It was always recommended to use a new address once the bitcoins are spent for the first time. This is a security thing, not the privacy one. As spending the coins from an address exposes the public key of that address. This potentially decreases the security as it adds a new vector of an attack and starts needing the security of public key cryptography used by Bitcoin. There are no known feasible attacks yet for the public key cryptography used by Bitcoin, but it is still a possibility.

As for the backing up part. As I said, it ain't a straightforward solution. Both have their benefits and costs. Will users rather create a new wallet once they get hacked or will they make a daily backup. I think the developers chose the one that seems to have less work in it and require less of the users and potentially save some funds from getting lost. The security is the same if you create a new wallet after a hack, but hacks are rarer then creation of new addresses, so it is less work for the same security.

No one is sure about anything, but there is no reason to assume it won't. Besides, blocks are practically supposed to be 4 MB now as segwit is activated.


There is decreased security in this that is unescapable. The only way to be sure that this is original blockchain is by having the entire history. A new node can not really know if this checkpoint is valid or not, not without the full blockchain. As for the verification part, there are already checkpoints in Bitcoin Core that are hardcoded and the client assumes valid, as far as I understand. And there are also options to remove the old blocks and just keep what you need, this is called a pruned node.


It is not that complex if you read about it. You can see the 3 part article describing it here to some extent https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/understanding-the-lightning-network-part-building-a-bidirectional-payment-channel-1464710791/ ,
It is a common misconception that LN is introducing middlemen. This would be very simple and nothing special at all if it was the case. Using online wallets you can already do this. Instead LN is a pretty smart way of doing this in a safe,trustless and decentralized manner. It is not perfect of course, but it is an amazing optional improvement.

As I said in my original reply, if you don't know you are hacked and you have a classic wallet, then it doesn't matter that your future keys will be unknown as hackers would still have access to your computer. They can't steal your bitcoins and you not know about it (hopefully).

If you know about it, then you change your wallet and there is no risk of them having new keys, since you create a new one.
You understand what I am saying?

I don't see a scenario where you are better of with a classic wallet and are aware of where your bitcoins are.
What would that scenario be?

Someone hacked you and stole your bitcoins? Then you just create a new wallet so hackers can't steal your future keys.
Someone hacked you and didn't steal your bitcoins? Then you create a new wallet when they steal your bitcoins as then you would have to know you have been hacked. And that period where you didn't know you were hacked, hackers would just update to the newest wallet you have with all the keys.

There is just no realistic benefit here, as you can always adapt to your situation.

Well it is not a straightforward solution to this. Other then risk of a hack, there is a risk of hardware failure and what if you didn't have time to make a backup before the disk crashed or what if you simply forgot? When you get hacked, you likely either know that you are hacked or your computer continues being infected and wallet continuously stolen. If you know you are hacked, then you can create a new wallet, and if you don't, then a classic wallet won't save you anyway.

I guess it is about the risk of being hacked vs the risk of losing a backup of your wallet. For a regular user, risk of getting hacked might be lower then of all the other problems that they can get themselves into on their own. And for users that need high security, well using a paper or a hardware wallet might be a better choice for them anyway.

If I am not mistaken, MoonBTC is a Bitcoin faucet, correct? It's been a while since I used those. They are an absolute waste of time to earn anything. They were just there in the early years to let people test out Bitcoin with some negligible amounts, just so they can see how it works. Nowadays you have Bitcoin exchanges and the Bitcoin fees are way to high to make transactions from faucets.

Please note that this has nothing to do with mining, it is just distributing free Bitcoin and is earning a revenue like many sites do with ads.
You can mine some altcoins however with your browser which would, I guess, qualify as "web mining". You can check out https://coin-hive.com/ for that. They provide a java script implementation of Monero mining algorithm.

Treca sreca...

Da, baguje sajt. Cesto se desava ovo sa ovim forumom. Ne znam sta rade sa tim milionima u bitkoin donacijama sto su dobili za njega.

If you don't want to deal with the transaction accelerators, then you can always use CPFP method.
Transaction accelerators are just services some miners offer, CPFP is part of the protocol that was created for bumping up the fees for already sent transactions.

Hahaha Ma nije problem, evo skrolujem jednu stranicu vec pola sata samo da vidim sta ima ispod dva posta.
Ja sam ozbiljno mislio da nas zezas.
Ljudi skrate po par paragrafa da ne muce narod, a ti celu stranicu covece citiras.

Inace, ide neko na meetup sutra u Miners pub? Ja bio samo jednom do sad, sve mi nesto iskrsne pred dogadjaj.

All I am saying is that whether you put up a fight or not, it makes no difference if you are just going to give power to someone else.
It will be the same problem with a different name. No matter who wins, the politics stay pretty much the same always.
You can rally the entire country, good job, but if it is going to end with the same power given to a new name, it is all for nothing.

If you are brave enough to stand up to your system, then do it right and change it from the bottom up. No elections are needed for a revolution.
Doing these little protests is just giving the authorities the idea on who to target and a practice to shut you down.

I have no political views in most cases and definitely not in Russia about which I know very little. I am just saying what makes sense to me.
We all see this all the time, in every country. Never has things changed in an election. Elections are for people who accept the system as it is and just want a new face with a new name.

I wouldn't be concerned with the price as much as the reason for why it dropped. The price of Bitcoin will not make me either a rich nor a poor man.
But the effect that made Bitcoin drop to zero will likely affect my life more.

So the question is, why would it drop? If it just dropped to zero (or close to zero) today, I would buy all of them (for nothing).

When did the problems of corruption change with an election? Don't sell people false hope. When you have problems on such a high level in a country or in the world, the problem is not in individuals, it is in the system. There will always be more bad apples, the problem is the system that allows them to come to power.

You will not change anything by just electing another politician. That would be a lot easier, but that never works unfortunately.
You need to change people, the system, not the officials. Even a good apple gets spoiled in a barrel full of bad ones.

You can also keep your blockchain on multiple drives if you use Linux. So if you have another hard drive you can start downloading the blockchain on that hard drive and then change the data directory to the one on SSD and make soft links to the block files on the other drive. (soft links are like shortcuts)
You can make soft links by using a command "ln -s <target> <shortcutfilename>", which will make a file <shortcutfilename> that will point to the <target> when accessed. In this scenario it makes sense for target to be on the regular hard drive while the soft link (shortcut file) to be on the SSD.

Using RBF is pretty good way to insure your transaction doesn't get stuck if you are unsure if the fee is enough.

But if your transaction is already stuck other then using transaction accelerators you can easily just use CPFP method.
Of course for CPFP you need to control the receiving address in the transaction or be able to ask the receiver to use CPFP to get the transaction confirmed.

You can use Bisq that is decentralized, so you need to ID verification. You have multiple payment methods and you trade directly with the other trader.
You will need however some bitcoins first to place in a multisig for the security deposit.

Disk requirements are wrong there. Blockchain has increased since then. I wouldn't even bother without 200GB.

You don't need a good CPU, the most basic one that could run fine a decade ago for most common tasks would be sufficient.
It just might take a bit longer to do the initial sync. The requirements are most basic, you pretty much just need a normal PC, even an old one will do, as long as it wasn't from more the 10 years ago, I guess.

Running Windows is a whole other story that I can't help you with, as I haven't run Windows in years and never used it for Bitcoin.
You can install Ubuntu and you will see that it is nothing difficult, just a different Desktop, but using a command line would give you amazing powers that you could never have on Windows and it is very basic to use it as well.
You have plenty of tutorials on how to install Bitcoin Core on Ubuntu as well as do any other basic operations. You will not have a problem setting it up, I am sure.

You can stop Bitcoin Core at any time during an initial sync or not and it will normally continue once you turn it back on.

I think that it is definitely fair that he pays you the current price for those bitcoins. Unless you think that you would have sold them by now or would be hacked as well, it is fair to ask from him the amount you gave him.

You can always meet half way if you are not sure. Current price plus the price at that time, divided by two.

I can just say that I would definitely have not sold my bitcoins since then (as I didn't) and that I would never hold them in an online wallet or centralized exchange. I would always have my private keys on my computer and only there. So if I gave someone a loan in bitcoins, I would expect bitcoins in return.

Stab him

Just kidding of course...that can get messy

Does he even have those bitcoins anymore? He might not be able to pay you back anymore and as price of bitcoins increase, he might never be able to.
I think that you should either demand your bitcoins now or forgive him. Waiting will just make the situation a lot worse as the price rises.

Probably should wait more then two weeks. It is a well known story of Bitcoin, where people wait for price drops that never come. History shows that it is never wise to wait for Bitcoin price to drop and you should buy as soon as you can or possibly wait for the local minimum, let's say when price is smaller then it was whole week.

Bitcoin needs to be at least ten times it's current price to take any significant percent of world currencies, not mentioning stores of values like gold.

You can already buy many things with Bitcoin, it is just that unfortunately these companies use Bitcoin payment processors like BitPay and don't actually deal with Bitcoin themselves. You can pretty much buy anything with bitcoins if you search for it.

Yes, those steps would work perfectly. Wish you all the best with your new encrypted wallet Enjoy!