thank you for the answers you provide. I appreciate your time.

What I ended up doing just for today is creating another legacy address on my core wallet and just using that one for my transaction.

I'm sure segwit is great and everything, but I can't afford a headache today if I somehow fuckit up.

I'll try another segwit transaction some other time when I have a more clear understanding of all implications of using segwit addresses from core.

I'm in the same situation as OP.

I wanted to try a segwit address to receive some funds from an exchange.

So I generated a new regular address (the old way) then I went to console and did command addwitnessaddress newaddress and got another address with starting with 3

Then, with the intent of confirming I own the keys, I tried dumprivkey on the new segwit address and got the same error as OP.

I would love some knowledge to weigh in on what I'm dealing with, at a practical level.

What exactly is this segwit address I have starting with 3, and why's there no privatekey to it?
What happens if I send funds to it? Is the balance held under the orig address?
What's the difference between this and the first non-segwit address?
Why should I use 1 over the other?


TIA!!

Thank you.

I am running Luke's BIP148 and mining at Slushpool/UASF since it was available because it seemed that nothing would break the deadlock and the BIP141 activation threshold was ridiculously set to 95%.  I realize I'm in the minority on this, but I hope there's enough of guys like me willing to do something to get Segwit activated one way or another.

Large miners claim they will be running 2x and activating SegWit by July 25, which will moot the point of BIP148.  This is 100% fine by me.

I will return to running the original core after Segwit is guaranteed locked in.  Hopefully the forking hash to 2x will be minimal and we won't end up with CoreCoin and BitmainCoin.

Is core planning on integrating Segwit2x?

If no, what exactly is core planning in regards to a BIP148 chain split or a Segwit2x hard fork, if anything?

I would go back to yesterday and not drink the expired chocolate milk.

Is core planning on integrating BIP148 or BIP149?

I hate running anything non-core but I really want segwit.

I didn't recieve ICO tokens after BTC invest.  Very sad and disapoint.



So far, SONM is a schrodinger scam.


(AND YES I emailed support@sonm.io)

There is version called btc1 that just released an Alpha you should research.

Do NOT TRUST your coins to this client YET!

I feel that if SegWit is activated, no matter the method, UASF BIP148 is success.

Taking profit is never a mistake.

Where does Wu think he's going to sell his new JihanCoins?  To the PBOC?

It's like when you have bathroom.  The body is splitting from the waste.  Until you can make it there, you might have an uncomfortable belly ache.

Unfortunate, but necessary.

Don't forget to wash your hands.

I'm no expert but I think what happens is you get a fork where all the hashpower goes to the 20MB block fork but those dumb bastards can't sell their coins because all the exchanges are broken.

The price plummets for months until someone can turn on a Radeon 5830 to mine on the segwit side until the difficulty drops after weeks or months. Segwit gets activated and we can all buy used chinese mining hardware at a super discount on ebay.

#UASF

Jeez Lauda, harsh... A noob with some comments about his real world experience of the Bitcoins.

I think you need to take a break from replying to franky and jonald.

 

Is it better to be infamous or non-famous?

Every time there is a big run up in price, it follows with a high mempool congestion followed by dump in price.

I think every time, it's a subset of soon to be ex-HODLers rushing their cold balance out of storage to exchange, LBC, etc to reap some well deserved profits, causing a mini-crash.

It's always the same.

I'm expecting a small-ish crash by May 15th.

Thanks for your reply.  I enjoy the speculation.

Have any secret covert ASICBoost public miners announced that their secret way of making 20% extra secretly still works fine on testnet, just without the extra secret 20%?

Have any secret covert ASICBoost miners have announced that "whoops! our covert ASICBoost chips don't work on segwit testnet" to the community when they tried?

Or would they more realistically say "gosh darn, these chips are glitchy and crash alot with segwit, well lets keep our mouths shut and try like hell to block segwit on mainnet for as long as possible, hopefully we can ROI on this stuff before anyone finds out"?

But I guess with the extra $$, glitches can be replaced and fixed up pretty quickly.  I mean you gotta make major, major chip fuckups to burn through $100 million(s) profit, right?

Segwit would break the ASICBoost part of hardware, right?

Can you please elaborate on which fundamentals you refer to?

(Serious question, I truly want to understand my ignorance in this speculation)

Assumption: Bitmain/Wu implemented covert ASICBoost in hardware chips giving 20% electricity advantage.

Assumption: Segwit would 'break' ASICBoost, invalidating the 20% advantage, leveling the playing field for all mining.


Here's my theory:  Assumption 2 is wrong.  In fact, segwit would break all of the ASICboost hardware rendering it useless.  Once segwit is activated, difficulty drops dramatically because all that ASICboost hardware must be thrown out and re-manufactured.


How much mining power would be immediately deactivated?
What would be the effects on Bitmain if this were true?
What would happen to the difficulty?
How long would the network take to recover from this disaster?

Ultimately I believe it would be a good thing, but would it be chaos for a few months?

I'm glad you agree with me.  (a lot of people seem to really hate LN for some reason)

Do you have an eclair LN node address to share?  Don't forget to open port 9735 to your eclair client in order to accept incoming LN channels.

And let me know if you need some testnet coins.

Cheers!