Price is too high compared to other 12-c spiders on the US market with similar options which are selling for $140-160K.
I'm interested if you are willing to come down on price and accept payment in Bitcoin Cash. Refuse to pay with Bitcoin. Ridiculous fees, and confirmation times these days.
@ChironRegera What dickhead worries about a $40 fee when buying a $140k - $160k car. Answer - someone that cant afford the car. Putting the 140k into bch would also end up costing at least $280 if on an exchange that charges 0.2% for the trade. It will probably cost more so easier to just pay the 40... I need to buy the car just to make you bitches STFU. Beautiful car. Seriously though, I have no place to put it. |
|
|
|
The blockchain is a disaster, there are more ways to lose your money than Las Vegas and that's not even counting trading losses.......
Just look at Cryptopia, they have a support queue of 14,000 complaints and take two weeks to even respond. That's 7,000 people per week who are going to be told they are idiots by support staff and that it's all their fault. Crypto currencies are built to be dangerous and unforgiving, justified by Libertarians who see any problem as individual sovereign risk. If you got it wrong you deserve the consequences. But what do you think will happen when this is unleashed on the masses?
Satoshi wrote a paper describing a peer to peer currency with no need for trusted intermediaries. Sounds like you have problems with trusted intermediaries. Exactly. People deal with un-trusted intermediaries and don't like the results. So, don't deal with them. Plus it sounds like OP has a problem with "lazy developers only change the first letter of addresses". Why trust lazy developers? Adults have to be responsible for themselves: if they don't know the difference between "bitcoin" and "bitcoin cash" don't blame bitcoin, blame either the person who didn't bother to find out what they were buying or blame the developers who chose names that were confusingly similar (although how anyone would be confused about two different names if they can read is difficult to understand). I don't have such a negative view of "the masses" as OP, I tend to think that people are smart enough to see the difference between well tested software from non-lazy developers and untested, poorly written software from lazy developers. Not to mention see the difference between a third party service and bitcoin. The curious thing is that Satoshi AGREES WITH THE OP POSTER(insofar as the risks of third parties)!!!!! Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending. We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing the proof-of-work. The longest chain not only serves as proof of the sequence of events witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest pool of CPU power. As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers. The network itself requires minimal structure. Messages are broadcast on a best effort basis, and nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdfBut Satoshi would note and it must be agreed that the poster's anger is incorrectly directed at the blockchain and should be directed at the third parties. The blockchain is the solution not the problem. The problems noted appear to all be "off blockchain." |
|
|
|
You don't necessarily need a CD. Do you have a USB stick lying around with like 4GB you can use for this? (exclusively for this, everything else on it would be formatted/deleted. But you could use the stick again once you're done.) If you're willing to spend $200 on a bounty, you should definitely be willing to buy a USB thumbdrive, assuming you don't have one around......
Somewhat easier than this is using Virtual Box to generate a virtual Ubunto system on the Mac. Still need known good 2013 wallet test files. I will look around later today and see if I have any and how this works. |
|
|
|
The blockchain is a disaster, there are more ways to lose your money than Las Vegas and that's not even counting trading losses.......
Just look at Cryptopia, they have a support queue of 14,000 complaints and take two weeks to even respond. That's 7,000 people per week who are going to be told they are idiots by support staff and that it's all their fault. Crypto currencies are built to be dangerous and unforgiving, justified by Libertarians who see any problem as individual sovereign risk. If you got it wrong you deserve the consequences. But what do you think will happen when this is unleashed on the masses?
Satoshi wrote a paper describing a peer to peer currency with no need for trusted intermediaries. Sounds like you have problems with trusted intermediaries. |
|
|
|
Future addresses, yes.
But what about past activity? Say that a person had put $100 in BTC into an unencrypted wallet for the last 10 months, and he then encrypts the wallet (Bitcoin CORE).
Someone finds an old unencrypted wallet.
How is it possible that it would not have valid content that was retrievable by the finder?
It's not possible for any backups to be invalidated. There isn't any way to surefire make an existing backup useless without the need for a central authority to validate each backup. The old backup will have the previously used private keys. If someone finds an old unencrypted wallet and your old addresses still have coins in it, they can spend it. You have to send it to a new address in your new backup to deter this possibility. This is what I thought. The popup message which comes up is then quite confusing. |
|
|
|
Update: increasing bounty to 200$ minimum.. need to get the important info out of these wallet.dat files. Is there an easy way to see if they are encrypted? I believe both files are from late 2013
Here is a method. Take a known good 2013 CORE wallet, unencrypted. Run tests using suggested methods on it and establish what actually works. Only then try the same known-good technique on the target wallet. |
|
|
|
They don't. The warning is correct however.
Bitcoin Core purges your keypool with 1000 keys or your HD seed. In the case of the HD seed, the previous keys that were used are exported into the wallet file. Since the keypool is refreshed/HD seed changed, any future address generated with your new backup will diverge from your old backup.
Future addresses, yes. But what about past activity? Say that a person had put $100 in BTC into an unencrypted wallet for the last 10 months, and he then encrypts the wallet (Bitcoin CORE). Someone finds an old unencrypted wallet. How is it possible that it would not have valid content that was retrievable by the finder? |
|
|
|
I wish to reply further (also to cellard’s last post above); for now, simply to address one issue: Regarding address formats. I'm seeing a lot of engineering-level discussion but better would be to simply toss samples at test groups and have them type them in, gather comments and so forth.
They did. Did you read what gmaxwell said upthread? Red highlights are here added. Bech32 is designed for human use and basically nothing else [...]
In actual testing transfering bech32 addresses to another person is on the order of 5x faster with bech32 due to errors being made even in careful usage of base58-- more than the time itself transferring a base58 address is often insanely frustrating-- you read it, and ... nope, no idea where it's wrong, only that it's wrong -then you try reading the whole thing again and again and again.
[...]....
Missed that. Thanks for pointing it out. |
|
|
|
The bitcoin code base / protocol was complete years ago and needed no other genius proof of dev any more like E=mc^2 does not need to be bubbled up by other fellows any more.
And thus, you show your ignorance of physics, too. E=mc^2 is the equation for the rest energy of matter. Got velocity? A more complicated equation is required to ascertain E. [...] Sure, go learn more physics but the genuis part is done by Einstein and yet we are years later and still try to prove parts. Dont come up with all the rest here or could you solve the rest with pure men power (as you do now with btc + SW + ...) ? Satoshi did the genius part (by introducing artificial order = energy = negativ entropy) and there is no need to extend it with extra kinetics.. and dilute the genius order. Think big and accept that BCH will work better also because its simpler. Oh, my. Somebody “learned” from “science popularizers”, then combined that miseducation with a heaping dose of New Age woo. “artificial order = energy = negativ entropy”? “extra kinetics”? With all the quack pseudoscience pseudo-jargon flying about, next we will hear that quantum mechanics proves we have entered the Age of Aquarius. Quantum mechanics also proves that I have psychic powers; and my psychic powers tell me that you are an imbecile.
Every time I feel I need a short break, I pop in here and see if this thread was updated with more stupidity. If so, I take a swing at one of Ver’s hapless little drones. That takes less effort than hitting a punching bag; and it’s more satisfying than shooting literal fish in a barrel.
Gosh, I just don't know. I've never tried to shoot literal fish in a barrel. Adjusting aim for refraction is not a problem. How about big fish, little barrel? Try a shotgun. Sawed-off. Nah, still not as fun as smacking down bcash shills and sycophants. Which itself is not so rewarding as the spiritual solace brought by founding my own cult, ϐ bitcult.faith ϐ. All hail the god of Bitcoin.
Sure, go learn more physics but the genuis part is done by Einstein and yet we are years later and still try to prove parts. Dont come up with all the rest here or could you solve the rest with pure men power (as you do now with btc + SW + ...) ?
Satoshi did the genius part (by introducing artificial order = energy = negativ entropy) and there is no need to extend it with extra kinetics.. and dilute the genius order.
Think big and accept that BCH will work better also because its simpler.
Huh?  Why shouldn't we make transaction malleability avoidable and then make use of the powers of bitcoin script that Satoshi had designed? Using opcodes that Satoshi conceived but didn't personally use is too complicated? Taras, per the above, you are arguing with somebody who just proved that negativ [sic] entropy brought us into the Age of Aquarius! Humble yourself. Don’t you dare presume to question the wisdom of a guru.I'm thinking if we spin that barrel, then we're barreling well outside the bounds of Einstein's theories, which didn't deal with torsion and centrifugal forces. You could say we are fishing in the Fourth Dimension, to get teknikal. So this Aquarius barrel spinning at the right speed has time space warping inside and this moves the fish all to the barrel sides and at the right side they warp out one at a time. Note the One at a time. That's clearly a quantum phenomena hence we've not got quantum physics as the causation factor. And you already know what's coming next. String theory. We gonna catch those fish on a string. |
|
|
|
Hello,
I have Electrum installed on several computers using the same wallet/seed. I would now like to sell one of the computers. If I delete the wallet file from this one machine, will it affect the equivalent wallet that also runs on the other two machines? Thanks, I just want to be sure I do the correct thing!
it's best when selling a computer to securely reformat the drives, not just one program like electrum. Wipe it clean of all your programs and passwords and activities. |
|
|
|
I have an old paper wallet (pre-fork) I would like to transfer to an offline computer running Electrum. I believe this is known as cold storage. I would like someone to walk me through this step by step. I have downloaded Electrum to my now offline machine and am ready to do the next step, but I don't know what the next step is. I will pay someone willing to hold my hand and help me through this entire process in a safe way.
What you have right now with the paper wallet is cold storage. With cold storage with Electrum, you may have higher risk but you would be capable of making transactions. The paper wallet can only be restored in it's full amount, while Electrum or Trezor would allow moving smaller amounts out of cold storage. Is that what you want to be able to do? Because if not, you're fine as is. |
|
|
|
....
I am sorry that popping up with "constructive criticism" out of the blue without much in the way of reintroduction or community engagement probably seems more confrontational in the absence of regular positive contributions to the project's development. I'm actually sad because I'm embarrassed to be explaining $30 transaction fees to people ....
Seeing this thread impels me to two comments. Kudos to you for your early and continuing visions of crypto. Regarding address formats. I'm seeing a lot of engineering-level discussion but better would be to simply toss samples at test groups and have them type them in, gather comments and so forth. Or just leave things along. But hey, whatever. The market will decide, sooner or later. |
|
|
|
public static money MaxFee=1.50 // Less miners because not enough cream to go around
[...] public static money MaxPorschePrice=1.50 // Less Porsches because not enough cream to go around That should work, right?
[...] Block sizes are not relevant to this issue.
I know. Really, that’s my point. Per the ridiculous thread title, Lightning Network will compete with Visa. It is not comparable to “Bitcoin Cash”, “S2X”, or genital herpes. The amount of WRONG, it hurts.... Do what I’m doing! I’ve been ignoring my forum duties (so rudely as to fine folks) whilst coding multilanguage support for easyseed(1). The race has been on to get that feature published before midnight UTC; and I appear to be losing. The latest push was yet another battery of runtime integrity self-tests. I think by now I have more lines of runtime test code than feature implementation code, which is good for a utility which pertains to Other People’s Money. Every time I feel I need a short break, I pop in here and see if this thread was updated with more stupidity. If so, I take a swing at one of Ver’s hapless little drones. That takes less effort than hitting a punching bag; and it’s more satisfying than shooting literal fish in a barrel. Now, I’m happy to have chatted with you irrelevantly on a thread which is anyway offtopic garbage in its entirety. Cheers! Gosh, I just don't know. I've never tried to shoot literal fish in a barrel. Adjusting aim for refraction is not a problem. How about big fish, little barrel? |
|
|
|
Said “Anti-Cen” with unspecified units, presumably some fiat currency with no possibility of Byzantine agreement on an exchange rate: public static money MaxFee=1.50 // Less miners because not enough cream to go around
That is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever seen in my whole life; and it has plenty of competition between the four corners of this world. You have no idea how Bitcoin works. Or how reality works. The security level of Bitcoin’s Byzantine agreement on transaction ordering grows proportionally to its value, as mining increases in revenue, and thus becomes more competitive. But it’s not even necessary to look that far. Capping the sole criterion which miners use to choose between transactions of equal size, and users use to determine which transactions are important to them, is tantamount to trying to fulfill my desire for a Porsche with one simple line of code: public static money MaxPorschePrice=1.50 // Less Porsches because not enough cream to go around That should work, right?
Look at the numbers cellard posted! Do you have a home PC with 32GB spare RAM to dedicate to a Bitcoin node? Can your home connection pass 99.2GB of daily traffic? That’s all with full 8MB blocks; and according to Bitfury, all that hardware buys you a whopping 28tps. It’s still 2 orders of magnitude under the throughput of Paypal, and 3–4 orders of magnitude under that of Visa.
To compete on a practical basis with Visa cannot mean that every node has the entire transactional volume passing through it. To compete with 1/100 the volume of Visa cannot mean that every node has the entire transactional volume passing through it. Block sizes are not relevant to this issue. I know. Really, that’s my point. Per the ridiculous thread title, Lightning Network will compete with Visa. It is not comparable to “Bitcoin Cash”, “S2X”, or genital herpes. The amount of WRONG, it hurts.... |
|
|
|
Guys please help me, I dont know how to retrieve that missing word, Im so worried right now, and its almost 2100 words generated inside the ledger nano s, which means I have to try about 2100times to restore it, it could take forever and its kiing me right now  Hi there, If you want I can have a go retrieving the missing word The 24th word is a checksum word and can aid in recovering the missing word, Good point. Information from the checksum likely defines which of the 2100 words is the missing one. Or reduces the possibilities to a handful. EDIT: I just saw #13, it handles this in a comprehensive sense. |
|
|
|
... We already have studies that show at what rate nodes would get wiped out at current block size and in increases of 2MB up to 8MB. This study was developed by Bitfury:  So if BCash was getting used AND spammed as BTC does, blocks would get filled and 95% of current nodes would get wiped out of the system. What does it mean "wiped out of the system?" Is that computed as a side effect of the fact that people don't have, say for example, another 200 gb to dedicate to block chain for each year that passes? Look at the numbers cellard posted! Do you have a home PC with 32GB spare RAM to dedicate to a Bitcoin node? Can your home connection pass 99.2GB of daily traffic? That’s all with full 8MB blocks; and according to Bitfury, all that hardware buys you a whopping 28tps. It’s still 2 orders of magnitude under the throughput of Paypal, and 3–4 orders of magnitude under that of Visa. I don’t see any figures here on iops; but I can guess qualitatively. Got RAIDed enterprise-class SSDs? Disk space is the smallest problem with big blocks. Nodes of modest means can prune. But the above table shows that there would be nothing to prune: They wouldn’t be able to keep up with the network, or even run without getting hit by the OOM-killer. (For comparison, the Steem documentation specifies a minimum requirement of 32GB RAM for a Steem node. Most users simply use steemit.com. So decentralized. But it has the magic word, “blockchain”.) To compete on a practical basis with Visa cannot mean that every node has the entire transactional volume passing through it. To compete with 1/100 the volume of Visa cannot mean that every node has the entire transactional volume passing through it. Block sizes are not relevant to this issue. |
|
|
|
" While “Bitcoin” as a term with its commercial highs and lows has been thoroughly dissected by economists and investors, most, however, have failed to articulate the underlying technology behind it, i.e., Blockchain. "
Thus, how blockchain technology will revolutionise the legal services industry?
They've "failed to articulate" because they are clueless about it. |
|
|
|
... We already have studies that show at what rate nodes would get wiped out at current block size and in increases of 2MB up to 8MB. This study was developed by Bitfury: So if BCash was getting used AND spammed as BTC does, blocks would get filled and 95% of current nodes would get wiped out of the system. What does it mean "wiped out of the system?" Is that computed as a side effect of the fact that people don't have, say for example, another 200 gb to dedicate to block chain for each year that passes? |
|
|
|
I have released an initial version of the easyseed(1) utility for secure generation of BIP 39 mnemonic seed phrases. As any worthwhile software, it comes replete with a manpage, q.v.My original motivation for writing this was that I needed a lightweight, reliable BIP 39 seed phrase generator with easily auditable sources and minimal dependencies for use on a stripped-down airgap machine. The source code is short, easy to read, and lovingly commented; it can be readily understood by anybody with a basic knowledge of the C programming language. Its only dependencies are cc(1), make(1), and a library SHA256 implementation—available on most platforms via libcrypto or otherwise. Now that it’s written, easyseed(1) is also the first necessary component for my campaign to urge that users stop using saved webpages to generate their Bitcoin magic bits. What kind of an airgap machine has a web browser installed, anyway? But most importantly, as a rule of thumb, Javascript code cannot reliably acquire proper entropy for generating random numbers. This is a persistent general problem, and specifically subject to extended fretting by the author[1] of the most popular BIP39 webpage. easyseed(1) reads bits straight off /dev/urandom, or from user-provided keymat. Gathering and processing of entropy is properly the kernel’s job. My userland utility will let the kernel do its job. Since it’s written in C, easyseed(1) can reliably obtain kernel-provided randomness on every Unix/Linux platform in about two lines of code (open(2), read(2), plus error checks)—rather than cooking up some tortuous “random” scheme which may or may not perhaps probably work sort-of. This is a beta-quality initial release. It is not yet feature-complete: In particular, I have code partly written to add support for all languages which have wordlists in the Bitcoin BIP repository (currently Chinese (Simplified and Traditional), French, Italian, Japanese, Korean, and Spanish, in addition to the current English). easyseed(1) does have basic test vectors copied from the Trezor repository; and with those vectors, it runs a self-test on every usage. However, more tests are desired. Licensing includes a Bitcoin Consensus Clause, to prevent use by scamcoin pretenders. I am here opening a Bitcoin Forum thread for discussion of this utility; over time, I will edit and update this post as appropriate.
1. Though that is not nearly in the same league as boneheaded absurdity from ignorant developers who confuse multiple distinct meanings of the word “entropy”. pointbiz: “Perhaps more entropy can be gathered using techniques used on Panopticlick”. #facepalm cantonbecker: “I like this idea”. pointbiz: “I used all the easy techniques from Panopticlick to gather entropy. [...] I added up the low and high entropy bits and my personal results are 34.3 to 42.8 bits of entropy.” Oh dear heavens, are you using this to generate keymat for Bitcoin!? Some people should be enjoined with a permanent restraining order forbidding that they ever approach within one hundred metres of crypto-related code.I like this idea you have. Personally I am a believer in the entropic properties of dice. Also your comments lead me to point out a serious flaw in the use of off line web pages. Namely, shouldn't such a web page (a computer program) not operate unless it was off line? |
|
|
|
Hi!
how can you loose 1 of 24 words? a very curious case...
......
All it takes is one pet rabbit.... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
