the foolish utilisation of "the cambridge report" is where many lies lay

everyone know these facts:
network hashrate is peaking at 272exa this week. does not mean that miners hashed at 272exa every day for the previous year. (thus energy report estimates are already too high)

s9's, s11, s15 and s17's asics are not profitable in reality. no one is still mining using outdated hardware. (thus energy report estimates are already too high)

when asic farms set up within xx miles of a green renewable power generator. they are using green energy physically. (although reports sets them as generalised in a wider region/area to set them in the report as using a 'mix energy source')

when asic farms form 6month-2 year contracts with power generation companies. they are rightfully buying an allotment that the power company would else waste, as that allotment is outside of the residential retail 'demand' thus usually goes unpaid for if it were not for the asic farm

the power usage is more so near the 50TWH per year.. not 150
the green % is more then 60%

my feeling is these 'cambridge report' numbers have been fabricated as worse case fudged numbers, so that given a few years politicians can ask cambridge to supply real numbers so politicians can say they fixed the problem. even when there was none..

for those wanting the most basic paper/brain maths that doesnt need a calculator
the average network hashrate for the year 220exa
the average terrahash/watt for asics 0.025

the average 100terrahash/kw for asics 2.5
the average 100petahash/mw for asics 2.5
the average 100exahash/gw for asics 2.5
the average 200exahash/gw for asics 5
the average 220exahash/gw for asics 5.5
5.5*24*365=43800gwh/year
=48.18twh/year

everyone. its not just the terms of service/user agreement. you signed up to.. you have to now continuously re-read the terms each time you use the service

most sites dont need to even inform you of changes.

and in the celsius case. the court was defining a certain term sheet based on the new terms just 2 month prior to the funds lockdown.. not the ones years prior when users signed up

the stupid thing is.. facebook ads and youtube recommendations.. have algorithms

they should be able to recognise a phish and auto ban the account/ad/recommendation.. they simply dont

the 119k bitfinex thieves got caught

as for using mixers
even more simpler then just taint following..
the FATF regulation policy is that any use of privacy enhancing tools (monero, LN, mixers. etc) flag up funds as suspicious
so it becomes simple.
"the more you try to hide. the more you get noticed"

the silly thing about mixers/ln/monero/etc is this.
they only work the more users use it.. less users use it the more flaws and failures are seen

with mixers being used by a 0.x% of community. it provides a narrow darkpool of suspects
working backwards from a service to the privacy tool
working forwards from a theft to the privacy tool
narrows down the privacy tool usage by certain date. further narrowing down the darkpool of suspects

....
why do you you think there are some malicious idiots trying desperately hard to get innocent normal people into using privacy enhanced tools even if privacy enhanced tools are things that will definitely get innocent peoples funds noticed more (flagged as suspicious)

because JUST thieves using a system. swapping tainted dirty funds means just the thieves receive dirty funds on the outbound
so they need to coax innocent clean people into privacy services so the thieves can take the clean funds and leave innocent people with the dirty funds

(homeless people trading their underwear, means homeless people only receive someone elses dirty underwear.. unless they can try to get more innocent retail customers to donate their clean underwear for dirty underwear)
now who would be stupid to do that, knowing they would end up catching something nasty

bitcoin does not reveal identities

the only way to track down a person. is to link a person to said transactions via a service

..
also transactions can be de-linked (mixers).. where you end up chasing after a innocent recipient of mixed funds to their kyc exchange and they get their accounts frozen and treated as stolen funds

and entity(thief/luke) is now hoarding a different set of utxo

many wallets can easily stop supporting legacy

some already are making it a headache just to default set the wallet to use legacy import/"change" addresses
some make it difficult to just import a key and it display the legacy balance because the default is to convert key to a segwit address for balance display of key(thus showing nothing)

having the rigmarole of having to "describe" the priv to pub setting. can easily lead to non support of certain pub settings with just a couple lines of code that doesnt require a censuses event to implement

as someone highlighted. it ends up with people hoping they kept around an old wallet to have the legacy easily usable

just take a look at the number of wallets available that just importkey and a p2pk is displayed.. .. not many left now
many still convert to p2pkh but majority lately default build privkeys into segwit display addresses, or where the wallet defaults to build a segwit wallet before the user has even decided what key types they want to use. and then when its time to want to use legacy, have to go through a process to force it

devs have already cludgy coded a 4x premium cost into using legacy (falsely promoted as a "segwit discount")
so they are doing all they can to try swaying(difficult, non default, costly) people away from using legacy

bitcoin pubs and cafe's are better business models than a premiss of a bitcoin college
more people would just pop into a pub/cafe more then a college. even if a "course" was free
pubs/cafe's are seen as more relaxed, open, social and less restrictive, application required entry
(plus business does get paid with the side hustle of selling beer/coffee/ exchanging coins)
you have a win there.

my gripe i have with your specific concept was the whole "onboarding bitcoin" but then advertising a sub network that operates, functions, and feels nothing like bitcoin. thus gives a false first impression of bitcoin expectation they are told they are experiencing.. thus when they finally wake up and figure out bitcoin(real blockchain experience) themselves and use bitcoin(real blockchain experience). they then experience something else and realise its not what they were taught, sold, experienced in your venue

its like saying "we are bitcoin, now hand me your money so i can sell you some WBTC or renBTC or msat"
"we are digital gold its independent of middlemen, now let me sell you some digital brass iou's that can later convert and settle, IF you have a co-partner (middleman) to cooperatively settle, where you can claim digital gold later"

if you are unable to tell the difference between bitcoin vs subnetworks like lightning. then it limits your teachings to others about the same point

so i hope you are teaching the differences and not just saying "lightning is bitcoin"

n0nce
you got no clue at all
try to do more research and less social drama sucking up to certain people

EG read how the LN payments really flow
https://github.com/lightning/bolts/blob/master/04-onion-routing.md
not your comic book manual of deceptive wording

for people pretending to be observers. your choosy about what you want to see and what you want to close your eyes to,

open your eyes once and a while to the less than perfect case scenarios, you might learn more and while at same time promoting broke things less
you might even start to become risk aware for your own value security. rather than aimlessly think your value is secure

people want a good monetary system that works without the endless worry of funds moving without their consent and without being lost just by things like wanting to settle up or even just sleeping

if you want to observe things about lightning.. actually open your eyes to the flaws too. not be blind and only see the dreams
i know you only want to sales-pitch the "best case".. but try to now ant again open your eyes and observe "normal " case usage.. and maybe one day you might challenge yourself and open your eyes and observe "worse case".. and maybe just maybe you might become risk adverse to want to be making observations that are risk awareness

you have fooled yourself into dream of only best case dreams
the peg is the onion payments.. these are NOT COMMITMENTS!!
also, lets quickly explain commitments..
NEVER is a raw bitcoin transaction format of data of a full bitcoin transaction sent between LN users
they send small datapoints(mainly measured in msat) where each side builds its local commitment and its partners desired commitment via converting datapoints to sign locally and than swap signatures to check partners
(research htlc conversions)

now back to onion payments.
LN funds route around the network via onion payments where there is a different value UNIT that floats around which trigger separate things. the conversion of the value unit. is what your missing the understanding of

bitcoin format transactions do not loop around routed paths from payer to destination across a multi-hop
commitments are just the receipt.. which are not settled thus not secure either

if you think its soo fixed, secure, rigid and perfect. why do you think watchtowers, revokes and many other things are add-ons that become needed

---

have you even tried to read the malicious stuff of your idolised devs.. saying bitcoiners do not even own their value. that bitcoin is not a system of property ownership even in the link your provided

open your eyes

you lot dont want bitcoin fees to be sub-penny amounts as thats competition

anyways
when just one exchange can cause a week long congestion of transactions on bitcoin.. bitcoin needs to scale
even if that exchange was to go LN.. when it then wants to settle all those channels.. guess what.. congestion again
LN solves nothing.. just delays things

but you stay in utopian best case scenario.. singing and praising when things play good and ignore/run/get amnesia the many examples of bad
(guess you forgot how LN failed el salvadors chivo wallet (oops your suppose to blame bitcoin, right))
(guess you forgot how LN failed to not fractional reserve (thor turbo) (oops your suppose to call that a feature, right))
(guess you forgot how LN can break its peg (oops your suppose to call that user error, right))
(guess you forgot how after 5 years. the bitcoin tx count is still under 2500 and the fee's are over an hours labour for unbanked country)


do you also need reminding that bitcoin does not leave the bitcoin network and what value is being played with ON ANOTHER NETWORK/SYSTEM is not bitcoin
.. nothing about a LN onion payment resembles bitcoin

need i remind you that LN is not a bitcoin feature solely to function on bitcoin and cant survive without bitcoin
.. yep i said it LN can function without bitcoin (yep without reprogramming/recompiling your LN wallet you can flip a button and play with other currencies)

LN is not a "bitcoin"
its much more emulating other crap subnetworks emulating that they are bitcoin (renBTC, wBTC) many many ways.. differing unit of payment, peg not secure to bitcoin. phishes to be bitcoin but is a different network entirely. yet LN doesnt even have its own blockchain or its own consensus..nor is a onion payment(ln's native tx mothod) something bitcoin recognises

---

as for saying that LN has taken on the strain to create some slack..
read this topic. where the most prominent LN-ers are showing their relay "events" of only 20-150 A MONTH

bitcoin nodes relay ~150-230 tx every minute

LN gets congested and bottlenecks just trying to route $600
(Average Channel Capacity 0.068 BTC$1,175.57) (2 participants =  average $587.78) per direction

---

oh lets not forget the whole liquidity thing

if just 7,000,000 people wanted to move 0.02btc($340) EACH.. just 5 hops using a node with one channel route direction
thats needing 840,000btc locked to process those 140k payments..

yep it needs for a 5 x hops needs 6x capacity to enable such hops

so now imagine binances 25m users of 575,000btc
needing to move 5 hops to destinations
requires locking up 3.34m just to process 575k.. whereby those (router/middlemen) of 2.8m of locked value is then stuck as 'outbound' and not spendable by the person that locked funds up.  able to facilitate further routes..  nor able to facilitate further routes..   as it was used to process the first 575k
(in this scenario of 1 channel hopping)

but wait.. let me guess "bottlenecks and payment failures are a feature or user error"
where you suggest they then create another channel set to find another route
thus now 6x becomes 12x locked just to process 1x of payments (rinse/repeat)

now do the multiples
Average Channels per Node 9.45

funny thing is LN fans think that bitcoin shouldnt scale this decade..
..so,  thanks for the confirmation of this ("projecting 50 to 100 years into the future")
.. i guess you missed my subtle yawn of waiting for their plan to actually flourish..
.. waiting for promises to be met
.. waiting for the supposed secure solution without flaws..

here is the funny
LN has been around 5 years.. liquidity=5k btc
taproot has been around 1 year.. liquidity 22k btc
taproot reached its forst 5k coins in 4 months..
taproot most recent escalation by 5k coins in 2 months!! .. says alot about LN's growth factor of 5 years in comparison


havnt ln-ers not realised yet, .. they havnt launched.. their moon plans have not flourished in 5 years
they are just holding up bitcoins evolution with endless promises.. not wanting bitcoin to scale because bitcoiners are suppose to wait for LN to launch.. (in a now projected time of 50 to 100 years)

very old address = legacy (starts with a 1) also known as PKH(public key hash) if rip160hash
or
just PK(public key) of non rip160hash

im guessing he has coins on  a PK and not a PKH

not until LN-ers have world domination and turned bitcoin into just a reserve for LN-hub settlement layer, where bitcoin fee's become above $10+ as standard,,  where the only bloat is LN settlements, to then make LN-ers need to scale bitcoin apparently

the master LN plan..
offboard everyone on bitcoin, to LN..... to reduce tx utility on bitcoin.. then after more time(yawn) of then getting LN settlements to fill the blocks then and only then do they want bitcoin scaling

using a well publicly known keypair

this hex
e3b0c44298fc1c149afbf4c8996fb92427ae41e4649b934ca495991b7852b855

results in
1HZwkjkeaoZfTSaJxDw6aKkxp45agDiEzN  (uncompressed)
1F3sAm6ZtwLAUnj7d38pGFxtP3RVEvtsbV (compressed)


try that hex to see if your convert shows similar results and see if your converter also shows a stage where it reveals a output that looks like it starts with a 5 k or l (wif private key)

EG
L4rK1yDtCWekvXuE6oXD9jCYfFNV2cWRpVuPLBcCU2z8TrisoyY1 (compressed)
5KYZdUEo39z3FPrtuX2QbbwGnNP5zTd7yyr2SC1j299sBCnWjss (uncompressed)

if you can see the results with the details example i gave in the converter you used then the converter is doing as it should.

your best bet is finding a converter that converts from hex to uncompressed(prefix 5) and maybe you will see the end result bitcoin address you want. and then import the uncompressed wif(prefix 5)

without showing me anything

does the (separate) converter site give you a result where
typing in one hex length of text at a time:
where part of the conversion process per attempt start with a result where there is a prefix of 5, k or L?

and then later show a 1 prefix that matches your required address

if you can get to a point of one address resulting in the public (1 prefix) address you want and see above it a private key(wif) starting 5, k or l.. then import the string of the 5,k or l prefix text

i would not recommend you telling strangers your private keys or methods that could establish your private keys.. best option is to try and find guides to the services you use. including whatever wallet you had previously to see if you exported keys wrongly to end up with a hex

im guessing there is a language/jargon/translation barrier

are you saying the 3 hex based keys:
a. join to make a single public address(we call multisig)
if so it appears safepal does not support merging them into a multisig once importing keys separately..
.. so find a different wallet that supports multisig
OR
b. funds are spread over 3 addresses (1 address per key) and you are having difficulty converting "hex into wif" for each key for safepal to understand

there could be a possibility that the "hex" you have.. came from something else
EG most wallets dont dumpprivkey into hex format. so its strange that you are handling hex keys as your private key

maybe try to go back to your old wallet and see if you exported/'dumped private key'(s) correctly

..
if you have 3 x sha256.. then end result (converting to wif(starts 5,l k))
3 private keys with either:
prefix 5 is uncomressed(most accepted by most wallets
prefix K or L is compressed, not as accepted by most wallets


if its a true bitcoin keypair(s) would be those wif keys(prefix 6 k or l) would convert to public addresses of:
3x legacy addresses (three addresses beginning with 1(one address per hex))
or
1x multisig (a single address beginning with 3 or bc1q) where all three keys joined to make the multisig

usually libertarianism can only really succeed thrive from a proposer/influencer/ideal(central)... once the proposer has disappeared to ensure the proposer then does not make subsequent demands, pledges, proposals that turns them into an authority

murray only really got truly popular after his death in 2006
bitcoin only really got popular after satoshis disappearance in 2011

if both were still around today. then they would have been seen as leaders/influencers, which then is not libertarianism(self governance)

---

as for barter.. hmm / not really happening

if it were then bitcoin would be rated not in central exchanged dollar..
it instead would be rated in minimum wage.. where local communities will exchange 1btc for 1700 hours labour(about right for US min-wage) where by it also equates to (converted to dollar) $510 in africa per bitcoin for the same 1700 sweat labour
as that would be a true value barter measure.

yes many shady exchanges use the clause "your investment can go up or down and you can lose it all, we are not liable for loss" as their catch all clause to think they can take funds off people because users agree they can lose it all and not hold exchange liable

ok..

so your trying to say.. you have funds on a multisig address of 3 keys

where your software is not understanding the 3 keys

first convert each sha from hex to wif..
then
import each key (new wallet software use "descriptors" not "importkey")
(find user guide of software for specific importkey/importdescriptor method)

without us knowing the wallet software you want to import into. details of how to import are different/difficult to explain

then once in wallet software. THEN combine them to the multisig to get the end result address

my biases can be backed up by events that did occur..
my issues with segwit activation is backed up by blockdata that supports how things actually happened
(id trust code/immutable blockdata, rather than a tweet or social club)
my biases against all the flaws of LN can be backed up by the flaws.

i dont have utupian fantasies. i actually do the research. and everytime, i ask others to do the research too. and not just pander to their pals who told them a story using a quote of a third party that told them.. as thats just echo chamberism of cabin fever friendships.. not facts

i know people hate HOW i am frank.. literally. ..  how im not an ass kisser or a hugger.. but then again, who deserves a hug when they are already asleep dreaming

once coins enter a mixer things get harder to follow
however shifting a large amount through a mixer in a certain period would see a larger amount of outputs  after mixer too. seeing large amounts join back together to more then the usual allotments can reveal the entity again and if then going into a exchange can reveal their KYC

its not impossible. but it is harder with a mixer involved to just 'taint watch'
it requires seeing a large yield of 0.00x go into some utxo's and a large yeild of 0.00x move afterwards to see who swapped with who..
(it would be stupid for a entity to then deposit them all into same service or re consolidate after a mixer)
.. it may even result that a innocent receiver of stolen funds gets in trouble for handling stolen funds and loses their funds due to links with the mixer they used.