15 ) This now empty wallet, is the one that you should move to the btc1 client or whatever other fork to access your coins
And when you sent your coins in step 14 someone just took that transaction, along with all the others, and replayed it on the other network, just because he can. Now that wallet is empty on both blockchains. You see, it is not that "simple" when there is no replay protection. |
|
|
|
|
We shouldn't worry about things we can't do nothing about. Let along if they have small effect on Bitcoin anyway.
So you shouldn't worry about it, but there is drawback when people cash in their free coins, as often they will join their coins together and cash in all of those free coins in a single transaction, which hurts anonymity of Bitcoin users. There are also maybe some psychological problems with them, but I mentioned a practical one.
|
|
|
|
You can check with even more antiviruses using https://virustotal.com/ , you will be able to pinpoint all the AVs that flag it and all the ones that don't. Just make sure not to upload any private files to that website, like the wallet file or maybe even log, just something you are sure isn't very identifiable, especially if you are running a Tor node and care about anonymity as well as security. |
|
|
|
I don't think there was any confusion  The OP asked if he had to chose "legacy" or "segwit" wallets on his hardware wallet in order to get "free" coins after the segwit2x fork. I then proceeded explaining that bitcoin cash was a hard fork, it now has it's own blockchain. I explained that segwit was a softfork, so both "legacy" and "segwit" wallets share the same chain. So, i explained that when the segwit2x hard fork would happen, it did not matter if you chose "segwit" or "legacy" as your wallet type in your hardware wallet. After the segwit2x hard fork, transactions generated by both the "segwit" and "legacy" wallet's unspent outputs *should* be spendable on both the old chain, as they will be spendable on the segwit2x chain. This is what i wanted to convey, and i think it's still valid.... However, you are completely right about the replay protection. I haven't dug into segwit2x, but if it doesn't have proper replay protection, you have to be carefull. There are ways to circumvent the problem tough...It's not even hard to do: how to avoid replay attacks:you have a wallet, containing the private keys to spend unspent outputs spendable by address X. there are 2 unspent outputs. At a certain block height, there is a hard fork. You now have 2 unspent outputs on chain A and 2 unspent outputs on chain B. IF you buy a pack of cigarettes using the unspent outputs on chain A, the seller can replay your transaction on chain B, and steal your funds... However, if you create a NEW wallet on chain A, and a NEW wallet on chain B, then spend your 2 unspent outputs on chain A to fund an address generated by your new wallet on chain A, and do the same for chain B (spend all unspent outputs on chain B to fund an address from YOUR new wallet on chain B) the risk is gone... Yeah, I read it again, you were correct.  The whole thing where OP called segwit2x "segwit" was confusing I probably thought you were talking about the other one or read it wrong, I don't remember by now. Sorry for calling you out when you were correct  As to further comment on your post I replied to earlier, if I understand everything correctly here, S2X will accept the witness data from this Segwit network. It wouldn't make sense for them to implement new and/or different segwit protocol. |
|
|
|
|
I spent some time trying to get that evidence of extortion and as much as I gathered, Lauda admitted to trying to extort in order to get a confession or some further info about that person and his alleged scamming. Now I don't see any evidence that an agreement was made before the attempt of extortion, apparently there might be a pgp encrypted message, but gpg asks me for a secret key for that, but even then, you can't really prove it happened before the extortion unless they put a hash of that agreement in the extortion message and shared both of them after the fact. So something shady could be happening and if I had evidence that extortion happened, I would believe that Lauda should be treated as responsible, since he didn't provide proof that it wasn't for personal gain, but since I couldn't get that evidence either (I don't know what the encrypted message that was shared is) I can't really make that claim.
|
|
|
|
i Secured my blockchain account & Gmail account with 2FA, another thing is also i did not share my identifier, Password, backup phase with anyone. no hacking activity in my computer system. when i login to blockchain every time i received attempt mail in my registered mail id. i secured my wallet with world no 1 security which provided by google. checked my gmail activity log on my computer no hacking my Gmail so how is that possible to anyone can stole my all coins when my computer system off.?
I mailed and Rise too many ticket to blockchain but they didn't answer me.
I need positive answer from any knowledgeable person.
A person can never be certain that his computer wasn't compromised. It is entirely possible that you got hacked and that somebody just saw your backup phrase while you where checking it out yourself. Besides, google's security is far from no 1. No 1 would be if you had a paper wallet and if you really had hundreds of bitcoins, then I really don't understand why you didn't use a paper wallet for so much money. 2FA has been broken for years, by the way and trusting any service to keep you safe is unwise. You should have taken the security in your own hands, as these services make best targets for hacks due to their high value. You could go more in detail to figure out what exactly happened, to give you some closure, but if your coins are in another address, they are gone, no one can get them back other then the owner of that address. |
|
|
|
|
As achow101 mentioned, it is possible, but you won't be able to be certain that it will work first try and an exact detail on how you should attempt this will only be apparent after the fork. So prepare yourself for a lot of uncertainty and possible complication. You will also need to be well informed after the for, to see what exactly should you do to try to split the coins.
|
|
|
|
anyone knows the safest wallet in computer to store your bitcoin? something similar like MEW for ether perhaps..?
Bitcoin Core is the most developed and reviewed wallet. The fact that it is a full node client is also crucial for the security as that is an only way to be certain that funds are in your account. MEW is an online wallet, to my knowledge, and the security in online wallets is the lowest. You don't even have those coins, it is the exchange that keeps it for you, let along that you store them securely, which those online wallets get hacked all the time. So at least use a light client like Electrum if you don't want to run a full node. |
|
|
|
That is not the case. At least in the western nations. The women are increasingly taking advantage of the laws and using them to torture the men. Have you noticed the divorce cases involving celebrities recently? Most of the time, it is the men who end up paying a huge chunk of their life savings as the alimony. Women doesn't have to part with their savings.
That is very true, to be honest. It is very hard for a man to get custody over his children, even in cases when it is obvious that he is more responsible and stable. There is simply a stereotype about men being irresponsible parents and when it comes to something as important as children, some judges simply don't want to ignore those stereotypes. I think it is important for us to always keep in mind not only that there are unfair treatment and evil people on both sides, but good people as well. |
|
|
|
|
These games between countries with nuclear missiles are childish and can be very dangerous. It is like people forget, that there are nuclear weapons, since the second world war, and that no one can win a battle against a country with a nuclear arsenal, you can only choose to die with them and the rest of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
This looks like a game that I would be lost in for months if I start. I am sure I would love it, but something tells me (probably the apparent simple design) that I will be locked in my room, not eating, for weeks. It looks like one of those games that steal your life away and can't resist when you get into it. I just can't afford that anymore, as I don't have as much as free time as I used to when I was younger.
|
|
|
|
|
None. Most ICOs are scams and shouldn't be trusted. You should invest in Bitcoin and not expect to get very rich very quickly with no work. Why would you buy something for a certain price if they can't have any competitors yet? ICOs set their own price for a coin which defeats the free market purpose. Just buy coins after you see how they are doing. Why would developers undersell their coins? They will oversell them. And what is the chance that you know more about the real price of a coin then the people who know all about the coin, since they created it. Just don't waste your time and worries, buy Bitcoin and hold long, that is a way to go.
|
|
|
|
Your arguments are good, but itīs not the sustainable living i mean!!
I was thinking about take care of nature, saving resources, climate change and so on...
Not to live that you kids have a good life too, to life that the next generations in general have it
The key, I believe, is try to make as little change as possible to the planet, whatever that change should be. So a closed ecosystem is the best option and it fits with our aspirations to leave on other planets as well. We could live underground and not cut down forests for no reason, let along farming and wood. We should try to develop underground farming to a higher level. Use heat from the core of the planet or from solar panels in the desert to generate electricity that we use for artificial light in our underground farms. Unlike some people, I actually believe that less organic and natural way of life is the best option for the planet. We should use GMOs to make underground farming more efficient and live our life with our inventions and interfere with nature as little as possible and let it run it's natural course without us. |
|
|
|
|
Not trusting companies and governments is crucial for security as well. Privacy and security often go together.
You should use open source software only, that is your best bet. So running a Linux based OS, for example, is crucial, otherwise anything you do is in the hands of Windows and hacks that happen all the time on that OS.
Neither Whatsup nor Google Chrome is open source, so don't use that either. The Tor part I agree with as well of course.
Tails OS was always best for privacy, but it is harder to make it persistent, so other Linux distributions should be good as well.
|
|
|
|
hey so i have a question here: Will Bitcoin fork again in November 2017? If it does, how will that affect Bitcoin Cash? and why bitcoin have to fork again ? what's the point
Yes, Bitcoin will fork in November, around 20th. It won't affect Bitcoin Cash at all from a technical point of view, economically however, who knows. Maybe traders will go to it keep their funds safe due to uncertainty of how fork will play out, or it might kill it as it as uncertainty grows in cryptos similar to Bitcoin, who knows. Nobody says that Bitcoin has to fork, at least not for couple of years, but some think that it needs to increase the number of on-chain transactions to prepare for the possible future high adoption. |
|
|
|
|
There are many topics about how unlikely it is to get an address collision. This is necessary for safety of Bitcoin, as if you could get a collision for your address, anyone could, which would make Bitcoin useless. So don't bother, there are no collisions if you generated the addresses correctly. There are quadrillion quadrillions of quadrillion quadrillions of addresses. 55k is nothing compared to that.
|
|
|
|
You say it's not safe to get the free coins. But you also say: if one has the private keys (like people with their coins on a ledger), you will get them automatically? And you also mention: we will never be able to use them. Every point you make is a contradiction to the previous  They are not a contradiction The point I was making is that you will definitely get the coins if you have your private keys. They will be on both blockchains and only you will be able to move them with your private keys. You will be able to move them and use them, however, you might not be able to move them separately, in which case, you kind of have to abandon one of them. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. I'm reading about this replay protection thing, or the lack of, and i'm beginning to see the problem now, i think So if my newbie brain is getting this right: Bitcoin core has no replay protection Bitcoin S2x will have no replay protection. If you have coins on both chains, and you send coins on one chain, there is a possibility you loose the same amount of coins on the other chain? If i understand this right, this is a serious problem when holding both Bitcoin core and Bitcoin s2x...  The truth is that it isn't just a possibility, it is near certainty. I said it might be possible to split the coins, but not by just sending them and hoping. Since, someone, somewhere will probably replay all the transactions. However, it might be possible to split them with other methods, that will not be 100% safe and the exact method will depend on the hashrate of both chains after the fork. |
|
|
|
Who will take the initiative to become the voice and take on the role of being the chosen representative of BTC?
The role of a chosen Messiah or Savior to help steer the road to a Crypto Future
Bitcoin don't need a representative, it is a decentralized currency not controlled by anyone, and that's one of its best features. Bitcoin's community is in fact its real representative. Mostly by Core developers who represent bitcoin, but in general every user has the right to do so, as bitcoin is open source and connected to everyone in blockchain network. There's no role for Messiah in bitcoin, unless Satoshi come back in this forum. But, no one can ensure to help steer the road for crypto future due to Government could do anything to regulate cryptocurrencies, whether to support or ban it. Not even then. He is an inventor, not an owner. By now, many people evolved Bitcoin, we are grateful to him of course, more then to anyone else, but he is not the only one anymore. The rest of the network deserves a right to represent itself. There is no need for a single person to represent such a vast technology, it would only bring the instability. He is a good and honest man to make a right choice of leaving the community and a God damn saint to never move his hundreds of billions of worth bitcoins just to insure the stability of bitcoin's price and adoption, as if the founder cashed out, people could panic. |
|
|
|
are bitcore dev's threatening to change the PoW algorithms?
No. They aren't even considering it, let along threatening it. Once you change the POW, both miners and exchanges will need to have to deal with it, so you would suffer from both a crisis of hashrate and liquidity.
Not really exchanges, just miners. It is true that big mining pools are often exchanges as well, due to the vast majority of coins they need to sell and the ease of setting up an exchange, but still not all exchanges at all. The point is that change in PoW really only affects blocks and not transactions, which exchanges deal with, but they use RPC calls anyway, so it is just enough for them to update their client. Miners however need new mining equipment as well. Defeat is never an option, we must find a way to stop the segwit2x hardforkers.
We don't really need to stop them, they have a right to fork off if they wish. We can just ignore them, which would probably kill their blockchain anyway, but we shouldn't be hateful like that, just ignore them for our own reasons. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
