It looks like you imported an address to your blockchain wallet. Settings - addresses - imported addresses - scroll down - there have to be an address or addresses. Click more options, if you imported an address using private keys properly then you will see private key and transfer option. Only after writing down the private keys transfer your funds to blockchain wallet.

If an address is watch only then you imported an address without private keys.


https://support.blockchain.com/hc/en-us/articles/210353823-How-do-I-manage-Imported-Addresses-

https://support.blockchain.com/hc/en-us/articles/209564506-Make-a-Wallet-Backup

I am in favor of Segwit, off chain transactions, LN, Schnorr signature, these are necessary to prevent miner manipulation to some extent and also to give users a choice. I am not good with too much technicalities, basics, Segwit is a block size increase/block weight increase. Transaction malleability, 4:1, 1:4. If I am right the base limit is around 2 MB.

Now I guess this where the big blockers don't agree. I personally do believe 1 MB blocksize wouldn't be enough forever, sooner or later it needs to be increased. Big blockers believe a soft fork implementation to increase blocksize wouldn't be sufficient in the future and I guess Segwit + 2x increases the base block limit to 8 MB.

But hard forking the network three months from now would be suicidal. I am not dragging myself into the politics of bitcoin, just my opinion. Core has been working on bitcoin from the beginning. I don't know if Core would agree upon a hard fork or not. If yes then the Core developers and Jeff Garzik team of developers could work together to create a robust code through efficient planning and multiple testings and then implement it one year from now.

In my honest opinion I do believe bitcoin should scale with an equal blend of off chain and on chain implementations. Off chain solutions might be a bit harsh on miners, once all the bitcoins have been mined, incentives would be transaction fees only, a necessity for a PoW protocol, and off chain solutions would keep them in check.

As far as LN or big blocks are concerned, then the centralization argument can be put forward from both the sides. There is and would be centralization in some of the working modules of bitcoin, but as far the whole protocol isn't served into a platter and handed it to the government, I am good with it.

BCH has opened a Pandora's box. ViaBTC was planning to launch an ICO to buy/rent hash power to fork the network. Some individuals with heavy pockets wouldn't shy away from forking the network for their own personal gains. Splitting protocol, multiple chains/coins, uneven distribution of hash power, lack of decentralization and security. In the end bitcoin users would end up holding different pieces of bitcoins.

I had read a post on discussion thread today from an user asking when is the next fork so he/she can cash in quickly, no shit given about the consequences of a fork

Bitcoin is an open source protocol. Everyone can argue and create a lot of commotion, but at some point in time everyone would have to agree up on something or make a compromise for a cause which they believe in.

Since you already had bitcoins on Coinomi you converted it using the advanced derivation path. Do you want to move the bitcoins in blockchain to Coinomi or would like your BTC to remain in blockchain?

Either way you have to get the private keys. Blockchain wallet - settings - addresses - select the address with funds - more options - private key - warning - continue - copy the text below private keys, it is the private key (it's already in WIF format, you don't have to do anything) - write it down.



If Blockchain to Coinomi:

1. If you are okay with moving your BTC to Coinomi then select your bitcoin wallet in Coinomi, sweep wallet, enter the above private key and bitcoins would be transferred from Blockchain to Coinomi (0.0004 fee)

2. Then select BCH wallet, sweep wallet and enter the above private key, you will get BCH equivalent of BTC you had in blockchain wallet.

If you don't want to want move BTC from Blockchain.

3. After writing down the above mentioned private key. In blockchain you will find add option below default wallet. Create a new wallet and move your funds to it.

4. Follow step 2, BCH wallet in Coinomi.

Since you already had bitcoins in your Coinomi wallet, I guess moving your funds from Blockchain to Coinomi would be much more easier for you. Writing down the private keys of an address/s in your blockchain wallet is the most important thing.

This is the simplest way I can explain this, don't know how to get simpler than this Rather than opening multiple threads for the same reason, try to understand what anyone is trying to explain, it's not rocket science, beginner's guide.

1. A hard fork is a big event, it doesn't matter if the fork was initiated by a small majority, what matters is a hard fork creates a lot of uncertainty, instability right before, at, and right after forking and during this time having no control of your coins and just letting exchanges do whatever they want to do with your coins would be the stupidest thing to do. During an uncertainty if you give priority to free coins over control of your bitcoins then I guess some of us are guilty of giving this crappy advice.

2. Like d5000 mentioned, paper wallet to Electrum to Electron Cash (Recommended)

3. You can also get your BCH through Coinomi wallet, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2061341.msg20605324#msg20605324

PS: Hard fork or not, keeping a good amount of your coins on exchanges is a bad choice.

1. Go to your blockchain wallet. If you have multiple addresses with funds then note down the private keys (WIF format) of each address.

2. With addresses having funds there is a transfer option to the default wallet. Create a new wallet and transfer all your funds to this new wallet.

3. Install Coinomi wallet (Android), https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.coinomi.wallet

4. Backup the phrase and use a strong password, from the menu select +coins, Bitcoin Cash, below enter your password you will see advanced settings, add this derivation path M/44H/0H/0H. Your BCH wallet is created.

5. From the right menu select sweep wallet, enter the private keys you saved in step 1, you will have BCH in your Coinomi wallet. Repeat the process if you have multiple private keys.

Coinomi seems legit and safe, but use it at your own risk.

Got scammed on this forum:

1. You will see several bitcoin related ads on this forum, they aren't endorsed by BCT so before using them or transferring any funds to them it's your responsibility to do some research about these to validate their legitimacy. In case you got scammed you can start a scam accusation thread, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=83.0.

Sometimes you might get a refund, most probably not, but it would prevent other users from getting scammed.

2. You will see users endorsing their own services or products on this forum. The rule is to always use escrow when dealing with a fellow forum member, exceptions can be made if that user has a very good reputation or if you had several trades with that person, otherwise stick to escrow.

If you got scammed by an user then start a scam accusation thread and the best possible way BCT can intervene is by neg rating the scammer.

Generally got scammed using bitcoin:

Refunds are impossible with bitcoins so the best thing to do is avoid scams. Like I said, it's your responsibility to research, verify, validate and then decide is it worth spending your coins.

BTC-E posted an update today in the Russian local thread that they were able to access their databases and purses and they are currently assessing it and this information would be made public before the end of next week.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2063529.0

The first part of your question is a bit stupid, illogical. You will find shades of centralization in bitcoin in different fields, but still the protocol isn't controlled by a single entity, take that away the whole purpose of bitcoin is gone, then no difference between fiat/dollar and bitcoin, just another currency backed by a flawed monetary system and controlled by centralized authorities, governments, banks. In simple words, decentralization is what makes bitcoin unique, inherent nature, take it away bitcoin is dead.

1. Exchanges using hacked as a dummy reason to get away with users funds.

2. Exchanges itself getting involved in money laundering or other illegal stuff and thus being compromised by legal authorities and again users bearing the brunt.

3. Exchanges taking user privacy for granted and sharing user details with centralized authorities. It wouldn't be wrong to say that exchanges could share details of users who are involved or doubted to be engaged in illegal activities with the authorities and in the same tone it wouldn't be wrong to say that privacy is one of the key attributes of bitcoin and exchanges are bound to protect user privacy at all cost.

The solution lies in decentralized exchanges, something like Bitsquare, open source peer-to-peer trading with the exchange having no control over user funds and absolute privacy.

Most importantly it's always a bad idea to keep a good amount of funds in centralized exchanges.

Sooner or later questions like these would be asked.

1. Is Bitcoin promoting ransomware?

2. Is ransomware promoting Bitcoin?

The ransomware news definitely brings a whole lot of negativity to Bitcoin. Is it a planned approach to tarnish the image of Bitcoin? We don't know or it might simply be hackers making illegal use of bitcoins pseudonymity. Bitcoin does get attention with such events, but the irony is, it would compel people to stay away from it.

Storing bitcoins expecting ransomware, that's a hilarious approach, doesn't makes any sense. Instead of that spending on making systems invulnerable to viruses like WannaCry would be much more logical.

Among web wallets Blockchain is buggy, but in terms of security they are good, access to private keys, 2FA, passphrase, advanced options. Compared to online wallets that are prone to hacks and having no absolute control over your funds, paper and hardware wallets are always way too better, almost unhackable.

Paper and hardware wallets are means of cold storage. If you have a good number of bitcoins and don't spend them regularly then they are the best. If you have a good number of bitcoins and spend them regularly then keep a small amount in hot wallets, be it Blockchain, Electrum, android wallets like Breadwallet or Mycelium and store the large amount in paper or hardware wallets.

Paper or hardware wallets getting lost/damaged/burnt is as possible as your online wallet getting hacked, wallet service turning scam, DDosed and going offline, messing up with password or recovery phrase, account getting banned or locked with funds.

Hassle free sometimes proves costly.

Seems like bitcoins aren't going to be legal anytime soon in India. The inter-ministry committee formed by the finance ministry of India have been studying Bitcoin for the last few months and now they have recommended to the government to take steps to discourage the use of Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies by regulating commercial establishments and intermediaries. A complete ban wouldn't be possible, but the prospects of India legalising Bitcoin is looking bleak now.

https://news.bitcoin.com/indian-government-take-immediate-steps-to-stop-bitcoin-use/

Bitcoin would have a greater value than BCC, but at this point in time I wouldn't say BCC would die, maybe it would exist with having 1/4th or lower the value of BTC. The survival of an altcoin or any cryptocurrency entirely depends on market adoption and the purposes it serves, real usages. An altcoin created for the sake of small-term profits, pump/dump, speculation, no real usage becomes non-existent within a short span of time.

Right now there is no question of would BCC be competing against BTC, more about would it survive the market. A month or so ago it was about flippening, too much hype about it, with ETH's crash it ended. The same with current BCC's cap, it would be highly volatile, it would have to survive long enough to have some stability.

Bitcoin just needs to have Segwit activated (which would happen this month) and put an end to to the scaling drama to remain as the top cryptocurrency.

I have no idea how this whole D3 visualization thing works, but if you can then here is LN's github page, https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/releases/tag/v0.1-alpha

Bitfury successfully tested Lightning Network on Bitcoin mainnet, https://youtu.be/fqT-3xN8npA

Lightning-ready Bitcoin wallet (testnet), https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=fr.acinq.eclair.wallet

LN was successfully used for a real world transaction in April to buy a beer, first buyer being Roasbeef (one of LN's developers).

LN is ideal for microtransactions, apt for merchants, instant low fee transactions.

Coinbase is one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges. BCC is an altcoin which currently has no real world usage and with the current hash rate there is uncertainty about how long it would survive, at least it would be extremely volatile in the next few weeks. Even Coinbase added Ethereum after an year of its launch so IMO I don't think Coinbase did anything wrong by not adding just another altcoin which is yet to prove its mettle.

There was a flash crash of Ethereum in June on GDAX and taking full responsibility they gave out $1 million to cover traders losses when in fact it wasn't GDAX's fault, blame the extreme volatility of altcoins. A similar crash would have happened if Coinbase/GDAX had added support for BCC soon after its launch, another flash crash and then there would have been another backlash for reimbursement.

Coinbase had given the users the choice to withdraw funds if they wanted to access BCC so nothing to blame them for. Yeah Coinbase would face legal implications if they sell users BCC or enable BCC trading without crediting users with the BCC they deserve.


https://support.coinbase.com/customer/portal/articles/2844217-uahf-uasf-faq

https://blog.xapo.com/xapo-and-the-forks/

If you had 15 BTC on Xapo at the time of split then there are two possibilities.

1. Xapo will credit your account with 15 BCC.

2. Since you don't have access to private keys on Xapo, they will sell your BCC and convert it to BTC and add it to your existing balance.

Another one BITMIXUR.IO



Just replacing E with all the 26 alphabets. Reported it to Google.

1. Alice temporarily locks funds inside a LN payment hub to process an off chain transaction to Bob through a multi-sig address. Both Alice and Bob needs to sign to make it a valid transaction.

2. Payment hubs have no control over your funds, you have the keys. LN is entirely dependent on Bitcoin blockchain.

3. On chain transactions are necessary to both open and close a channel. Between opening and closing a channel you can make as many off chain transactions as you like. When you close a channel the last transaction gets recorded on the main chain, on chain transaction.

4. If both Alice and Bob agree to close the channel then it can be closed immediately.

5. Theft is possible during LN transactions, but there is adequate built-in protection to prevent such scenarios. If Alice closes the channel with the intention of scamming Bob, then the party who is trying to steal ends up paying a penalty.


https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Lightning_Network

Indians are highly dependant on these three exchanges. You can't blame them for not supporting Bitcoin Cash. Prior to the split they had made announcements that they wouldn't support BCH and asked users to withdraw funds before July 30. Maybe Coinsecure might add BCH option soon.


http://blog.coinsecure.in

Rather than keeping your funds on these exchanges if you had moved your funds to a wallet then you will be able to trade BCH on one of these exchanges soon.

Wait for another 6 blocks and then a block bigger than 1 MB needs to be mined and from that point we would have BCC. All this would take a few more hours (depends on BCCs hash power).

https://www.bitcoincash.org/activation
https://www.btcforkmonitor.info