I was wondering, what do you think it's better for readability?

In here, you're mod-ing 7 with p instead of (x³ + 7) with p:


If you mod (x³ + 7) with p, you will, indeed, get:

If you use a centralized exchange, then you hand out many, important, personal stuff such as who you are. While you may achieve a significant proportion of anonymity (using CoinJoins, mixers etc.), it's still not enough to cover your untraceability. The fact that you've given away where you live, your phone number, your credit card / bank account, your identity etc., says a lot by itself. Those individuals behind the exchange can sell your info to even chain analysis companies.

So, I'd say that beyond purchases of cryptocurrencies, you should be really aware of who you're giving this sensitive information. Especially when you want to retain anonymity.

Due to a recent disagreement, I think it's advisable to define what's a full node.  Definitions are strict, so wherever you consider I'm wrong, correct me.

For every computer that is directly or indirectly connected to the Bitcoin network, we say that it consists a node of the network.  These nodes can either share the block chain, be servers of lightweight clients, contribute to the lightning network's capacity etc.  So, anything that sends and receives information to/from the Bitcoin network can be referred to as a node of it.

A full node is a node that forces all the consensus rules^[1].  They download every block that is sent to them and verify its validity based on these rules.

Myths about full nodes:

• They necessarily keep the whole chain.  False.  Those that discard past blocks are called pruned full nodes or pruned nodes for short.
• “Full” stands for full features.  False.  “Full” stands for full verification.
• Full pruned nodes do not contribute to the network by relaying blocks.  False.  They can advertise themselves as having the latest blocks and therefore, can help the network's bandwidth.

---

[1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Consensus

If they use that bitcoin during the period that it has fallen since you make your purchase, then yes. They're in a loss.

If by “not using it for paying something” you mean to use it as a currency, then it's mostly due to volatility. Note that there are less and less fluctuations as the market cap rises. That's true, because it makes it harder to manipulate.

I get your point, but you have to understand that the percentage changes of the price of the U.S. dollar are far, far less than bitcoin's. Yes, Turkey Lira's dropped by a lot more during the last month, but compare the times this happens with bitcoin and with any fiat currency.

What's better for the merchant to sleep easy? To trust the free market or the government?

This can work in our case only if you know the address you deposited the bitcoins. It should be listed in your outgoing transactions in your Coinbase account. Or have you already found the address?

What's “HODLER”? Is it an exchange I'm unaware of?

---

Let me understand this; you do have found the address, but you can't find the exchange which is shown in walletexplorer.com?

Was the wallet we're searching an exchange wallet for sure? Even if it wasn't a “USB wallet”, it could be a non-custodial one such as Electrum, Bitcoin Core or Armory which means that no third parties hold your money. Have you searched your emails for “bitcoin” just to see which exchanges you're registered at?

Why did you send the bitcoins from your Coinbase account? Did someone recommend it to you? Please elaborate so we can assist you.

You clearly don't understand why bitcoin was created and I can acknowledge this from that very sentence:


So, I advice you to leave those technical-analysis books with attractive targets and start learning about it. Here's a great website to begin with:

• Bitcoin Wiki
• Learnmeabitcoin.com
• Bitcoin Information & Educational Resources

Here's a brilliant writeup which describes in the first page the purpose of this innovation; read it: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.

Why should you verify an already-verified set of outputs?

That has nothing to do with pruning. Alright, let's take it in another way:  What if a hacker replaced your UTXO with his UTXO while you're running a full node? Once you had verified the outputs you'd have no way of knowing if your verified outputs changed.

The only difference is that full node does the IBD once.

I feel lucky that I was into that 90%. Let's go now, 118 years left for the rest 10% to finish!

That would be true if the demand remained the same since 2009. Generally, you can make an assumption from that law only in the short run. In the long run, the demand cannot be considered fixed.

It's really a challenge to have a conversation with you, franky. I confess.

Running a pruned node means you don't have to trust anyone! As I said, whether you run a node who does keep the chain or not, you validate every single transaction you receive from your peers. The system works trustless-ly. What is this you dislike pruned nodes so much?

Huh? Don't pruned and full nodes differentiate only in the size of the storage they require? They both make a full verification.

If you find this interesting then here's something even more interesting:

As said by hosseinimr93, there are around^[1] 2²⁵⁶ valid keys, but the address' length is 160 bits^[2]. This means that there can only be 2¹⁶⁰ valid addresses. If you divide the total valid keys with the total valid addresses, you should get the correspondence of private keys to the same address.

2²⁵⁶ / 2¹⁶⁰ = 2⁹⁶.

This means that there are around 2⁹⁶ different private keys which correspond to the same address. So, each time you generate an address and export the private key, remember that there are more than 79 octillion others which are highly unlikely to be generated from any other person!

---

[1] The total valid keys aren't exactly 2²⁵⁶, but 2²⁵⁶ - 2³² - 977. It's the prime number P used for secp256k1. The curve is defined over the prime field of ℤ_P.
[2] For simplification let's take 1-of-1 legacy addresses.

That depends solely on the supply and the demand. If there's demand for C++ programmers and there are really few, it's understandable that they'll have a high income. Likewise, if there's not much demand for truck drivers and there are many, they won't have a high income.

Note that I'm referring to active income. Passive income is the one which will return you high profits. You should develop a skill that is in favor of your passive income.

I think that I just love what I do.

Yes, cause when I was writing those values I hadn't seen you changing the OP. @interiawp had also said that it's possible with 248 bit signatures (which I've never verified, though), but you just created a thread stating that you have a script which derives private keys from RSZ. This lured me into wasting my time.

Anything in your defense?

As if the character count makes the posts constructive...

Yep.

As n0nce pointed out, it's not about poking. I barely understand what you write and you should consider it justified if one does not understand a part of your text. Besides simple grammar mistakes such as improper usage of punctuation etc., some of your sentences don't even make any sense at all.

It seems like you're writing your posts in a rush while you want to shut me up.

And again, I don't understand what you're trying to mean in here:
If I don't understand that to get data, other people need to have the data to give what? Then you conclude that others need to have that “data”. Should I assume the data is the block chain? Then, of which process is this the step one?

Here's a nice site to see fees by priority: https://mempool.space/

This post was made more than a decade ago. At those days, yeah, you could have your transactions confirmed for free. However, times have changed and due to the rise of bitcoin as a currency, there are much more transactions in the memory pool; so many, that the miners choose the transactions based on the best reward:size ratio. So you'll have to pay them, even a slight amount.

I don't understand. Do you expect us to give you an investment advice?

If you're referring to the lightning network, then you'll find me disagreed.

The network may be different, but the units are the same. Yes, beyond the 1 sat, the bitcoin network does not understand and it's foolish to say that you transact bitcoins (since it's only a promise), but prior that, it's real bitcoins. You transfer signed transactions that are normally accepted by the bitcoin network and, alongside, partake in a game theory where you're discouraged to broadcast any other than the latest transaction that is made.