That is a pretty hefty statement to make.
20k was the peak of a bubble, the price increased extremely fast. A correction had to follow.

But this does not mean that bitcoin won't reach this price again. Especially if you look at the adoption rate and the development ongoing.
The development alone is improving the protocol + usage, which increases the value of BTC as a currency.

While it is foreseeable that BTC won't reach 20k this year (and maybe also not the next few years), i am confident we will see new highs.
Especially when the whole ecosystem around btc starts to influence the daily life with comfortable, faster, secured payments with low fees. Basically when adoption kicks in.

It is literally the second post in this thread..

• Quote from: hollipharm on August 06, 2018, 02:37:10 AM
  The bitcoin transaction is complete.  I was just a little to impatient!
  

No. Most wallets show the transactions either with 1 confirmation or as soon as it is received (as unconfirmed).
Note that a wallet often is a piece of software which lets you manage your private keys (desktop-/mobile-/hardware- wallet), not an exchange account or any other 3rd party service.
Because only such services do 'credit' the amount of btc's after X confirmation.

Additionally mentioned he is using electrum to receive the coins. Electrum shows transaction as soon as it receives the information (0 confirmation).

---

@OP
Since your issue doesn't persist anymore, you might want to lock the thread. Scroll down and press lock topic in the lower left corner.

Mining and 'processing' transactions are different things.
Any older PC can process all transactions happening in the bitcoin network. That's what all Nodes do, miners just as nodes on a 30$ raspberry pi.




You could have mined bitcoins with your toaster back in 2009. The process mining itself is pretty straight forward and not complex at all.
You can't mine with your CPU as a solo miner anymore because there is way too much competition. This happened purely due to more people mining bitcoin with better hardware (asics).

But if monero had the same amount of contribution from miner as bitcoin has, you also wouldn't be able to solo mine anymore. It is just a matter of userbase.

Do do you mean that someone can find out your address if you are using the bitpay service to receive payments?
If thats what you have meaned, then yes..

Addresses are public information. Anyone can see them. Even if you use BIP70 payment requests.
At least after someone has made a transaction, he can simply look at a block explorer to look for the receiving address.
But as mentioned above a simple GET-request is also enough to extract the address. This is because BIP70 is just a protocol ontop of the application layer. Transactions are still being sent 'to addresses'.

Unfortunately only localbitcoins.com can help you in this situation.

Those recovery emails usually get sent pretty fast. Did you check whether you have used the correct email address (the ones you have used to signup with) ?
And you might also want to check whether it got moved into your spam folder. This happens quite frequently with such auto-generated emails.

If you have entered the correct mail address and also didn't found the mail in your spam folder, you probably have to wait until the support will answer your mails.
They are the only ones who are able to help you in this case 

Each piece of software on a PC has to open a socket to communicate with a network.




I don't see any pro argument for building a cryptocurrency on top of HTTP. You would just require everyone to additionally run a web server to be able to communicate with the network.
There is no necessity for something like this.




Well, theoretically you can do each communication over HTTP but this doesn't give you any advantage. Just disadvantages.




No, note at all. At least not in my eyes.

What exactly were you trying to do? Which problem of BTC are you trying to solve with this method?

Depends what you define as control.
If you are talking about the freedom of sending value across borders to anyone you want in a short amount of time, then noone. Noone is controling crypto this way.

But i assume you are talking about the trading market. The people who effectively control the market (and with it the price) the most are the ones who have a massive amount of money and want to control it.
The $-value is purely dependent on the supply and the demand. If a single entity has enough power (meaning supply OR demand) you could consider it a market maker and therefore also controlling the market.

The more mature the whole crypto market gets, the harder it will be in the future for a single person to provide enough supply/demand to manipulate the price a lot. The control of the market will get distributed from a few very rich people to more not that rich ones. This process takes time.

Unfortunately, no.
The currency used is not related to the populations thinking/acting. It is just a means to an end.

The poor are trying to climb up and the rich are trying to keep the poor down to keep their wealth. Unless you can change this through a currency, it does not solve any socioeconomic problems.

 


Well it can replace the traditional process of a payment (which logically is part of a purchase agreement). 
Thats the whole deal behind bitcoin. You can send value to anyone in the world who is also willing to accept it. Secured, decentralized and with a low fee without any middlemen.

Your statement does imply that the only incentive to use bitcoin are lower fees.
This is by far not correct. Bitcoin does have way more advantages compared to traditional banking systems. Lower fees are just one of these.

People in countries with an extremely high inflation rate prefer bitcoin over their local currency because it is less volatile. That being sad about bitcoin in the current stage just shows how small this problem is.

Quite a lot people prefer to use a pseudonymous near-instant financial system backed by math. Even if the transaction fees are higher than usual.


But this does not automatically mean that the fees per tx will rise. If LN as a 2nd layer solution gets adopted the on-chain fee tx's can be higher without really influencing the overall fees paid to make X (2 on-chain + Y off-chain) transactions.
In this case the user will pay the same, but the miner will indeed receive a higher fee (through channel funding-/closing- transactions).

Not that it just isn't that easy to calculate the costs, you would have to prevent rich people from trying to get more rich.

Since money rules the world, the price ($ value) will always be dictated by the supply and demand on exchanges. It is basically just an object being traded. In the end it all comes down to the supply and demand on the exchanges it is traded on.

IMO the correct way would not be to stabilize the price, but to increase adoption which will in return decrease the volatility itself.
There is a lot of interesting development ongoing with bitcoin. With more and more new bitcoin user (not hodler) the coins will gradually get more evenly distributed. This actually will decentralize the price, or at least the power to change the price.
But this does of course require merchant and customer to be ready to accept/pay with bitcoin in their daily life.

Besides checking whether electrum is properly connected to a server and checking the balance on a block explorer, what version are you using?
If you are not using 3.2.2, download it from the official source (https://electrum.org/#download).

Did you also make sure to actually broadcast the transaction instead of saving it locally ? This might occasionally cause some issues.

Doing the GET-request as suggested by TryNinja is probably the safest way to get the correct address.

Under linux this can be done with one command:

And with jq installed (a commandline json processor) an appealing formatted output appears when entering:

---

Not every wallet has BIP70 implemented. Therefore some user might need the direct address to pay to.
Additionally people are used to send coins 'to addresses'. Using an bitpay invoice number or sending 'to a website' sounds somewhat weird to them.
 



Yes.

Did you check whether you are correctly connected to the network ?

Since your configuration should be correct (assuming the 'identical' coins do have the same config) it seems like a network issue.
Are you properly connected to the (correct) network? And are you sure you are not part of a fork or something else?

Because somehow your blocks have to be invalid. They wouldn't be rejected otherwise. So either you are generating the blocks somehow wrong or the network is kind of broken / forked.

Open core, go to 'Help' -> 'Debug' -> 'Console'.
Then enter the importprivkey-command:

Note: You need to replace 5YourPrivateKey with your actual private key. And this command needs to be executed for each private key you want to import.


You might also simply just follow HCP's guide to import them into electrum. Will probably be faster if you have a large amount of private keys to import.

This depends on what you define as 'need to backup'.
The only thing you really need to backup is the wallet.dat. This file contains all of your private keys (which are needed to access your BTC).
Anything further is helpful, but not necessary to be backed up.

If you don't want to resync the whole blockchain (which might take some time depending on the specs), you'll need to backup the chainstate folder.
In case of a corruption of your DB, you will be able to remove the block files and redownload the blocks again. And instead of needing to completely process the whole blockchain to build the chainstate, you will be able to use your backup instead.

Instead of downloading the corrupted blocks, you might also store the whole blockchain as a backup. But this does need quite a lot of space and doesn't bring that much time advantage with it.
Downloading a few files isn't the problem. Building the chainstate if it got corrupted takes the most work (CPU, I/O, ..) and therefore time.

Did you solo-mine or mine inside a pool? Did you work on the block yourself or were you given shares from the mining pool operator to solve?
Or am i misinterpreting this and you are actually running the mining pool?

If someone inside the pool finds the solution which leads to a valid block, the reward should get divided properly. If this doesn't work either the block got rejected or the mining pool setup is somehow broken.

If you are running the mining pool, chances are high that there are problems with the configuration.
Did you verify whether the blocks are build correctly and valid (e.g. containing your address for mining reward) ?

Dd is a comand line tool to read/write to files. It is used for proper (but slow) cloning of hard drives (copying drive sector-by-sector, bit-by-bit to make an exact duplicate).
But you can use any tool you'd like. Clonezilla is an often recommended imaging/cloning tool which brings a lot of cloning techniques with it (e.g. dd). 

No. This is an incoming transaction.
Can be seen on the screenshot:





Whether OP has a 2fa wallet or not, doesn't matter.
The person who gave OP the payment created a transaction with 3 outputs. One of these outputs (0.0000215 BTC) is assigned to OP's address.
While the other two obviously don't.




The blockchain explorer is showing an estimated value of 0.02 because it assumes that 0.02 BTC has been transfered (which kind of is true). But only a fraction (1 of these 3 outputs) were assigned to your address.
Transactions can combine multiple inputs into multiple outputs. Therefore there is nothing weird when you are actually only the receiving part of one of these outputs.

Well, theoretically you can create a 2FA-like type of setup by using a n-of-m multi-signature scheme.
With a 2-of-3 scheme, your primary device holding one key and a secondary one holding another key, you basically got a 2FA since it requires 2 out of 3 signatures and the private keys do only exist on 2 seperated devices.

Electrum is kind of using this scheme. It generates 2 (out of 3) private keys for the user and 1 for trusted coin (the google 2FA service provider).
Your seed will be able to recreate 2 private keys, so you will always be in full control. But then initializing your wallet it only uses 1 key.
This requires you to 1) sign the TX with your local private key and 2) let trustedcoin co-sign your transaction (happens automatically inside electrum in exchange for a fee).

To export your private keys, open your wallet and enter the menu option 'Tools | Export Private Keys'.
You will be able to choose a directory to store your text file containing the private keys. You will need to get that text file onto your PC to import the priv keys into electrum (or any other wallet you have chosen).

Note that you should either sweep the keys into a new electrum wallet (which makes the private keys useless, moving all funds to your new electrum wallet) or import them into a wallet and send them to a new electrum wallet (the reason is that you will have a HD wallet with private keys derived from the 12-/24- word seed instead of needing to rely on the wallet file itself).


To read more about exporting private keys from multibit: https://multibit.org/help/v0.4/help_exportingPrivateKeys.html
To read more about importing/sweeping into electrum: http://docs.electrum.org/en/latest/faq.html#can-i-import-private-keys-from-other-bitcoin-clients