This is weird. I just got a text from the guy I sent the money to that he got it, however in electrum it's still showing unconfirmed. I'm so confused.
The server you are currently connected to might be overloaded or experiencing some other problems. Restart Electrum and it should automatically connect to a different server. |
|
|
|
I tried to accelerate and it said my fee was too low so I went to raise it and I got an error message in a box with a yellow yield sign that says
How did you try to accelerate your transaction? Since you are running the latest version of Electrum, your transaction should be marked as replaceable. Go to "History" tab, right-click on your transaction and select "Bump fee". If I'm correct if this goes unclaimed for 30 days it comes back to me so I'm not worried but I need this to work,
Your transaction should be dropped from the mempool after about 2 weeks. You should be able to replace your transaction using above instructions, though. |
|
|
|
Would it be possible to onboard non-Bitcoin users straight to Lightning, without having them to go through buying their own coins from an exchange, setting up their own wallets, and all the other steps? I believe a hosted service like that would be the most practical.
Sure! Strike already does it fairly well. Users can easily send Bitcoin/Lightning Network payments without having to worry about the technical details - they just need to deposit some fiat and scan a QR code of a payment invoice. Users can purchase Bitcoin directly through the app if they provide an invoice from a third-party wallet. |
|
|
|
Yes but all of these are signed transactions that are kept by the channel founder.
Commitment transactions are stored and can be broadcast by both parties. 8. Alice broadcasts a transaction of her 1000 satoshis to the blockchain which makes the entire procedure useless, because the signed transaction that Bob keeps will not be accepted from the network.
Each new commitment transaction invalidates the previously signed transaction. If Alice broadcasts an old commitment transaction, Bob can immediately publish a penalty transaction which will send ALL funds to his address. It also works the other way around. Lightning network is known for being fast. But I don't understand where does that "fast" refer to. Is it fast on confirming the transaction?
The whole point of the LN is to decrease the load on the blockchain and make small transactions cost-effective so broadcasting an on-chain transaction after every off-chain transaction would be pointless. When you send a payment over the Lightning Network to a node to which you are not directly connected, multiple nodes pass your payment further along the routing path to the destination node. That's what happens fast. |
|
|
|
I'm trying to understand it, but I don't get it. Even if transaction(s) are signed in a multi-signature address, they still have to be broadcasted on-chain, so a very high fee must be paid. By who?
By the funder of the channel. Second question, what if I pay with lightning network and before they are added to the blockchain, I spend them? Won't this make the signed transaction useless?
If the channel opening transaction is not confirmed, you can't use such a channel. Every time a channel is updated (either one spends/receives some coins or routes a payment), both parties sign a new commitment transaction which reflects the updated balance of the channel. |
|
|
|
Is that for Mac? I'll probably pass since I don't care really.
I mentioned in my first post that it was for Windows. Here are the instructions for Mac OS. Open Finder
Go to folder (shift+cmd+G) and type ~/.electrum
The wallet name does not have any impact on anything. You can leave it as it is if you don't mind it. |
|
|
|
Another thing I read on the electrum site is I'm supposed to do something with a signature afterward. I couldn't find it but it just told me to close and restart which I did so I guess I'm good.
You are actually supposed to verify the signature of the installer before the installation. This process makes sure that the file was not replaced by some malicious third-party. Here you can find a detailed guide. It shows my entire history and the amount of bitcoin but it is not showing it in USD.
Go to "Tools -> Preferences", select "Fiat" tab. Change your "Fiat currency" from "None" to "USD". I had fiat wrong but what about wallet name? can I change that? or does it matter. Right now its on default.
You need to change the file name manually in "%appdata%/Electrum/wallets". |
|
|
|
Funny I tried that and it didn't come up. I'm doing it now but it's asking if I want to encrypt the wallet file. I'm the only one who uses this computer, MacBook Air, and it never leaves my sight so do I need that? I'm thinking yes but not if it'll bog down the system. Do I encrypt? and thanks.
It never hurts to have an extra layer of security. You will be able to recover your wallet if you forget your password and remember your recovery phrase, so don't worry about that. |
|
|
|
Got a new computer and due to technical reasons I have to reinstall bitcoin vs. just transferring it. When I go to install it brings up a new wallet for me to start. When I put in the name of my old wallet it doesn't recognize it.
You need to copy your wallet from your old computer to a new one. If you are running Windows, press WIN + R, type in "%appdata%", go to "Electrum/wallets" folder and copy your wallet file. Paste it into the same directory on your new computer. Is there a way to install electrum and use my seed to just go to my old wallet (I don't get the option with the new install from the electrum website. Just make a new wallet
Select "Standard wallet" and then "I already have a seed". |
|
|
|
There are no issues so far but i don't get one thing, when i tap "receive" on my BlueWallet app, the address is not the same as the one i have in electrum, why is that?
That address should belong to your wallet. Launch Electrum, select "View -> Show Addresses", go to "Addresses" tab and see if that address is listed there. Alternatively, you can enable the console ("View -> Show Console") and type "ismine("address")" into it. If the console returns true then that address belongs to your wallet for sure. |
|
|
|
I don't know where is the central part of the Bitcoin Lightning Network? This is not accurate !! The Bitcoin Lightning Network is a temporary record between two parties who conduct many transactions without being recorded on the public Bitcoin Blockchain so that the transactions are processed faster and the final result is recorded only on the Blockchain, do you see there is any centralization in this?
Let me explain it in a different way since you seem to be a little confused about how the Lightning Network works. Your answer is a simplified explanation of how transactions are settled between participants of the same payment channel. When you try to send a payment to a person with who you don't have a direct channel, your payment is routed through other nodes for a small fee. All of those nodes need to be connected via payment channels. The concern is that people will favour popular nodes because their payments will have a higher chance of being routed successfully. The implementation of multi-part payments has slightly mitigated this issue. |
|
|
|
a tak trochę sobie rozkminiałem nad wykorzystaniem ewentualnym LN do prywatności na wzór monero czy zcasha - gdzie w ramach kanału moznaby dodać adres, który bylby niejawny - w sensie nie tylko jego saldo ale rowniez sam adres (oczywiście dla wszystkich poza właścicielem kluczy prywatnych  Bardzo dobry pomysł! Niektóre implementacje pozwalają na wydłużenie ścieżki płatności w celu zwiększenia prywatności. Dodajmy do tego dzielenie płatności na mniejsze części i wyślijmy je przez inne ścieżki, żeby praktycznie uniemożliwić ich śledzenie. Po zamknięciu kanału, będzie widoczny tylko transfer do drugiego uczestnika. W przyszłości, to może być ciekawa alternatywa dla tradycyjnych mixerów i CoinJoin. I tutaj przechodzimy do pytania - jak postrzegacie oplacalnosc uruchomienia wlasnych kanalow?:p (na początek z jakas czastka setnych btc..)
Raczej jest to mało opłacalna zabawa w tym momencie. Jest parę dużych węzłów, które zbudowały swoją pozycję głównie na byciu promowanym przez pierwsze strony akceptujące płatności Lightning Network, ale tylko kilka z nich zarabia jakieś znaczące kwoty. Tak przy okazji, w przyszłym tygodniu zamierzam zamówić Raspberry Pi 4 i zewnętrzny dysk SSD, żeby postawić pełny węzeł Bitcoin oraz prawdopodobnie c-lightning. Czy bylibyście zainteresowani tym jak wygląda cały/częsciowo proces konfiguracji? |
|
|
|
For instance, I had never expected that the address format of BTC would change some day from P2PKH to bech32. And such things make me nervous when I'm not a coder.
Technically, it hasn't changed. You are not forced to use or switch to a different type of address. If you stick with P2PKH, you just won't be able to gain any benefits from new types of addresses. There are no penalties. Because Trezor uses a website, you don't have full control. When one day Trezor website stops working, because for instance Trezor company goes bust, then we can't reach anymore our BTC in the Trezor (maybe a coder can, but not me...).
That's not true. When you set up your wallet, you are given a 12/24 word recovery phrase which can be restored in many other popular hardware and software wallets. You can also use your Trezor with Electrum - you won't expose your private keys this way. Or can I still today send BTC to an old address format P2PKH with the current BTC software from a bech32 address? I still have empty unused P2PKH paper BTC wallets left. Then I can do the test first with a small amount.
Yes, you can. There is no reason why it would ever become impossible. |
|
|
|
Electrum currently has a Lightning Network implementation. Have you used it/what are your thoughts on it? Because I haven't been able to try it due to lack of support.
Yes, I have. In fact, I wrote a detailed guide to using it ( Electrum Lightning Network walkthrough). If you have any questions, you can post them in that thread. It's definitely easier to use than c-lightning and LND, but it still lacks some important features like multi-part payments and configurable settings. |
|
|
|
I had been wondering the same thing why LN is not getting the support of many and why it failed to get the popularity it must have.
There is still a lot of room for improvements. Developers are working hard to introduce features like dual-funded channels, splicing-in/out, and improve the code base. Recently introduced multi-part payments were a huge milestone. Right now, a lot of people could get easily frustrated with routing problems. So these are the limitations that developers have to contend with before we can expect LN to be utilized widespread by Bitcoin supporters and enthusiasts. Hope that something can be coming out with this area soon.
I believe that most of these people will end up using custodial wallets like BlueWallet, which already provide a fairly good experience, because of the difficulty of proper channel management. It will take a lot of time and effort before non-custodial Lightning wallets become as easy to use as custodial ones. |
|
|
|
Czy jest mozliwe "podpiecie" do takiego kanalu adresu ktory nie jest w blockchainie?
Nie za bardzo wiem jak może wyglądać adres, który nie jest na blockchainie. Mógłbyś podać jakiś przykład? Lightning Network jest ściśle powiązane z blockchainem ze względu na specjalne kontrakty, o których wspomniałem na początku, więc odpowiedź prawdopodobnie brzmi nie. Bo rozumiem, ze normalnie odbywa sie to tak ze na starcie kanalu adres A ma jakis bilans i B ma jakis bilans
Obecnie tylko jedna osoba może wpłacić środki, które będą wykorzystywane przez kanał. Osoba A przesyła środki na adres multisig, który wymaga podpisów osób A i B do wydania środków. Po każdej transakcji "off-chain", uczestnicy podpisują nową transakcję "on-chain", która pozwala na zamknięcie kanału bez udziału drugiej osoby. I po zamknięciu kanalu nowe bilanse sa rowne stanowi poczatkowemu plus przeprowadzone operacje?
Po zamknięciu kanału (są dwa możliwe sposoby, żeby to zrobić), środki ze wspólnego adresu multisig zostają przesłane na adresy obu uczestników kanału. Jeżeli któryś z uczestników ma otrzymać 546 satoshi lub mniej, to te drobne zostaną dodane do opłaty transakcyjnej (ze względu na dust limit). Jeżeli saldo którejś ze stron wynosiło 0, to transakcja zamykająca kanał będzie miała tylko jedno wyjście. |
|
|
|
To kto w takim razie ma wtedy dostep do listy transakcji w takich portfelach?
Jeżeli kanał jest publiczny, to każdy jest w stanie sprawdzić wyłącznie obecne saldo obu uczestników. Niezależnie od rodzaju kanału, tylko jego uczestnicy mają dokładną listę transakcji.
Czy jest możliwość zeby w ramach kanalu LN wszystkie transakcje byly calkowicie niejawne (tak jak np w zcash shielded albo xmr?)
Wszystkie transakcje są niejawne. Nie ma centralnego rejestru transakcji. W przypadku gdy płatność jest przekazywana przez kilka węzłów, to węzły, które pośredniczą w procesie, wiedzą tylko: od kogo dostały płatność oraz komu i ile mają przekazać. Im dłuższa ścieżka jaką musi przebyć transakcja, tym większa prywatność. Co raz więcej portfeli wspiera "multi-part payments", które umożliwiają dzielenie transakcji na mniejsze kawałki i wysyłanie ich przez różne ścieżki (kilka różnych kanałów), co także zwiększa prywatność. Zdaję sobie sprawę, że to dalej może brzmieć niezrozumiale. Czy rozumiesz co mam na myśli przez "ścieżki" i "przekazywanie płatności"? |
|
|
|
I don’t have a Trezor, so I’m wondering if it is really necessary to type each word in its entirety to check the correctness of the seed? When I did the seed entry on Ledger, and so it is with Electrum - entering the initials of each word, a suggestion is shown and the correct word can be selected, which reduces the whole process to less than 5 minutes.
Actually, you don't type anything in the advanced recovery mode. The whole process is similar to the PIN entry. This blog post shows it in a more detailed way. You don't need to enter the whole word; it looks that only 4 letters are needed for each word. |
|
|
|
I also read a few online articles saying that you can reverse an transactions if its still in a mempool by using the same input, paying a higher fee and changing the output to yourself. [...] I know you can do it with a mining attack but I'm talking more about the "legit" way.
If your transaction is marked as replaceable and is unconfirmed, you can double-spend it. Some wallets allow to do that easily. For example, in Electrum, you can right-click on a transaction and select "Cancel tx" if you are running the latest version. Next, Electrum will create a transaction spending the same inputs to one of your addresses with a higher fee automatically. As for the Bitcoin Core, I think that you need to use zapwallettxes=1 parameter at startup before you will be able to create a conflicting transaction. |
|
|
|
Also, checked through the seed checking and seed recovery process...even though the order is randomized, doesn't reducing the attackable word space to 24 pretty seriously weaken the key? I mean, I just entered the words in a browser ffs...
You could have checked "Advanced recovery" box before you started the wallet recovery. It takes a lot of time to enter all words, especially if you have a 24 word recovery phrase, but at least you don't expose your recovery phrase. Here you can find step-by-step instructions. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
