If you're using an implementation of the server that has a simpler tutorial, feel free to give me a link please! The problem with systemd is that I get this:

I meant that I'm running the commands from “angelo”, which is the main user probably.

I don't understand. Should there be a command for daemontools that will start the electrumx server? The only thing that is mentioned about those tools is this:  https://github.com/spesmilo/electrumx/blob/master/docs/HOWTO.rst#using-daemontools

Thanks for that, but it seems that something else goes wrong, because I still get the same error. I reads that I haven't set a DB_DIRECTORY while I do have on scripts\electrumx\daemontools\env.

What would be the difference? I'm not sure if I have installed it as a regular user. I have used sudo for most of the commands, because it kept returning me that I don't have permission. The electrumx directory is located on the main user (angelo) and not on electrumx.

The bitcoin's testnet block chain is downloaded on my external drive. Not inside any of the ubuntu's directories. Could this be the issue?

This is how I've modified DB_DIRECTORY on scripts\electrumx\daemontools\env:

Next activity adjustment is in 5th of May. You'll most likely reach the required activity that day.

Merit isn't a number that increases based on your time you've been active here. It's a unit that it's been sent to users from other users to define the value of a post. Once you receive 2 merits, you'll be able to send 1 merit to someone else. People usually spend their sMerits to useful posts, so if you see a member with high merit count, it means that he/she has been helpful to the community.

You have reached 28 points of activity, but you haven't received any merits.

Because you need to be a Junior member and to be one, you need 42 30 points of activity and 1 merit.

Here's a useful thread: FAQ: Everything you need to know about forum 'activity, account ranks and merit.

I personally find it dangerous. Let me explain you the parts where I find incorrect.

You're choosing to generate the keys from a website. Whether if it's a malicious one or not, your wallet's compromisation may happen from a third party. Not to mention that you'll have to run javascript for the addresses' generation which is also not recommended. Can I ask you why you prefer to have a paper wallet instead of just writing a seed phrase? You will be, then, able to derive as many addresses as you want.

You probably don't know it, but WinRar isn't open-source. This means, that you'll encrypt using a compiled version of an unknown code.

I don't like it. It may work, but I don't like the way you've thought this.

I don't know how many people is this “several”, but I would have high doubts for the long term. I mean, how can you be so sure that a password that is more than 14 characters long will remain on your memory?

---

Here's a very secure way to do it:

0. Download electrum and verify it!.
1. Boot Linux.
2. Do not connect to your home internet.
3. Transfer the electrum installer that is verified to your freshly-booted machine.
4. Open electrum and create a new, standard wallet.
5. Write down those twelve words it'll pop you on a piece of paper..
6. Copy all of your receiving addresses and transfer them to your USB as a txt file. You can view them by clicking on “View” --> “Show Addresses”.  (Warning: The addresses, not the private keys!)
7. Get rid of the linux and copy that txt file to multiple drives.
8. Optional:  Store the piece of paper of with your seed phrase on multiple places, to prevent any loss.

You now have nothing to worry about. Everything's open-source, you have nothing to remember and you have only written down twelve words.

No, it doesn't have to do with that.

When you query a command to an electrum server, whether if you're using a watch-only wallet or not, you're sending the address, not the public key. Electrum nodes fetch the transactions related to that script hash and only those. If you search Hal's address' script hash among all those transactions you'll see that it has received 0.0159762. But if along with the hash, you search the public key you'll see that it's 50.0159762.

A better picture of the subject. Nowdays, when you sign a transaction and broadcast it, you're locking your funds to a 160-bit hash.

Example:

Back in 2009, you were locking your funds to a compressed ECDSA public key as shown:

I hope I made it clear to you.

Yes, that's because electrum doesn't display P2PK transactions and Hal's rewarded bitcoins were paid to his public key. For an unknown reason, electrum looks only for the transactions that are related through through the derived script hash from the address. Pay-to-public-key transactions aren't related to that script hash and that's why it doesn't return you the proper amount.

That was firstly answered by @ranochigo. You can find out more here: Electrum doesn't show rewarded coins.

Thanks. Are these environment variables located at home\<user>\scripts\electrumx\daemontools\env ?

Alright, let's see. I've redone the entire procedure, because I was very sure that I was doing something wrong.

I run electrumx_server on the terminal, but I get these errors:


Could it be a configuration issue?

Stating the opposite is also wrong. The fact that people accept it as a payment method makes it, indeed, a medium of exchange.

While I do believe that it should be considered by most people as a currency and not as an investment, I find it wrong to not consider it an investment. Bitcoin was introduced as a cash system, and thus, a currency, but an investment is any asset or item that will bring profit at some point in the future.

A house is a building for human habitation, but it's also an investment. Or an even better example: If you take part to Forex trading, all the national currencies are, simultaneously, investments.

There aren't many things to be mentioned about the complexity of the tutorial. As I said, you guided the reader step-by-step of how to verify the signature of the binaries, but what I find missing from this tutorial and generally from almost every tutorial on the internet is the lack of explanation. Don't get me wrong! Not the explanation that will make you succeed on verifying the signature. I'm talking about the answer to "why?".

Why would I need a private key to certify the public keys of others?

Why would I need to certify someone just to ensure that my electrum binaries aren't malicious? Why will I have to deal with an email address and how is it resulted from a file of non-sense characters?

Why would you recommend me to create a private key? Note that this can be very confusing for a newbie. Do I need a private key for the certification of Thomas' identity or is it just recommended after all?

I meant faster for the newbies who want to verify their executables. I don't know about the others but when I firstly verified electrum using this tutorial, I wasn't completely sure of what I was doing. I was feeling secure with the replies and with the greatly described steps, but I considered the method kinda complex. To be honest, I wasn't into anything related with Bitcoin a year ago, as you can see in the first page of this thread, so this is maybe why. 

Or I may simply have this weirdly paranoid symptom in which you want to understand every-single-thing you're doing, on a disgustingly detailed way, such as understanding the maths behind RSA/ECC. Anyway. Signed checksums might had a shorter tutorial than this one. Although, you're explaining everything perfectly.

While, they may prefer not to do this with the checksum-way, I personally find it ridiculous for them to justify it with the collisions. Despite the fact that it's never going to happen you're essentially failing the function your entire project relies on. It's ironic...

This is exactly what I said. To upload a signed message containing the hash instead of leaving a hash solely.

There shouldn't be anything wrong with this and it's quite faster than the other method.

How long will it take to get your ether? Never. How long will it take to use your common sense? It depends exclusively on you. You've been defeated by your greed and your common sense at the same time. In this world, there's no one giving free money to the throng.

Since you're dealing with cryptocurrencies, a scam-bargain, you should also know that the transactions are irreversible. But besides that, if Vitalik really announced such thing, what could stop me from withdrawing all his ETH by doing the same procedure repeatedly?

There are other simpler ways to verify a signed message, but GPG does fine, yes.

But if the site was compromised, and it showed a different hash, the signature using Thomas' key wouldn't be valid.

You never stop spread FUD, don't you? That is wrong, dear readers. To correct the above propagandist:  If some authority controls the majority of the computational power and wants to harm the network it can by reversing transactions or by generating empty blocks. The consensus has nothing to do with that authority since it's a general agreement. The miners don't vote for changing the consensus rules, you should have read this on a forum quote.

That is also not true. The last confirmed message of Satoshi was on Sat, Apr 23, 2011 when he replied to Mike Hearn that he had moved on to other things.