware for their finances for say 10 years or more. Many Bitcoins haven't moved in 10 years, and ignoring the ones that are lost, many of those must belong to long-term HODLers. I haven't owned Bitcoin for 10 years yet, but I don't like moving funds either. I think that's more than enough lifespan for a device of this type because I doubt that anyone would want to use some old piece of hardware for their finances for say 10 years or more. Any lithium battery will die way before that even if it is maintained in a best way, but I hope there is still an option to power USB cable and power on device. I've seen many lithium batteries that still work after 10 years, although they lost maybe 40% capacity. I've also seen lithium batteries break phones because they inflated. It's convenient to have a battery in a hardware wallet, but adds a risk factor. |
|
|
|
Weird. It looks like someone was testing his malware backend. If you want to explain further, I would appreciate it. Take a look at the receiving address, and "CTRL-F bc1qs9gxwj6497yk" on that page, then scroll down. That highlights when the address received funds, when it sent funds, and when it sent funds to itself. Some of the transactions are consolidating, but at high fee. Some are splitting inputs. Both actions are a waste of transaction fees. What does it mean that someone was testing his malware? It's just a guess because I can't think of any other reason to create such transactions. In my opinion there are the following options:
1. Someone tried to brute-force my wallet and they succeeded. Highly unlikely. Except if the attacker knew some of my words and therefore were able to reduce the search space. Is there any possibility to know some (most) of your seed words, without knowing all of them? I guess not, so this is the least likely scenario. 2. Someone saw my seed phrase on my piece of paper. Highly unlikely. Since where I store my seed phrase nobody has access except for me. It's possible. 3. My BlueWallet app is compromised somehow. I downloaded it from the playstore. It's possible. 4. My phone is compromised somehow and someone gained access to my phone's storage. It's possible. Option 5: someone had access to your phone for a moment, and swept your funds. |
|
|
|
It's a trade-off between convenience and risks, and with LN, I choose convenience. But I wouldn't risk more than (say) $50. Yeah, you can't do much in lightning with just $50. I mean, if you open a $50 worth channel with someone, chances are, they aren't big in liquidity. So you're probably going to have lots of failures. So questionable convenience.  (also, $50 are easily spendable, you'll quickly need another channel) Good point, opening small channels is problematic. Small custodial amounts work fine. |
|
|
|
3Jp9hU........p6ai. I don't show the exact address because I don't want to expose all of my transactions for privacy reasons. You can't obfuscate addresses like this, it's trivial to find.Your topic would have been more clear if you kept windice out of it. This transaction has nothing to do with your previous transactions. It also means my first post still applies: Weird. It looks like someone was testing his malware backend. |
|
|
|
I have read before that not your node key not your coin. Now it's correct But do you really mind for small amounts? It's a trade-off between convenience and risks, and with LN, I choose convenience. But I wouldn't risk more than (say) $50. If I am using Electrum for lightning payment, is it your coin? The reason I asked is because they said not your node not your coin. I want to know how true it is. Short answer: yes. But I never went through the trouble of actually testing if I can recover LN funds from Electrum just from the private key, without cooperation from the other end. It seems like much more work (and thus risk) than using a custodial wallet. Or just trusting Electrum does what it should do. |
|
|
|
As I said, it's from the website where I sent some sats to play roulette You're contradicting yourself: I have never sent money to this address First, you say your Bitcoin was sent to the address above. Then you say it's from a website you've used, while you say you've never sent funds to that address. It doesn't add up. How do you know which website the address belongs to? |
|
|
|
Could it be done with a SMF patch? But why? There's no point in denying a user to read someone's post history if he clicks on it. If there's anything that needs patching, is that you can't Merit a post on an ignored board. That's an actual flaw that confused many (established) members. My avatar is disabled in topics, posts but it still shows at top left corner. If you don't want to see your own avatar: remove it! Why would the rest of us have to see it if you don't even want it? |
|
|
|
As I said, it's from the website where I sent some sats to play roulette, I think it's a scam. I'm confused: you said you "originally" created the seed phrase in Bluewallet. Does that mean you imported your seed phrase elsewhere? Which wallet did you use, and how can the website you sent funds to have anything to do with that? |
|
|
|
Going forward I would advice you prioritize offline method of storing your keys and seeds OP had less than 0.001 BTC in a hot wallet. That's a totally acceptable amount to risk losing, and I assume OP has most of his funds in cold storage already. The interesting part is the receiving address: bc1qs9gxwj6497ykmj5txdk7aax0c6psyr62fwcuv6: it received many more transactions, all within 24 hours. It looks like someone targeted many wallets at once. Update: It gets weirder: many of those transactions are sending his own inputs to his own address: this transaction for example. I have no idea why. I am starting to think that I must create another wallet where each cosigner is 24 words long. Should I? Or am I ok? I trust 12 seed words. You should look elsewhere, changing to 24 words will only give you a false sense of security. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
