Was the mnemonic phrase you tried to enter, given to you by the same wallet (samourai) ?

Usually the mnemonic phrase (if written down correctly) should recover all of your keys.

If you are sure you have written it down correctly, you might try to import it into another wallet.

The derivation path when importing the seed into a different wallet (e.g. electrum) depends on the address-type you have used.

• Legacy (P2PKH, starting with 1..): m/44'/0'/0'
• Nested segwit (P2SH, starting with 3..): m/49'/0'/0'
• Native segwit (bech32, starting with bc1..): m/84'/0'/0'

You should be able to see your funds once you import your seed (and choose the correct derivation path) inside electrum.
But i don't have an explanation for your funds not appearing on your mobile (except for a wrong/different mnemonic phrase).

You don't have to worry when updating electrum. Your wallet files will always be compatible.
Actually you should make sure to always have the up-to-date version of a wallet installed. This is the only way to somehow be protected against potential threats.

Make sure you have a backup of your 12/24 word seed. This seed is being used to generate all private keys inside your wallet. In case of an electrum update failing or a hardware failure, you will always be able to derive your keys again to access your coins.

Since your initial problem was that you were unable to upgrade to 3.2.2, you might want to lock the thread now because everything is working as it should ?

If you somehow still believe that something is not working as intended, please give a detailed description of what you think should happen and what actually happens.
For me it seems like you don't have a clue what you are actually doing inside the terminal, and just believe to have an error because the output you see should be different according to google.

Each node keeps the data on the hard drive. But miner do not try to keep the whole UTXO data inside the RAM. Verification is performed extremely fast, even including I/O.
Keeping all of these inside the ram would decrease the time it takes to validate the transactions, but this effect is so extremely small, it is not even worth being considered. Especially with an average block interval of 10 minutes.

Miners do perform the work in form of trying to find a hash below a specific target including the block data. They verify the transactions once, and then start to find a suitable hash.

You can import your private keys one by one into core by using the console:

The false at the end keeps core from rescanning the blockchain after each import.
First import all of your private keys, then do a rescan.


But the easier way is it import them into electrum, basically following the small guides from HCP.

According to this:



you are not able to find the directory. And this also is the reason that you can't start electrum. You just don't know where you put that file.
So you can either search your harddrive for the electrum folder and then simply run these 2 steps:


Or download it again, which takes 1 additional minute of your precious time, following all 5 steps.

No, he means that it won't be possible to agree on an exchange price upon block creation between multiple nodes simultaneously.
You would need one central source of data (exchange price). This would lead to easy manipulation, weakened security and complete centralization.

And in case of a fork it wouldn't just be a 'huge mess', it would create a second (or multiple) forkchains which would split the network into small pieces. Your network would effectively not be fully operational in that case.

You might just simply download and unzip the file again. These 5 steps take about 1 or 2 minutes.


1) Open a console and navigate to the path you'd like to put electrum in.

2) Download electrum with this command:

3) Unzip the file:

4) Enter the directory:

5) Finally run electrum:

Consolidating your inputs while fees are low should definitely not be ignored, especially if you are receiving a lot of small payments.
1 sat/B transactions do get confirmed pretty quick currently. But make sure to have the RBF-flag set to increase the fee in case of an unexpected spam attack.
This will barely cost you a few cents. But the advantage compared to a transaction with a big amount of inputs and high fees is definitely worth it.



RAM is non-persistent memory. Each data has to be stored on the hard drive and has to be loaded into the RAM while reading/writing to it.

Besides of physically searching through all of his stuff looking for a hardware wallet (physical device which holds private keys), paper wallet (printed wallet) or a seed backup (12 or 24 'random' words) which can all grant access to the coins, you could also search through his hard drive to find the software he used to store his BTC.

The general approach would be to first find out the software he used, then the way to access these coins (e.g. password protected file or printend paper backup).
I'd always look for a paper backup (most wallets do use a 12/18/24 word seed). Such a paper backup can restore the whole bitcoin wallet.

Only then you will be able to move the funds out to a new address of yours.

You need to use –– instead of – in front of an argument.

Your command would look like this:

Get 3.2.2 from electrum.org and open your wallet with this version.
You might also try to connect to any other server. The server does NOT store your coins/private keys. The server is only used to retrieve information about your transactions.
You can connect to any random server you want.

However, regardless of the version your password should always allow you to unlock your wallet. Did you download electrum from the official site (https://electrum.org/) ?
Where did you download the 3.1.2 beta version from?

If you have imported an address from visiting a blockchain explorer, you have created a watch-only wallet.
You basically added this specific public address on a 'watch'-list inside your wallet.

You will not be able to spend funds associated to this address without the corresponding private key.




If the string you have tried to import into the private key field did start with a 1.., 3.. or bc1.. it was an address, NOT the private key.
In this case you can not convert anything since this is not a format issue.

You need the private key to be able to access the funds.

Before messing around with recovery software you should make sure to have at least one or two additional images of your drive.

The process would be the following:

• Install your preferred linux on a bootable medium
• Make X images of your old drive using DD or any copy tool and a software writeblocker
• Keep the original drive and don't touch it
• Use any recovery software on one of the images you have
• Preferably use a fresh image for each software you try

This way you won't be able to mess something up which might lead to a corruption of your data.
And if nothing else works, you will still have the possibility of asking a professional data recovery service with your original drive.

You can not reconstruct the blockchain out of this data. Your individiual chainstate folder stores data related to your personal transactions / balances. This is being derived from the blockchain data.
This basically is your 'backup' of 'synching the blockchain'.

To restore if something fails, delete and redownload (or use your backup the blockchain) the corrupted files. In case of something happening which leads to your chainstate to break (would require another sync) you can simply copy your backup of the chainstate folder into the correct directory.

This scenario sounds like it happend to you?
Together with the countless threads regarding basics of setting up an online service, this would definitely make sense.

If your system is broken, freely explain your issues and enough people would be willing to help you. Obfuscating your story won't help you to fix your problem and will cost anyones time who is going to come up with a detailed explanation.


If you, on the other hand, just asks because of curiosity, the answer depends on each exchange. Most probably have implemented their own error handling.
They either start rescanning from the point of failure, or have a different form of acquiring the information.

In my opinion, this is definitely NOT fine.
It is NOT a hardware wallet. It does NOT have any secure element. It does NOT have any positive features a 'real' hardware wallet has.

This is just a small chipset with an implemented algorithm to derive private keys from a 'salted' password. Effectively a brain wallet.


The whole concept IS and WILL be unsafe. You can't repair a concept whose whole approach is wrong.

That's not as easy and convenient as it sounds. At least not if you aren't storing all of your holdings on a desktop or mobile wallet.
If one has a hardware wallet with multiple currencies, it would be a pain in the ass to completely move all funds out, setting up a new seed, moving all funds back in.
You will lose daily access to your old addresses (which might still be needed for signing messages). And you also have the problem of securely storing the coins while you are setting up a new seed.

If, for example, one is only storing his coins on a desktop wallet without many periodically transactions coming in, it is no hassle to change the seed and simply 'forget' about the old wallet/seed.
But for anyone who does need access to his old addresses for signing etc.. such a hassle simply is not worth the few bucks you gain with these forks.. especially nowadays..

If the developer (who hold >50% of the stake) do not sell their stake to the attacker, he won't be able to perform a 51% attack.
The 'reason' for it not to be the 'best practice' is 1) that there is no 'best practice'. Each coin is (at least should be) different and also serves a different purpose.
And 2) most people won't buy a new coin where some entity holds 50% of the stake. Even one single entity holding 10% can be a disaster in terms of price stability / decentralization / trust.




Regarding cryptonomics, if it is worth to attack a new coin with a 51% attack (liquidity has to be high, has to be listed on multiple exchanges, profitable enough), you won't be able to really avoid it.

The only thing which truly avoids such a situation is the correct decision regarding the consensus algorithm. If it is not worth to attack the coin, it won't be attacked.
If destroying a new shitcoin which isn't worth anything is part of a hidden agend.. well.. then you can't really prevent that. The only thing you can do is to make an attack as unprofitable as possible.

The only way to really prevent that is some technical barrier (e.g. someone holds 51% stake and always will be honest; theoretically safe, but practically not doable since there is no reason to have that much trust in someone).

The problem is that most people don't know how to secure their own mobile / pc.
How are they supposed to keep a wallet secured knowing that the amount of cybercrime is only going to grow in the future with more and more lucrative goals (crypto on a non-techy users device) ?

The only real viable option is to use a user-friendly hardware wallet which already delivers the highest possible grade of security. This, together with a small portion of common sense, would be the only way to allow average people to use crypto on a daily basis without losing their money.
But this is far away from 'the users responsibility that this lock never fails or becomes vulnerable'. Still a lot of trust into the developer of the hardware wallet would be required (to create a good product AND to get updates out ASAP when vulnerabilities are out).