While i truly hope that this is the case, i think you shouldn't be too sure that this correction is over.
Bitcoin has told us in the past that bear markets lasting 1-2 years are possible. This is, of course, no indicator for the future.
But BTC has proven to be stable in terms of mechanism/security. So future gains and bull markets will come. Wether it will be in 2 weeks or 2 years can't be said.




The capability? Definetely.
But wether it will happen? I'm not sure about that. I'd be happy if this would happen. But i wouldn't be disappointed if it won't happen by the end of this year.

You might try to install bitcoind (including whole synced blockchain) and use RPC calls to check the balance of the addresses after importing them.

The command you should enter is:

This will import the address as watch-only. The false is needed for core not reindexing right afterwards(can take a long time).

After you have imported all addresses you can restart bitcoind with the -rescan startup flag.


Wrap it into a small shell/python/whatever script and you should^TM be good to go.

But don't know how long this will take and if this even works with that amount of addresses. You might consider splitting those into smaller chunks.

The easiest would be to write a small script and check the balance via public API.
This is especially recommended if you are already generating/retrieving the addresses via a small script/tool.
There are several online services available which offer such an API for free.

For example:

• https://blockchain.info/q
• https://www.blockonomics.co/views/api.html
• https://blockexplorer.com/api-ref

I think thats the part we should begin with.
I don't think its impossible to stop whales from manipulating the price.
With regulations (at some point there have to be regulations on the way to global adoption) and the consequent higher liquidy
including non-anonymous trading of massive amounts of BTC's, whales won't be able to manipulate the market.

This is definetely not an easy task and won't be achieved in short term. But we are still in the early stage of BTC.

This depends on the interpretation of 'pump' and 'dump'.

Bitcoin (and all cryptos) are more volatile than any other asset you can easily invest in.
Long sideway moving is not the most common thing in the crypto sphere. So of course it is going to go either up or down.

Was the 2017 bull run a 'pump' in your terms? A 1-year-pump?
And do you then also regard the correction afterwards as a dump?

Because if you answer both of these questions with 'yes', then there will be more 'pump and dumps' coming.
But pump and dumps like often happening with low cap altcoins aren't happening with BTC.

A RSA token generates a one-time password based on the timestamp and a private key using an AES algorithm.
RSA tokens usually don't have any encryption inside. They are only used for authentication.

The nano s is a hardware wallet which is capable of signing different transactions using different signing algorithms and addresses.
Additionally it gives you the opportunity to check the details on the screen and confirm via buttons. It has a smart chip built in and the seed stored encrypted inside.
The Fido U2F application is comparable to the RSA token.

There are quite a few differences between those two products which justify the price of the nano s.

The 'security' of private keys is not only dependent on the hash function used.
The algorithm used to generate the public key from the private key is the ECDSA [1].

Nonetheless both, SHA-256 and ECDSA, are regarded as safe to use.

Up to today there hasn't been found a single SHA-256 collision.


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptic_Curve_Digital_Signature_Algorithm

I disagree with that statement.
In my opinion printed money will be abandoned sooner or later.

Im not saying that governments are going to declare BTC as primary currency (which they won't, since they always want to have full control).
But i am pretty sure that printed money will go away. It won't be tomorrow and not all countries are going to abandon paper money instantly.
But this is a part of evolution.
Wether (centralised) crypto currencies or simple credit cards are going to replace it can't be told for sure.




The government would have a lot more control with a crypto currency created by themselves (e.g. something like ripple) or with credit cards only
than with paper money. Printed money is way too unsecured regarding counterfeiting.
How you come up with the 0.1% is a mystery for me.

This definetely can be a danger to your cold storage.
Every single interaction/interface between your cold wallet and your online-connected device poses a danger.




This would require to download a malicious version of electrum (with a smaller key space) or it would require the malware to somehow influence the entropy of electrum before the wallet is created.
This is one of the less-probable versions of a malware one would encounter.

You are right with that.
Mobile wallets shouln't be regarded as secured wallets.
For me, it doesn't matter whether everything of the wallet is perfectly encrypted on the mobile or the pin is stored in plain text.
I only use mobile wallets for small amounts im fine with losing. As long as your mobile is not rooted its 'relatively' safe (for small amounts).



I don't think slower encryption would help at all.
Files can always be moved onto a new PC and be cracked there with multiple graphic cards.

Choosing a 'slow' encryption won't stay 'slow' for a long amount of time, since the technology evolves at a fast rate.

Zap can be configured to run on mainnet.

You simply have to open the folder ../lightningnetwork/lnd and edit one line of the file chainparams.go from


to


Additionally you have to add this to the file:




For a full guide on how to set up zap on mainnet you can take a look at this: https://medium.com/@zaptrem/mainnet-lightning-run-lnd-zap-desktop-on-windows-f73cf78dd633

What happened? Usually updating firmware works without any flaws.
Sometimes the OS is kinda 'messing around' with your USB devices.




Well.. i don't use BTC because its the 'easiest'.
The 'easiest' is for the old and fragile people. Without challenging your mind it will degenerate as fast as a LN transaction.
BTC is made to be the only one in control of your money while at the same time allowing fast transactions around the world.




Already updated my nano s. Was done within 15 seconds.
What about explaining what happened? Did you find out what caused your issue? I doubt it was ledger's fault.

A change of the block size can not occur in a soft fork.
A soft fork is defined by being 'compatible' with older nodes.

Bcash, for example, did simply increase the block size to 8mb. This occured in a hard fork.

Bitcoin on the other hand increased the amount which can fit into a block by introducing SegWit.
This happened through a soft fork. This works because transaction structure has changed and the witness data can be stripped off for older nodes (1MB limit).
Therefore no consensus rules get broken 'in the eyes of' older (non-updated) nodes.

.
SSD's have a micro controller which manages the access to the memory cells. Broken cells won't be used anymore for storage.
SSD's have more cells than actually 'needed' to achieve the promised capacity. Those start getting used when old cells die.
Renaming the block instead of deleting it would just use space (unnecessarily).


for reference: a small picture of a 'typical' SSD controller:

You have to admit that you seem to
1) not understanding our questions and not answering them properly
2) tell contradictory stories/information
3) be unable to read yourself

---

You should maybe start reading the thread. You question has already been answered the first time:

---

It seems like you are either a bit confused on how to click on a link and read the small guide for about 3 minutes
or you simply don't understand anything at all. In this case please clarify what EXACTLY you don't understand and/or doesn't work.

We try to make it as easy as possible. Even monkeys could understand this if they were giving concrete information about whats going wrong.

It is pretty unlikely to send coins to an address with a typo. Addresses include a 32 bit checksum.
This means: 1 out of 4.294.967.296 addresses with a typo included actually is a valid address.

The chance of misstyping an address and the address still being accepted because its valid, are less than 0.00000002 %


Now multiply that probability with the probability of sending to a random address which does have an owner.
You could pretty much say thats 0 chance.

If you created an account within mycelium it will get derived from your master seed including a 'counter'.
Did you create it within mycelium or did you import it?




Mycelium does export the seed created within the application (which is enough to retrieve all HD accounts create within the app).
For imported seed mycelium states that there has to be a seperate backup stored. Thats not a bug imo.

While it is true what you are saying, i have to partly disagree.

Anarc Senior was refering to the ledger nano s' types to choose from an address format: P2PKH (called 'legacy' by ledger) or nested P2SH (called 'segwit' by ledger).
While it is not wrong to call them legacy and segwit, the types of addresses are P2PKH and P2SH.

Additionally you can't tell for sure whether a P2SH address is 1) multisignature or 2) nested segwit until the UTXO's are spend and the redeem script is revealed.

Thats the Ledger manager application (required for updating your nano s and installing applications onto your nano s).

You further need to open a wallet app to access your cryptos. If you want to open your ETH wallet you have to either
1) open the native ETH wallet from ledger [1] or
2) use a 3rd party wallet to access your coins via the ledger (e.g. MyEtherWallet) [2].

Generally you have to follow this to access your coins:

• Open the wallet application on your PC and wait for the 'To begin, connect your ledger wallet' screen
• Plug in the nano s using the cable it got delivered with (or any other cable which does have pins for data transfers; i.e. not power-only cables)
• Open the crypto application on your nano s
• Enjoy accessing your cryptos safely

Did you try those steps in this order?


[1] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ledger-wallet-ethereum/hmlhkialjkaldndjnlcdfdphcgeadkkm
[2] https://www.myetherwallet.com/

From mainpage of bitref:

Since blockchain.info mostly(!) shows correct information and electrum too, i think both are showing the correct amount.
Bitcoin transactions are always made of unspent transaction outputs (UTXO) which have been 'assigned to your address' in a prior transactions (technically not correct, but should be easily understandable).

This means:
If you receive 1 BTC and send 0.1 btc to another address the transaction will have 1 input (1 BTC) and 2 outputs (0.1 to your destination address + 0.9 to a new change address of your wallet) (ignoring the fees).
In this case electrum will show you a 0.9 btc balance (which is correct) and some blockchain explorer will show a total amount of 1 btc sent (which also is correct).

For more information and a more insight sight you can look here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Change

I'd still recommend a better blockchain explorer (e.g. blockcypher, blocktrail, btc.com or blockchain.info (where BitRef is scraping the information from)).