What will be interesting to see is how exchanges and businesses react to this, as well as governments. The only reason governments are allowing Bitcoin to stay legal, or even neutral, is due the fact that they think they have the means to control it with efforts such as chainanalysis. Once/if BTC reached a point of actual fungibility in which the costs of trying something like chainanalysis are bigger than simply outlawing it, that is what I would predict would happen (that governments outlaw it and go into a full front attack), which will only make other governments become tax havens for BTC holders. Ultimately the price would most likely be pushed upwards but there would be an awkward period of, once again, "Bitcoin is dead" all over mainstream media.

By regular I meant what you point to be as bc1q. So bc1p is it for the new one. I didn't realize it was bc1q, but bc1 then random string. Im not a segwit user myself, still only use legacy. There's no way in hell the regular average joe user will notice any of these changes. That's why I insist: we need everything to be "mixed by default" somehow, and optional would be the clear transactions, ideally. What I mean is, the end user should just have to click "send" and that would be by default a mixed transaction. Then have some box you can check to not mix it optionally. This would be the standardized functionality of all wallets. That's how we reach proper fungibility. Otherwise we are going to start seeing horror stories regarding chainanalysis and innocent people ending up with BTC that was "tainted" attached to their names when they deposit in exchanges and whatnot. The only way to avoid this is that everyone by default mixes coins.

It's not a Kleopatra bug. His installation is most likely fine. I bet OP is, by mistake, trying to verify the installer.exe with the portable.asc file. Because both files are next to each other and similar in filenames, he downloaded the portable.asc file, and when trying to verify the installer executable you get the i/o 218136625 error. If you try by yourself, you'll see this is the same error that you get when you are trying to match the wrong file with the wrong signature. If someone else finds this thread this will be useful to be left here because no one pointed this out yet.

These things have to run at layer 0 to get any traction imo. We should have had better fungibility since day 1. Things should be mixed by default, what should be optional is making a clear A to B transaction. If we are going to have privacy, we want it to be as close to default state as possible. The internet went throught this already. We would have avoided the spying clusterfuck that it has become if it ran private by default. Only now ages later Tor is becoming more known as well as VPNs, but thats far from ideal. It's still nothing in the grand scheme of things.


Can't regular bech32 addresses begin with a p?

How far are we from rendering efforts like "chainanalysis" useless? As it stands, interacting with fiat exchanges is a risk by default. Most of us are regular people, we aren't criminals, yet, what those blacklisting services do is basically putting yourself into the insane liability of ending up in a risk linked to criminal activity because some of your addresses once pertained to an address that it's on their blacklists. On a long enough timeline, everyone's chances of having coins that are "tainted" increase to the point that it's absurd putting your coins in an exchange.

Every single wallet should be sending transactions that by default obfuscate things so no one is liable of this bullshit idea of having "tainted coins", in other words, actual fungibility. Until then, how is one supposed to deposit coins on exchanges? Again, as of right now, you are playing a sick lottery in which your coins may or not have traces of being tainted, and as time goes on and coins move, everyone's chances just keep going up.

You should ask these guys:

https://www.chainalysis.com

It's what many exchanges are using. Apparently they are busting $millions worth of BTC coming from "criminal activity". Binance is the latest exchange to be using this.

Using BTC on exchanges is getting increasingly risky. Forget about this criminal bullshit, for us regular users, it's still a risk to put your money into what is basically a lottery of your coins having or not "criminal activity" linked to them. BTC needs to get the fungible part improved if you want to deal with fiat frontends.

Are you factoring in taxes? those are some big numbers. Which are the % brackets on capital gains vs income tax on the UK? How did you acquire your BTC? In the US, I've heard if you hold for 1 year, any income tax that would apply expire and only capital gains apply. However the problem would be explaining to the administration that some guy on a forum paid you to post, that you acquired gains through forks, mining shitcoins and trading them on now dead exchanges years ago, faucets which have been dead for years and you  didn't keep any records... all those things add up into a tax nightmare hard to explain as most likely there's lack of documentation that got lost along the way. It's all licit origin, however, there is a risk they think you are bullshitting. It is a clusterfuck cashing out BTC in any scenario that isn't having purchased BTC in a regulated KYC/AML exchange, at your name with registered ID and keeping all buy and sell records. Other than that, you are playing a lottery in which they may or not think you are a dodgy individual trying to launder money. That's the problem for people that obtain BTC any other ways when they want to cash out. For some odd reason some people think they can simply cash out and "the burden of proof is on state authorities, they must prove im a criminal" as if that was a good idea. There's a lot of people that didn't do anything wrong stuck with BTC's not being able to cash out due fear of authorities, since they can't clearly prove the origin. I wonder how much % of that money is part of the BTC that hasn't moved.

Trying to make any sense out of this clusterfuck. So apparently (and I forgot about this) Bitcoin SV did fork from Bitcoin Cash. Now, on BCH addresses:

So the way I see it is that, people affected by this, will be the ones that had unclaimed BCH which remained in legacy addresses, but only the amounts that be sitting on p2sh... so to put it simple, any unclaimed amounts sitting on addresses that don't begin with 1 can be stolen. This proves in practice, an scenario in which the schelling point to hold your coins is addresses that begin with 1, and nothing else. Nobody will ever be stupid enough to break backwards-compatibility with addresses that begin with 1 (the original format) so seems reasonable to hold your coins in such format.

Now, if you bother with the clusterfuck that is claiming coins from a fork, then go for it, but a lot of people may simply don't even care they lose those coins all things considered. I mean, I would hate giving those guys "free money", but at this point I can't be fucking bothered with any of this nonsense, im trying to relax and enjoy the holidays, last thing on my mind is having to deal with this insanity to be frank. Remember that it requires that you move the entirety of your holdings, then download some dodgy software, then have to sync the entire blockchain of said altcoin, copy the empty wallet after you've moved your funds in there, and finally dump the damn thing. All of this without screwing up in the process.

Gmaxwell did address this on bsv subreddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/edr0av/massive_replay_theft_coming_to_a_scamchain_near/

And official bsv page says:

https://bitcoinsv.io/2019/12/23/bitcoin-sv-blocking-potential-p2sh-replay-attack-after-genesis-hard-fork/


Note: The theory is that it is argued if there were any "mistakes" here, and stealing funds was always part of the plan, they just got caught by gmaxwell.

So apparently, CSWcoin is going to hardfork in the near future. Said hardfork includes the fantastic idea of basically stealing people's unclaimed BTC, which means, if you didn't claim your BSV, those coins will be "confiscated" by CSW-Ayre's mining operation (which I presume are the only people mining the thing). This also includes that satoshi's "1 million" coins will be stolen. According to raw calculations, they'll get $85million. I mean, it's not a lot, but still, this has to be a joke right? am I taking crazy pills? How is people unironically supporting such thing at this point?

I assume most here didn't even bother claiming the coins. I mean, it's such a pain claiming a forked coins, you have to do much for so little, but I don't appreciate CSW getting free money, but still, I may just don't bother.

If this is not the case, correct me if im wrong on the whole thing, but that is what I extracted from what I've read.

I believe the initial shock would be negative for the price. Also my scenario includes mining operations being shut down, so with less hashrate comes lower price. Of course difficulty would adjust and someone elsewhere would find a good opportunity cost and open up mining operations. So things would go through this awkward phase were all exchanges with high liquidity are shut down, main market goes OTC... im talking really underground stuff, like going back to 2012. Eventually, long term hard money always wins, which means people that accumulated here get the fruits of understanding how hard money wins long term.

So either way, 1 million by 2032 or 100k by 2032 = rich.

What I think would skyrocket BTC automatically is if government made physical cash illegal, which I believe will happen somewhere next decade... so that's another thing to consider.

And onto price predictions, the current 2 scenarios I consider are:

1) 100k by 2022
2) 100k by 2032

Scenario 2 would have a very long cryptowinter, giving you the opportunity to stack tons of cheap BTCs. This scenario completes an hyperwave hitting around 1k-ish as the lowest low before a new ATH. However things are leaning up towards scenario 1), which would mean 1MM by 2032, but also means you'll have less BTC in your pocket.

Scenario 2 would need to include global warfare against Bitcoin. Like governments going all-in against BTC, closing ALL exchanges, threatening with possession of BTC as illegal, closing all ongoing institutional brokerage activities, no Bakkt, CME, ETF, none of that, all is cancelled. Making mining illegal, having the POTUS shitting on BTC every so often on Twitter.. you get the idea. BTC would be really underground during this period. I don't rule this scenario out because things can change fast and governments can become increasingly tyrannical during hyperinflation times. This would mean really cheap coins for a long time. During this time demoralization would be high, so it would be possible to stack at low prices. Once reality hits in as halving go on, panic buying would kick in eventually, specially by 2032 when the emission rate becomes almost flat.

I don't understand why people are ruling out this scenario. We have never faced a full blown attack, and I think it's eventually coming, which would fit this long crypto winter period I describe. Sure, like I said scenario 1 looks like it's forming, but things can change fast, fundamentals are not shown on TA.

In order to have a "rich lifestyle" you'll have to have your bitcoins taxed anyway, so it goes against your claim of "Good luck to them getting access to my coins."...

Suppose you have 100 BTC and price is $100k per coin, and you want to live a $10million lifestyle. You spend $1million on a nice condo and $100k on a car, you sell enough to make a decent yearly income from dividends, and so on... do you think the government will not ask where the money came from? because they will and they ask for origin of funds. What will you say and what data you have to back it up?

A lot of people live under the radar without flashy things because they couldn't prove the origin of their wealth (even if it's of licit origin, they didn't save the required documentation to prove so) and don't want to risk getting into a huge problem, so they are rich but still live a rather frugal lifestyle.

In order to bypass all of that with top accountants and lawyers I guess you would need a serious (9 figure or $billionaire) wealth, otherwise you can't pretend to be a big guy above laws.

If they were actual copies (clones), they would trade at 1:1:1. What we have is counterfeit Bitcoin, chinese Bitcoin if you will, vs real Bitcoin.
Just because something it's physical in the classical, tangible sense, it doesn't mean there aren't copies, and there aren't markets for them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUyCO3FXHS4

Those are the two scenarios im contemplating right now.

$100k by 2022: We continue going through the current (which in my book, has already started) accumulation period to shoot up to a parabolic move to 100k by 2022, then crash an 70-80%. We do not revisit lower lows. $1million

$100k by 2032: We go throught a "crypto-winter" of sorts, we visit lower lows (as low as 1k ish, completing the model of an Hyperwave). We get to pic a fuckton of cheap coins for a while because Bitcoin becomes pretty much dead again by normies and stablishment. Which means good news as we spend years buying coins in this limbo of 1k-3k. By 2032, it shots up to 100k as people wake up to all the time they've lost saving fiat instead of Bitcoin.

On both scenarios we end up rich:

Scenario 1, your current BTC will be worth a fuckton by 2032, even if you are not able to increase your stack by much anymore in terms of BTC as it becomes increasingly harder to add in +1 BTC due the higher prices. You are now rich.

Scenario 2, you have accumulated a lot of BTC through the crypto winter period, which means that by the time it goes to 100k, you are sitting on a lot of BTC, also rich.

The socket recv error Connection reset by peer (104) message happened to me while having Comodo Firewall enabled. So do this:


1) Close Comodo Firewall
2) Delete "chainstate" folder
3) Delete "peers.dat"

It will take a while as it generates the fresh files. I told you to delete those to generate them from scratch just in case. While it syncs be sure to disable ALL posible firewalls (and this may include going into the actual router setup, not only on your linux file) and watch the log again.

Edit: I see it's a Pi.

Well other things to try, discard it's an I/O error... can you plug another HDD and try a fresh install there?

And are you using an VPS?

And another thing to try.. can you try with 0.17? Some things changed since 0.18 so maybe you have something wrong in your config, for instance:

The rpcallowip option can no longer be used to automatically listen on all network interfaces. Instead, the rpcbind parameter must be used to specify the IP addresses to listen on. Listening for RPC commands over a public network connection is insecure and should be disabled, so a warning is now printed if a user selects such a configuration. If you need to expose RPC in order to use a tool like Docker, ensure you only bind RPC to your localhost, e.g. docker run [...] -p 127.0.0.1:8332:8332 (this is an extra :8332 over the normal Docker port specification).

If Bitcoin wants to be digital gold, you can't be having arbitrary countdowns in which you are going to lose all of your affected funds unless you move them from A to B. That is what has been my point for a while.

However, what do you really and concisely propose? I have not seen convincing arguments, when it comes to avoiding the need for funds being moved in case of an exploit on the algorithm (QC attack or otherwise).

Perhaps it's something we can't avoid, and every generation or so, you will need to do this, at least once in your lifetime.
With gold, the analogy could be that you may need to reallocate all of your holdings... the place in which they are sitting isn't supposedly safe forever.

Ese grafico es brutal. No veremos ese volumen de ICOs, altcoins, y en general "movidas raras" y exoticas de indole "criptomonedica" como lo vimos en 2017 con el pump a $20k. Vamos, o eso creo. Quiza veamos otra ronda de pumps de shitcoins varias en el siguiente rally a ATH de Bitcoin, pero no le doy mas que una oportunidad, sera la ultima para soltar lastre de altcoins. Para el halving de 2024 no preveo que existan altcoins, fuera de un par de proyectos, y para el de 2028, coincidiendo con la llegada de la "agenda 2030", preveo una dominacion absoluta de BTC con precios que ahora ni alcanzamos a imaginar. Para entonces BTC estara consolidado como valor refugio global, habiendo sobrevivido a lo que, preveo, puede ser un periodo muy oscuro de un ataque frontal de los gobiernos con baneos masivos, en algun momento en la decada de los 20's. Los que hagan hodl durante ese periodo son los que ganaran la partida.

Purism aren't safe.. it's an overpriced gimmick. You can't disable IME with the modern CPU's that are used in Purism laptops. It's a workaround with Coreboot but you still have Intel's propietary binary blobs. There's no workaround, you need old hardware, and you need to do the hardware changes I said, if you want to use Intel and be as private as possible. You need Libreboot, not Coreboot, and thus you are limited to a very small array of hardware. Same applies for System76. They are using i5s and i7s.

With AMD there's nothing to do, other than buying older hardware.

The moonboysa re the ones that came last and pump the price to insane levels. The smart people are starting to buy now, while learning about all the good news regarding the tech. I was really hoping to retest $3000 again and get myself a big chunk but I may be starting to become biased and deluded with a perfect entry. Im once again trapped in this feeling of wanting to buy now, but a part of me tells me to keep waiting, because we may see another dump. This is how I lost $3k entry point last time on Dec 12th...