The bolded part is key.  Whatever you do, don't turn it on again.  Likewise, was "turned on a handful of times" and left on for weeks at a time or minutes at a time?  Likewise, if 10GB was installed it is a lot different than if 100GB was installed.

So there is a chance, as far as telling them, if you trust them, yes.  If they are just going to "recover everything on there" they might see the file names too depending of course on what has been over written and not.

Usually if there is no wallet.dat file or directory, stopping and restarting bitcoin-core will recreate it.  (And you wouldn't have to re-download the block chain to do so.)

The wallet.dat file is accessed using Berkeley DB, is there something you are trying to accomplish by accessing it directly?

( see e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/build-unix.md
libdb4.8   Berkeley DB   Optional, wallet storage (only needed when wallet enabled)
)

It isn't like bitcoin.conf where it is just a text file, e.g.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/share/examples/bitcoin.conf


Perhaps if you tell us what you are trying to do you can get more responses.

edit:
Is this related to your other question about recovering an old wallet.dat?  If it is, whatever you do, do not install anything else on the old SSD.

I was just going to say almost the same thing, but exactly what o_e_l_e_o said.

About 5-6 years ago, I just bought a new computer and printer for cold storage that never touches the internet.  While these hardware wallets are nice, right now I am more comfortable with a specific portable that is used for cold storage and doesn't rely on a third party to access the coins.  I'd prefer to have full control and not have, essentially, a black box.Even though the source is out there, it still seems quite black boxy to me.

Of course, at $40, it is a lot cheaper than a MacBook Pro or other portable.

My initial thought is that she is an idiot who doesn't understand math.  I think in reality, she is carrying water for the fiat loving, anti-freedom political class who sees bitcoin eating away at her power.

Of course, since she won't define her terms precisely, she can make claims with a bunch of hand waving in order for her to try and trick people.

What exactly does she mean by "scarce"?
1 - scarce meaning that only so much of it is available.
2 - scarce meaning that only so many people can own a whole bitcoin, e.g. only so many people can own 100 million Satoshis.  
3 - scarce meaning that only so many people can own ANY quantity of bitcoin, e.g. how many people could own 1 satoshi (or even less with lightning).

If you say #3 is what she's talking about, then she's right that it isn't scarce because everyone can have *some*. Normal, rational, reasonable people would think of #1 and #2 were what one would think about when they say "scarce" but she is relying on people to think she knows more than she does and accept her stupidity as enlightenment.

Reminiscent of someone not understanding Zeno's Paradox.

Could it be that your amount is being eaten by fees so there isn't enough available to withdraw after fees?
Also, are you using "Withdraw BTC" to "Crypto Address" or "Coinbase.com"?

I look on the web and it shows:
To address
Amount
Network Fee
Limit
Processing Time

So if you had 0.0001 BTC, and the "network fee" was changing or was high enough it would fluctuate showing what was available to withdraw. 

I don't know how it could be negative but I've seen some people be anti ETF. 

I agree about the centralization being a problem.  One would hope that perhaps people would keep custody of their own coins, but one never knows.

The article isn't very well written, but it says: "The trading has been suspended for some time now."

I can see why if they can't trade 24/7/52 like bitcoin, you would have the entire weekend when futures can't be traded and bitcoin might be 5000 higher or lower from the previous trade.

Of course, that is the point of the futures market, to let people hedge. Seems stupid to have suspended it. At least there are other markets.

I think you are right.

Will the statists join the train to protect themselves while trying to sell everyone else out?  Probably.

https://www.coindesk.com/vaneck-proposes-bitcoin-etf-again


Eventually the statists will approve an ETF.  It is just a question of when.  Will this time be different?  Who knows.  Will it be a positive for the bitcoin fiat price?  Opinions seem to vary, but my view is that the more options for people to use bitcoin, in this case for capital protection/capital appreciation, the better.

In addition to what others have said above, selling and repurchasing won't buy you much, if anything.  Merely depositing it, waiting and then withdrawing a different amount first, and then the balance later would probably do as much.  You should make sure you are complying with the laws of your jurisdiction whatever you do though.  Converting to ether or something else works too, but if you convert 1.23456789 bitcoins to ether and then the exact same back a few days later, someone might notice.

Much also depends on your goals and timeframe. 

- If you intend to hold it for some long time period, you can just leave it where it is.  Once taproot is active, it will create some additional privacy improvements that you will be able to use to protect your privacy.
- If you intend to gamble with it now and IF online gambling is illegal in your jurisdiction, then you should consider different options.

So, is your goal to hold or something else?

Yeah, you are right.  It is too bad that Okung lied about it or someone lied to him about it.

He is a big bitcoin supporter though.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/sports/panthers-russell-okung-will-become-first-nfl-player-paid-bitcoin

He seems to be vocal about the benefits of bitcoin, "life, liberty, and #bitcoin".  I suspect he would've preferred to have been paid half that in bitcoin back in September, October, or November given the increase in fiat price since then.


* Vocal, see, e.g.:
https://twitter.com/RussellOkung

Save it and keep it to protect yourself from the control freaks running that country.  That would be my advice.

Just don't spend it if it will get you in legal trouble, but it will give you an escape route if the statists in charge there clamp down further on people's freedoms.

I have (and have had) faith in the long term benefits of bitcoin and that more and more people will realize them.  

I would be surprised if it ever gets down to 6K again - it could happen, just seems less likely with every passing day.  There are still people who wanted to buy "when it gets back down below $1" or "below $30" or "below $100/$1000/$2000" and enough people realized that (a) bitcoin is getting more and more solid and likely to remain so as time progresses (e.g. 2010 or 2013 it was much more experimental than 2020), and (b) more people are coming into the market to protect themselves.  Every new high there are people say they'll rebuy when it gets to $X again, most don't or it never gets down there again.

There are no guarantees of course, but every year that bitcoin survives increases the odds that it will be a long term success.

The funny thing is, I remember reading here (and on slashdot) before it hit dollar parity that "the price was high."  People were talking about "when the price goes back down to $0.10 or $0.50" then they'd buy.  Then at dollar parity, people said pretty much the same thing:  "I regret not buy when it was still low [e.g. below $1]" and "the price is so high" and "it will drop below $1 again and collapse since it is a ponzi/scam/you name it.".

Ditto at ~$10, $30, $100, $1000, gold parity, $2000, $5000, $10000, and now at $25000.  Every time it is the same thing.  No one knows the price direction in the short term from here, it is just market timing which rarely works unless you are lucky.

If usage continues to grow both as a transactional vehicle and asset class, the price will follow.  Bitcoin's future gets brighter with each person that realizes the value proposition.  In X years will people be looking back and saying "I wish I had bought when the price was so low at $10000 or $25000"?  Probably if corporations and others keep using it to protect themselves and their shareholders.  Everyone who bought or mined any bitcoin prior to a few days ago has a profit (huge, medium or small).

The question is, did the people who at $20000 in 2017 and who were lamenting how they wanted to buy at a lower price and would do so, actually buy at $3000 in March of 2020 or did they hesitate again?  Most probably didn't buy.

No one knows - if anyone knew when it would start falling, they'd be Nostradamus.

Who thought it was unexpected?  Eventually as more and more people realized the uses, it seemed pretty expected that the fiat price would rise along with it.  Will there be ups and downs along the way?  Sure, it has been like that since 2009.  

The keys are: 1. Only invest what you can, 2. don't borrow, 3. don't keep your coins on an exchange (unless it is really reliable, and even then...), 4. Wait -give it time as even more people want to protect themselves from inflation, confiscation from statists/authoritarians etc.

To me it seems as if some people try to cause a panic by attempting to sell a (relatively) large number of coins in bulk.  The market seems different than in the past in that it is more dominated by larger entities that are buy and intending to hold, not buying and with the intent to trade.   This is good because it brings more stability, at least compared to years past.

Whereas someone dumping 50 coins at the market price previously might have cause more people to sell, now it is a buying opportunity for people who are amassing larger holdings of coins. 

I hope that it continues and institutional uptake and usage keeps increasing.  Certainly people who want to protect some assets should be buying here - and certainly at lower prices in the Spring of 2020....on January 1, 2021, hindsight really will be 2020.

Just don't sell anything until $500k+, then only a little.

I have to agree with this, although as you note, the guarantee fund wouldn't cover this since it was the government that imposed the seizure. 

I think most people here would agree (as does the OP in the thread) that if the OP had held his assets in bitcoin, the government couldn't have seized it.

I don't know why they would wait that long, e.g. until the next halving.  If they are convinced of the value of bitcoin, they'll do it sooner vs later.