I use an electrum wallet. But I am a little confused and I do not understand much. Is there any definite explanation for this? So if I send you some money, what should I give as a miner fee?
If you have electrum open go to Tools -> Preferences and select the Fees tab. Make sure you have use dynamic fees checked. This will add a slider to the Send tab where you create transactions. If you want a quick confirmation (e.g. when you buy something) move it almost to the right so that it shows Within 2 blocks (or 5). In the next block is usually overly expensive in comparison and probably not worth it unless its some sort of emergency. If you have time (e.g. because you are just moving funds around between different wallets of yours and can wait a day or two) move it more to the left. Dont change these settings until you are more fimilar with fees. Keep in mind that the estimates are not perfect and that you usually have to wait a little longer than estimated. A typical transaction will be ~250 bytes so you can just divide the fee you see by 4 and have a rough estimate what you will be paying in btc for the transaction. Note that this is not true if you receive funds from faucets, I have writte a lengthy explanation as to why here[1] if you want to know more.  [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1044399.0 |
|
|
|
-snip- Do we really need to cram more information into the table? This is supposed to be an overview, which is why the detailed section was removed.
I don't see why not if the information is useful (not saying that this would be). -snip- Because it adds another dimension to the table which makes it more complex. I also argued that the information is only useful to a small subset of posters. We are catering at posters here after all. Why does it matter whether or not the campaign uses SMAS or not? |
|
|
|
Not really, the address is either used (for payments) or not. It wouldnt be in a state where both is equally likely.
if 2 people have an cat (same address) in a box (wallet address pool of 20-100 addresses yet to be used) but cannot yet see if its an active address ready to jump out and walk around (collide and be spent by other person) or not.. ... have they yet collided..  my point is that you can never know until you do something. -snip- Hmm, makes sense seen like that.
Gmaxwell and others have been advising against brainwallets for a reason... they are not and will never be safe.
-snip-
That was not the reason, the reason was and is that humans are bad at producing sufficient entropy for the brainwallet to be random (see the post by franky). This is true for the security of all wallets, if the entropy source sucks a collision is (significantly) more likely. |
|
|
|
I just checked my credit logs and found one bonus which came out of nowhere, i think its new year bonus   2017/01/07 - 12:03 PM Bonus 0.01138819 Bonus Does other also got the same amount like above in bonus? 2017/01/07 - 7:18 AM Bonus 0.03013997 Bonus
Thanks for the bonus btw. |
|
|
|
More of a question here for learning purposesTrue, this is what a send to two addresses unknown to the wallet (no private key) would look like. Considering the time the transaction took place its likely that the change key was one 100+ ofter the january backup. I am not getting how the return could go to an address about which your wallet does not know. I only see 2 options: A: If the client knows that all keys in the old keypool have been used up (sync is recent enough), it will simply re-generate new private-public keys. This happens if you unlock the wallet to make a transaction. Hence return should go to a newly (at the time of transaction) generated address. The client keeps track of the number of unused keys in the keypool, yes. This has little to do with syncing the blockchain, its entirely local. It requirest blockchain data to determine "used" though. B: If the client does not know that all keys have been used up (sync not completed up to the point where the last address has been used), then it will send the return coins to an old address in the old keypool (say 99/100), which has already been used before (!), but for which you also ought to have the private key in the old wallet.dat. In this case the return address would have 2 transactions in it.
We are talking about a restoration from a backup. More below. Please correct me if this is wrong, after all, I am here to learn.
Based on this and the transaction ID, the 13 BTC change was the only input to the return address, so I would say it is a new address generated when you sent the transaction. (Had 13 BTC been sent to a return address that was used sometime after your January backup (I do not see how that would be possible), that address would likely have another transaction in it as well. Being also old, it is quite probably that it was already used.)
BitcoinNewsBR
1. The transaction in the UI does look like if it was sent to an unknown address(mentioned by shorena), as generally return addresses are not shown in the UI. Are you perhaps using an extension/script to show these as well?
2. I think a "Private key for address X is unknown" also appears when you try to dumpprivkey with the wallet locked. I assume this is not the case.
No dumpprivkey 1HxeCXGT11wVwy78gsVrzFfkfdijQE9rct
Error: Please enter the wallet passphrase with walletpassphrase first. (code -13)
3. Have you tried to sign a message with the return address? I saw this recommended somewhere as to double-check if you don't have the private key for an address.
It should not make a difference. 4. If you haven't already, you could look at the commands listaddressgroupings and listreceivedbyaddress, they might tell you some additional info.
-
What I think happend is the following. OP created a backup in January and kept using the wallet. The wallet kept refilling the keypool whenever needed, but these are not part of the January backup. Sometime in September the 101th key since the backup in Jan was used as a change address. When the wallet was restored from backup. It recognized the transaction because it had one of the keys that controlled the input that was used. Since it did not recognize any of the output addresses it marked them as external and thus is showing them in the overview, whereas it would not show a change output. |
|
|
|
[ img]https://i.imgur.com/QDQtsl3.jpg[/img]
As you can see above , that what happened to me.
I've spent more than 30minutes here but my activity did not match with my post.
Can anyone explain what happened actually?
Activity has nothing to do with time spend. Read the sticky -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0#post_faq |
|
|
|
Also how the organizer of the RAFFLE choose a block? Is he do it as the time at which the RAFFLE closes and the current block which is going on or on some other basis?
We cant tell you that, because we dont run the raffle in question. I personally would set a fixed time (including timezone) and the nearest block to this time would be the one. Should two blocks have the same time difference to the given time it would be the later. Something along those lines so every can know in advance which block will be the one. A (random) number block in the not to distant future might also work. |
|
|
|
Thanks, I dont have to trust you in order to understand it, which I havent yet. Probably need to do it myself in order to fully get it. It also seems that my rating has little effect anyway. |
|
|
|
schrodinger's cat
Not really, the address is either used (for payments) or not. It wouldnt be in a state where both is equally likely. if you cant see it, did it really happen?
Thats rather philosophical, but idea that the world only is in motion when humans perceive it is rather strange to me, so yes. |
|
|
|
and it won't ever confirm because of the High-S value. wrong. 1) miners are able to confirm transactions with High-S values. 2) these transactions do not have High-S values. Its not the BIP 68 version 1 thing either though. I tried to understand it yesterday but gave up after some time. Wana point me in the right direction? |
|
|
|
first of all this is not about the probability of a collision, we all know about that
let's assume that one happened already, there is a way to know if this is true? how can someone be sure that one address was not replicated already aside from the improbability?
If the address wasnt used but someone else also has the private key, you cant know. |
|
|
|
Hello . .just by surfing on this forum i find RAFFLE .. its that numbers are taken by buyers from 0-9 and a-f . And then the organizer of raffle choose a block. How this number or alphabet is calculated through numeric block example 444600 etc  Each block has a height (e.g. 444600) and a hash (e.g. 000000000000000000f2085ab75fa5170fb1df5a335c79e78426063487486418). Without knowing the raffle, they probably refer to the (last digit of the) hash of the block with height X. |
|
|
|
I have bought a new PC, in which I've downloaded BTC-core 0.13.2. I set my router to open port 8333. The inbound and outbound connections are working well to the network . I am planning on running it 24/7.
However I am still I not listed on bitnodes.21, claiming I am unreachable. Can someone advise?
You need to forward the port to the local machine if your router does NAT and you need to open the port on your local firewall (if any). Once you have done that and bitnodes still does not see your node, feel free to send me a PM with the IP, Ill send you a full port scan back. |
|
|
|
Hey guys im looking for bitcoin cold storage?
Any prefer site you know, kindly share and pm me thanks
Cold storage literally meany offline, so there cant be a site where you use an offline wallet. You have to do it yourself, e.g. with an old laptop. |
|
|
|
-snip-
was raped, who's fault is it?
-snip-
Lets not go there, its a bad analogy, see below. -snip-
I see hacked accounts every single day here. It sucks. I hate seeing people's reputations get ruined for a few bitcents. The hackers are to blame of course but assuming you ever find them, would you ever really sue them for the $100 in damages? Obviously not. So it sucks (I know I already said that) but someone needs to take responsibility. Who should it be?
No matter what security you use, whether you're using a very secure computer or you use the same password on every website there's one person to blame: the hacker. Yes you should protect yourself but that doesn't mean it's your fault if you get hacked.
I really hope I never get hacked. Ever since I've joined bitcointalk I've been so much more careful with security so I hope that means I never get hacked. The problem is I've seen people turn on each other like wild wolves here.
Maybe let's come up with some kind of consensus. Let me know if there is a better option that should be in the poll that I didn't think of.
The attacker is always to blame, but the person attacked has to take responsibility for what happened. Its your account - same as its your body - if something happens to it, you have to live with the consequences of the attack regardless who did it. If your body was used to take out a loan, yeah the rape analogy starts to fall apart here. I doubt a rape victim has to deal with problems of damage done to others because they have been raped, at the very least I hope they dont. Lets put it aside. If your account was hacked and used for nefarious reasons you are not to blame (unless maybe you have been careless about security), but you have to suffer through the repercussions same as you cant just put a rapist in jail (Im sorry I know I said Ill put it aside) and suspect the victim to be fine. Why is this so you might ask, its a digital thing, it should be easy to just revert everything. Well for one you cant just revert the feeling that someone was using your account. At least for me this is already a violation on an emotional level. More importantly IMHO though you can not proof you have been hacked and we tend to be very paranoid here. In order to avoid 'I didnt do it, was hacked' as a get out of jail free card, there has to be consequences if there was damage. The original owner shouldn't be let off free. We all have to stand behind the actions of our account, Negative trust should be automatic in the case of default of a loan. Theymos believed so as well. think that marcotheminer should return the account now since it was probably hacked, but everyone should give yussuf89 negative feedback for being unable to stand behind his account's actions unless he pays 50-75% of the loan principle. (This is just my opinion -- I'm not going to try to enforce it.)
I personally think the best way to go is if both victims agree on something they can live with. A 50-50 split might be in order in many cases though.
btw, thanks for the reminder to change my password. If anyone has doubt its still me, ask for a signed message (PGP or BTC you know the drill). |
|
|
|
I tried the -addnode command in Terminal but I get the following error:
/Applications/Bitcoin-Qt.app/Contents/MacOS/Bitcoin-Qt -addnode=<50.155.31.101:8333>
-bash: syntax error near unexpected token `newline'
With the blockchain file updated on the other computer it seems to be opening consistently now.
Remove the '<' and '>', since you are synced up now your node should build up an up to date list of peers anyway, so you might no longer need to do this. |
|
|
|
|
is it encrypted? (starts with a 6)
|
|
|
|
-snip-
Another problem which can be avoided by simply waiting for the transaction to CONFIRM.
-snip-
Well, not for the person participating in the "doubler" as they have to send first. For everyone else, yes. |
|
|
|
What the hell do I do if it doesn't confirm?
Double spend it. After 72 hours most nodes should have forgotten about it. I don't really feel like losing 1.06 bitcoins.
Do the bitcoin's go back to my original wallet if there are no confirmations after a certain amount of time?
Depends on your wallet. The 1.06 bitcoin's were sent from bc.i to a local bitcoins address I had, intending to sell. They refund it after some time (might even be the same 72 hours, not sure). I have no idea how to double spend, I'm not all that techie gifted.
I've messaged Quickseller to see if he can help me.
Edit - Took about 3.5 hours in the end but I finally got a confirmation. The necessary 2nd & 3rd confirmations followed soon after.
I rarely ever use bc.i, most of my stash is in cold storage but I fancied selling what I've earnt over the past year or so from signature campaigns.
I've learnt my lesson, don't use bc.i standard fees. I always pay high fees when using Core to get quick confirmations but messed up here.
Getting a confirmation is always the easiest solution  |
|
|
|
i used gedit bitcoin.conf and gedit bitcoin and i was able to open the file but both .bitcoin and bitcoin.conf are empty ! there is nothing in both of them so i don't know why the command bitcoin-qt gives an 'payxfee' error ?
-snip-
.bitcoin is a folder not a file. Are you sure you are in the correct folder? What does ls -al return? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
