update  Goddamn, this is more tense than a Agatha Christie novel on its final pages. Kidden aside, I really hope I can peel in time. Just got back and now getting rid of the last remaining scamkey funds which I foooolishly kept. If he does indeed peel remaining cryptobonds before 790416 block hits, I kind of slowly feel in the mood for a nice little Paris trip.  |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for creating and providing this script. If it works it will spare me hours upon hours - much appreciated.
Will be able to try out in 2 days and then report back on how it went.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the info and provided links. Suprised to see it was indeed back in 2010. Did anything similar occure many years later by chance? "While the transaction does not exist anymore, the 0.5 BTC that was consumed by it does. It appears to have come from a faucet and has not been used since." (from https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Value_overflow_incident) Not sure if I am getting this corretly - did indeed some BTC (0.5) of this malicious block end up on the current blockchain? How is that possible if the original mined transaction was made void during a fork? [...] - The bug was fixed in Bitcoin Core version 0.3.10. The fix involved modifying the code to use a larger data type (64-bit integer) for handling transaction values, preventing similar overflow issues in the future.
[...] The oldest Bitcoin core version on Github is 0.10.0 - where did you get your info from? |
|
|
|
The longer fork represents the consensus of the network, as it has accumulated more computational work and has a greater number of participants supporting it. This is not correct. As I explained above, the longest chain does not necessarily contain the most accumulated work. I could fork bitcoin right now, drop the difficulty to 1, and then churn out 10,000 blocks in a few minutes. My new chain would be far longer than the main chain, but have much less accumulated work because the number of hashes required to generate all 10,000 of my blocks would only be tiny fraction of the number of hashes to generate a single block on the main chain. The main chain, although shorter, would have the higher amount of work, and so everyone else would stay on that chain and not switch to my longer chain. By choosing the longer fork, miners align themselves with the majority, reducing the risk of their blocks being orphaned or invalidated in the future. No, they do this by aligning themselves with the chain with most work, which again, is not the same as the longest chain. That's a greate explanation and a pretty crucial point. So a difficulty comparison is done every time by just checking the zeros in front of the latest blockhash? Reading about the accidental-fork-by-miners issue, I remember there was one instance, maybe already 10 years ago, when this happened 6 or seven times in a row. It then became apparent that there was a bug causing this. Need to look up what happened there exactly. |
|
|
|
Not sure where to post this, but general discussion seems too unspecific. I remember a few years ago (probably 4+ already) I read about a bug in Bitcoin Core that, if exploited, would have allowed for the creation of unlimited coins. It was reported and fixed before any malicious abuse could take place. I found this article: https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-history-part-10-the-184-billion-btc-bug/But I thought it was something that happend much more recently (like I said, maybe 4 or 5, 6 years ago). Back then I was suprised I didn't read more news about it. Now I am starting to wonder if I imagined things and tried a quick search because I would love to know some technical facts about what actually happened. Hard to find so far... |
|
|
|
It is excellent. Innovative and smart. It will help BTC's adoption. Haters gonna hate. But this is going to skyrocket.
What exactly is going to skyrocket? Ordinals or BTC itself? The latter, yes. Ordinals will stay a strange niche and maybe, just maybe, get a FOMO bump every once in while. But probably only for very few tokens, probably shilled by insinders anyway. So no, it's neither excellent nor smart. Innovative, slightly, it's just an exploit for something that was never intended as a data storage for such things. Zooming out in time a bit I think the ordinal stuff will turn out to be a minor glitch,. One of the many tiny hick-ups the Bitcoin network experienced over the years with not much impact in general. |
|
|
|
"Bitcoin is dead." I knew it!  Not sure, but to call this article news is kind of an insult to true journalism and real news. It summarizes some of the not so new issues including network congestion and the usual some-regulation-here and-there-stuff. I am truely wondering, does this sort of article create any value for anyone? It's not particularily bad, just standard with some real info. But nothing that would/should influence any sort of action from individuals as well as companies, right? Just an example: "While it is yet unclear the catalyst for today’s sharp drop, the volatility is to be expected given the current state of liquidity, especially after larger market maker Jane Street and Jump Crypto revealed they were winding down their crypto exposure,” Medalie said." It's so generic and a similar sentence could with some slight variant probably be repeated every month or so. /end of rant
|
|
|
|
First things first, I have pretty average memory, I don't forget important things too often, but I also can't instantly memorize things to the tiniest details like some gifted people can.
Around 5 years ago I decided to memorize my wallet seeds to have one extra backup method. My main backups are pieces of paper + a flash drive with wallet files.
I memorized all 4 wallet seeds (12 words each) that I have very quickly by rehearsing them from memory and checking with the written down seeds every day. For a long time, maybe 1-2 years I kept discipline and repeated the seeds every day, but eventually I started slipping and forgetting to do it, especially if I was busy with something. This affected my memory, and sometimes I forgot or wasn't sure about parts of a seed (2-4 words) so I had to look at it again and repeat it more often.
Interesting thing about memory, it's easier for me to repeat them in the sequence that I was always repeating (seed 1 -> seed 2 -> seed 3 -> seed 4) than to repeat only one seed that isn't the first. Also I can't repeat the words starting from non-first word or in an order that isn't original. So to me it's more like keeping in memory one big 48-word seed than having 4 seeds of 12 words each.
So in summary, I think memorizing a seed is easier than most people think, and there's no need to come up with songs or rhymes or other stuff, they can probably even make things worse. But in general memory is not reliable, even in long term, so this shouldn't be viewed as a reliable backup. It's just a nice extra layer of backup that doesn't require any complicated setup, and its strongest upside is that it's always with you (until your memory fails).
Interesting topic. There is a lot of science based data on how to ideally memorize things, it's a multi-layered topic which for the best effect includes a combination of several methods. I wrote some of this down a while ago, let me check and maybe I can post some info on it here. One of these concepts is ORDER, so it makes total sense it was easier to remember all 4 phrases instead of one from the middle of the pack. Regarding memorized seeds: Totally agree, don't solely rely on it - instead, if you can, use it as an additional way of "storing" your seed phrase. The only viable method to solely rely on it would be short to medium term - for example to get funds out of an oppressive country without any hardware/solid (paper etc) evidence. |
|
|
|
This sounds intriguing - will check it out.
Any more user experience reports since last post from January?
I tried to find a list of supported shit-coins and tokens, but their website doesn't seem to give away much.
Their FAQ seems to only talk about Bitcoin, Ethereum and Binance-Chain. In the video I also see Solana, Polygon Dash and a few more, though.
Not that I can find. It's still displaying a bunch of coins that you cannot add and everything else is just scroll though the list. I really don't understand their logic unless there was a lot more planned to happen faster and then it just didn't happen. But a definitive list, or at least a list with a date of making the list and supported coins at that time would be nice. I tried it a while ago, and it didn't work for me, tried back in January when I posted and again did not have support for some crap coins I use and I just took a look now and still does not support some basic ones. May check back sooner or later, but if they don't want to bother supporting some popular alts, as I said above it's going to really slow down the adoption of their app as people look for something that does. -Dave Yeah, sad story. Great initial attempt but no follow-through. I did a little more research (without joining another discord) but this thing seems to be only semi-active and the lack of clear documentation is slightly discouraging at the moment. Are there any multi-coin open source wallets that are actually running stable with a big support for many coins? A nice desktop solution would also be interesting. |
|
|
|
|
As much as I like a tiny puzzle (or maybe even call it mystery) to be solved... I have to say it is becoming less and less important who Satoshi is or was.
The whitepaper is here. The software implimentation with hundrets of improved iterations has been running for over 14 years now. There is a tiny army of experienced and dedicated core developers.
Worst case, Satoshi would wake up and suddenly access his ~1m Bitcoin and dump it on the market. Sure, Bitcoin price would be eroded for a while, weeks, months, maybe up to a few years (I doubt it'll take that long). But after that coin distribution would be even more decentralized and Bitcoin would just move on.
I highly recommend Andreas Antonopoulos' educational videos. His stance has been clear: It doesn't really matter who Satoshi is. For some it may sound blasphemous, but it's also irrelevant what his *vision* for Bitcoin was. The working network is here and it is what it is. If you think it has failed in its original vision you are free to fork the open source code to your liking at any time. And see if a majority will share your vision. *Satoshis vision, coughcoughlol*
|
|
|
|
I can confirm....I checked my two remaining shitbonds and he has swiped the one for block 685296 with a value of 0.00105 BTC
Scum bag struck again.
There are two btc addys on a timelock....one is the receiving end after the broadcast and the other the loading end.
He stole the initial loading wallet! Goodjob SCUMKEY! Hell has a place reserved just for your fat ass!
Can you post the txid(s)? Sorry, this means I lost a couple cards too, so want to verify ..  And yeah, this means he's getting super desperate. I hope he's a homeless beggar soon. Fuckin criminal. Hope his mom has found out, if anyone has her name addres or contact info LMK. I spoke on the pohone with her briefly once, so she knows who I am for sure... I want to make sure he's got NO MONEY FOREVER at this point, fucking pos... Defintely a desperate move (or just dgaf) to swipe for $30 but I think that already became evident when the Playtoshis with 0.001 funding were swiped. how would that work if it has a broadcast time in the future? It means he kept the private key that was used to create the signed transaction. With that, he can access the funds normally. Yes exactly. And it's super annoying since a timelock-coin concept is so cool, but in a way it's even more trust based because there is no way to sweep before a certain point in time. So even when it's already eveident that the maker has gone rogue there is really nothing you can do to protect your funds. The only way to go with timelock is probably to create them yourself. |
|
|
|
Sorry is this for all 3 or just the two Bitcoin one?
All 3 bars... Why it's designated as a "suite". 0.101 BTCJfyi, min bid increments are 0.01 0.12 BTC |
|
|
|
|
Wow, can't remember a graded one for auction the last few years. Not familiar with magazine grading? It's just a 1 - 10 scale?
Probably out of my budget range soon, but can't hold back for now:
0.025
|
|
|
|
I have created time locks for myself - really from one of my addresses to another of my addresses but i then deleted the keys to the first address so I could never spend the funds - only broadcast the txn in the future. I asked krogoth how to decode yoggs txn and this is what I got: {
"addresses": [
"bc1ql0ckf6myqjy7amlucvt3rufphd4vfvu9f8dnrk",
"bc1qtx2vfyhlrzt5ftpl6xkmyrsktcdth5uggmvx5t"
],
"block_height": -1,
"block_index": -1,
"confirmations": 0,
"double_spend": false,
"fees": 5000,
"hash": "3cf1c12da9bf908875477cec8a5c1c85336e6a0206fd51018c3d92fe298458cd",
"inputs": [
{
"addresses": [
"bc1qtx2vfyhlrzt5ftpl6xkmyrsktcdth5uggmvx5t"
],
"age": 629810,
"output_index": 5,
"output_value": 105000,
"prev_hash": "25834a5633203402a34d64c6ec223ab4a0f9cbf9140b9319495db212010d05bf",
"script_type": "pay-to-witness-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967294,
"witness": [
"304402205d77e3da348fde5c1f9de5a3ec0ca9520f760e35e75381b361ead9e309fc342f022060708afc815aba84ab57e7e11df8e1e110bbc42b210fde60d0a7b251c0b0467801",
"03cc2cc807e9476b79754b81f8804e23ceb335cd0ca3bd3c701ef77c3bba65fa72"
]
}
],
"lock_time": 895536,
"outputs": [
{
"addresses": [
"bc1ql0ckf6myqjy7amlucvt3rufphd4vfvu9f8dnrk"
],
"script": "0014fbf164eb640489eeeffcc31711f121bb6ac4b385",
"script_type": "pay-to-witness-pubkey-hash",
"value": 100000
}
],
"preference": "low",
"received": "2023-05-13T20:58:56.036698217Z",
"relayed_by": "3.239.224.19",
"size": 191,
"total": 100000,
"ver": 2,
"vin_sz": 1,
"vout_sz": 1,
"vsize": 110
}
the first address is the cards address so shows no txns the second address shows the funding address - which on 4/25/2023 he emptied my funds (along with 12 other cards) and sent to this address: bc1qty5ugy4f09ym6sc8sn43rl4wnyxjp82c838glx which promptly sent to this address: 32yZEAztUcT461wYU96HfKjYvpq9csGAbU which is where the funds are sitting now. this is for the 2025 card - the 2023 one is still funded but he can take that at any time. NOTE: THE 2023 CARDS COME ACTIVE IN 826 BLOCKS - IF ASSUMING 10 MINS PER BLOCK THAT IS 5.73 DAYS - PEEL YOUR 2023 CARDS NOW, IMPORT THE KEYS - BROADCAST TXN AS SOON AS YOU CAN AND SWEEP THE FUNDS ASAPPerfect timing for me (to hopefully access the cards in time), thanks for this important reminder. Let's hope he doesn't have/ will use the keys until then. Did you write that script @krogothmanhattan ? Would love a version with comments to explain every line. It's a shame, love the timelock concept. Squirrelbits has at least one coin making use of it - hope to see more in the future. But yeah, it's a massive trust issue for sure in general. |
|
|
|
|
This sounds intriguing - will check it out.
Any more user experience reports since last post from January?
I tried to find a list of supported shit-coins and tokens, but their website doesn't seem to give away much.
Their FAQ seems to only talk about Bitcoin, Ethereum and Binance-Chain. In the video I also see Solana, Polygon Dash and a few more, though.
|
|
|
|
Just one question, maybe I missed something, but what if people not from Bitcointalk will start to use TalkImg? From what I understood from FAQ post, image simply won't be displayed if I will try to post it on Bitcoin.com forum for example?
I configured the server so that images can only be used on the Bitcointalk forum. But Hotlink protection is never 100% guaranteed, and eventually in some cases it may be possible to post elsewhere. Now, the disclaimer is clear: it's only meant to work on Bitcointalk. I am not responsible if they use the images on other sites, and from one moment to the next they stop working. I'm constantly making adjustments to the server, and this can lead to some parameters changing and something that previously worked outside of this forum, no longer works. That's why I say: this service is only to be used on the BitcoinTalk forum. Avoid using it in other places, there is a risk that it will not work or stop working in those places in the future. EDIT: I am not saying that this rule cannot change in the future, but for now this is the objective of the service. I prefer to keep this objective, because that way I know I can guarantee the best possible service. But in the future it might change. Pretty amazing that this is possible. Big shout-out from my side for this super cool and needed project. Just the right time when imgur seems to have gone down completely. Sent you a quick pm to maybe help out a little with translation. Pure curiosity: Do you have any data on how many image uploads and how much data is used already? How many uploads per day on average? |
|
|
|
I do wonder though, do we need more scaling discussions again soon? LN in its current state is not helping as intended - and larger money sum transactions will continue to be only available on-chain. I feel there are some similarities with the 2017 situation.
I get a feeling that if centralized services like exchanges allow LN deposits or withdrawals we'll see more people use that. I believe the average joe doesn't have enough incentive to use LN as of now since they rely on centralized services most of the time. I pay for some services with BTC (like VPN for example) monthly and most of them also don't use LN to accept payments, so that's that. Maybe I can try to look for one but there will be other issues like trust, unreliable downtime, etc. CMIIW. You are making a good point here. Regular CEX are probably still by far the largest interface to most people holding crypto - if they are getting used to Lightning that way it could indeed lead to a much higher adoption. Thanks for the link - does it scrape the LN network by itself or how are the services reported to the website? On a sidenote I was recently wondering if miners do have an incentive to slow down LN adoption / to lobby against it because it will ultimately mean a reduction in on-chain fees for them? |
|
|
|
It was OKX before, now Binance will stop providing exchange services to Canadians. It is because Binance is not able to meet the new regulatory policy concerning stable coins. https://twitter.com/binance/status/1657099651210969088?t=iyxq7EHvzHsRxxZKgjlpRA&s=19If you are from Canada, it is better for you to move you coins out of Binance. The same reason OKX withdrew from Canada: To OKX Canadian usersThe new commitments we are now requesting from unregistered CTPs relate to the following areas:
•enhanced commitments in relation tothe custody and segregation of crypto assets held on behalf of Canadian clients;
•enhanced commitmentsto precludethe unregistered CTP frompledging, re-hypothecatingor otherwise usingcrypto assets held on behalf of Canadian clients;
•a prohibition on the part of the CTP offering margin, credit or other forms of leverage to any type of client in connection withthetrading of crypto contracts or crypto assets on the CTP’s platform;
•new commitments from controlling mind(s) and global affiliates that affect the CTPentity seeking registration and relief;
•restrictions on the part of the CTP relying on crypto assets, including proprietary tokens issued by the CTP or an affiliate of the CTP,in determining the capital of the CTP for excess working capitalpurposesand in determining the capital base of the CTP;
•enhanced commitments in relation to the filing bytheCTP of financial information with the CSA on a regular basis;
•enhanced commitments in relation to the retention of a qualified Chief ComplianceOfficer (CCO)during the pre-registration process;
•a prohibition on the part of the CTP in respect of clients buying or depositing Value Referenced Crypto Assets (commonly referred to as stablecoins)through crypto contracts without the prior written consent of the CSA; and
•a prohibition on the part of the CTP in respect oftrades in crypto contractsbased on proprietary tokens, except with the prior written consent of the CSA. What a hardcore way to handle stablecoins - it's practically a ban. I wonder where this stems from exactly: - The need to protect against anything that could threaten a government-based stable-coin or - Protection for stable-coin users because of the fear that they may be innsuficiently backed which could result in massive losses when the card-house collapses In any case, I wonder why Binance doesn't just shut-out any stablecoin based trading on their platform instead of a complete withdrawal from Canada. |
|
|
|
Lot 1: .1802
Lot 2 - 0.1021
Lot 3 - 0.012
Winners Thank you for the bids gg Was watching from the rail with awe. Seems the longer I wait the more unlikely it will be to get a Casascius (incl holo) for an affordable price. BTC0.1802 for the "Ugliest physical coin" is a new ATH, no? Might part with mine, if thats where we are.
Probably looks better in real, it's massive and shiny after all. Does have an ugly vibe to it, though, lol. Still a crazy piece of [Bitcoin] history. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
