LOL I posted this and price crumbled by 10$ in 1 minute  |
|
|
|
Has anybody noticed that the SELLING volume is less than half than the ASK volume? In other words, there's TWICE the request than what's available on the market. It's true there's no meeting on the price, but it's just a matter of time... sooner or later those that want to buy will accept that the price will not go down anymore, and the buy frenzy will begin.  This is Poloniex though, I don't know how it's going on the other platforms. What's your thought about the situation? |
|
|
|
|
One thing is sure: if you let somebody steal your cryptocurrencies, you are not good enough to... make a cryptocurrency.
|
|
|
|
Just my personal opinion on the matter..
I mean people still like to compare BTC to a ponzi -- well some of the bigger ponzis I've seen make it around 5 years before they start to fall or bust completely.
I'd think after year 10 it would be time to throw a huge party.
Bitcoin has grown hugely in the past 2 years. It only doesn't seem so because it didn't enter mainstream yet, but it's spreading hugely into infrastructures and finance world. End 2013 it was still a thing for nerds and anarchists, from 2014 up to now it entered the world of large stores and finance, almost 1 billion $ has been spent on infrastructures for Bitcoin. And banks are now scared of it. Now there will be the battle: first was ignoring, then derision, now it's time for battle. Banks won't drop the game easily. But my opinion is that if Bitcoin makes it for 2020, it will become global before 2025. There's an interesting interview with Bitcoin evangelist Antonopoulos here, it would put peace into your heart if you read it |
|
|
|
As this matter is often asked, I thought I'd make this post, so that when somebody search for it, the answer immediately appears. Keywords: bitcoin number of possible addresses, banks, hackers, computers, numbers, addresses. ANSWERBitcoin has 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 of possible addresses. So let's make one hypothesis: a set of banks wants to destroy Bitcoin by generating addresses. They buy 1 million of computers or equivalent computational power. It's already nearly sci-fi, but let's believe that it's possible. Each computer can generate 1000 addresses in one second: that's something more than 30 billions of addresses per year. So we have each year 30 billions of addresses * 1 million of computers. That's 30'000'000'000'000'000 of addresses in one year. If banks let run those computers for 10 years, they would still have only 300'000'000'000'000'000 of addresses. That's still infinitely less than: 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 of possible addresses. Edit: user shorena, that knows more than me about the subject, just suggested the following: My GPU can do ~38 million per second, lets just take 35 million addresses per second, to make it easier.
If you are considering an attacker that has money, I will assume 4 GPU's per machine, so 4 Million GPUs (1 million computers) at 35 million per second or 140,000,000,000,000 keys per second in total. 140'000'000'000'000 * 60 * 60 * 24 * 365 = 4,41504e+21. Let's make it round: 400'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000 addresses per year. As you can see, it's still infinitely less than: 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 of possible addresses. But there's another thing to hold in account: each address needs memory: I would also suggest you add disk space, because every key needs 32 byte at perfect storage and with the above keys per second thats 4480 TeraByte per second. I would dare say that it's not so much important the computational power, but the memory, because when you can fill 4480 TB in one second... you need hard disks that will probably be available in 2050. So, as you can see, even going for a worse scenario, there's still no chance to dip into the immense number of possible addresses available in the system. And it's not even a question of address generation speed only, but more a question of hardware, of memory hardware. |
|
|
|
As long as you have your seed you will not loose any bitcoins. You can create a new wallet in parallel to the old one. Safe it under a different name (e.g. wallet_1) and you can even have both open at the same time. If you want to be on the safe side you can make a copy of your wallet file. You can find it here: C:\Users\YOURUSERNAME\AppData\Roaming\Electrum\wallets\ You might have to change the settings in windows to see hidden files and folders. Thank you, dude, gonna try it today  |
|
|
|
Did you create the wallet with Electrum 1.x or 2.x?
Did you change the default gap size when creating the wallet?
What happens if you create a new wallet using the same seed?
I think I created the wallet with v.2. I didn't change anything, as I don't know all this technical stuff (and here we go again: looks like a wallet for coders, not for common people). I don't know what happens if I create a new wallet using the same seed, I'm scared to try and lose everything. |
|
|
|
|
I deleted BALANCE and TX from the pic, of course.
|
|
|
|
Addresses are shown in used if they have at least 1 transaction but the balance is 0.
You can reuse them if you like an they would go back into the regular list.
But it is good practice to not use them again.
The label does not matter.
But I have a list with ALL addresses used and no more to choose from, that looks like a bug to me. This is how it looks:  |
|
|
|
Electrum automatically creates new addresses so that you should always have 20 unused addresses available.
Isn't this the case for you?
Change addresses can't be moved to the normal addresses area.
They are from a different path of the BIP32 tree.
I don't know if it's working correctly. The RECEIVING addresses are all used, they are 8 and they are all labeled, and under USED there's another one used and labeled, nothing else. Addresses in CHANGE are 11 and 1 is labeled, and in USED under CHANGED are 14, one is labeled. I can't understand the BIP32 tree: too technical, I don't know what it is. However, for me no matter under what tree the addresses are generated: I, as a user, don't care about that. I would like to organize them in folders in example, and I can't. This wallet interface is made for CODERS, not for USERS. Maybe it's time for Electrum for the next step and implement a decent, beautiful, comfortable UI? Smartphone wallets are making steps forward in regards to user interface development. |
|
|
|
|
Thank you!
BTW how do I add addresses???
In the Addresses tab I can't find a way to increase the number of addresses.
Also, I can't understand the use of CHANGE and RECEIVING.
I used all the RECEIVING ones, and now one in CHANGE, and can't move them.
Is it possible to organize them?
Electrum should work a bit on the interface, it's very spartan...
|
|
|
|
|
Can I uninstall the old version after I installed the new one or should I uninstall the old before?
I am scared of uninstallation, I don't know where the wallet is stored.
|
|
|
|
Regular people are refused to use Bitcoin or doesn't understand why it's important except for criminals and speculators.
Transaction times are too slow... The list goes on. Everybody I know already know what Bitcoin is but they are not
interested.
So it's a matter of time when central bank(s), government(s) or bank(s) create their own crypto currencies and block chain
based services more advanced than Bitcoin. Same happened with the internet: In the beginning it was free stuff and
small open source projects, now it's completely dominated by few huge companies who collect all the revenues (Google,
Facebook, etc)
So when this will happen to block chain and Bitcoin will become obsolete?
(Please no delusional believers "Bitcoin will replace fiat" type of nonsense comments)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c"BitPay is a global bitcoin payment service provider headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia.[2] It was founded in May 2011 by Tony Gallippi and Stephen Pair. BitPay provides payment processing services for merchants, and is one of the largest bitcoin payment processors.[3] In 2014, BitPay started processing $1 million USD daily.[4]" For example, Ebay volume is around 90 million $ per day. But Ebay established in 1995, while Bitpay established in 2011. The situation is much better of what it seems, it's only hidden to the mainstream, but it will explode sooner or later. In my opinion, Bitcoin will serve, together with a bunch of other cryptos, for 20-30 years, before being replaced by another possible technology... but there's also a concrete chance that Bitcoin will evolve and adapt to hold up to the end of the century when hopefully there won't be the need for any form of money... or humanity will have wiped itself nearly entirely. |
|
|
|
I came to figure out, why would a consumer/customer use Bitcoins?
You have to pay the 3 cent fee, while you dont have to pay anything when paying with a credit card.
So what is really a benefit for using Bitcoins, customer wise?
I don't know about your country, but I have to pay 3 euro per month if I touch my credit card. Then there's the anonymity factor. Then there's if you want to open your store you don't have to pay a bank or credit card for transactions. Then there's you don't even need a bank account (1.5 billion of poor people cannot access a bank account). But this apart, Bitcoin is not about how much you earn or save now, but how much are you INDEPENDENT FROM BANKS. Remember Greece. Remember Argentina. Remember Iceland. When people will understand this, Bitcoin will enter mainstream globally. |
|
|
|
Still waiting "soon" we'll take the world..
Stop waiting, that soon might be 30 years. Better concentrate on earning more bitcoins and developing it. The demand will come after. Nah, Bitcoin will either be globally used in the next 10 years, or it will decline miserably. It will either work or not, and people will keep adopting it or something will happen that will destroy it. Its value will soar in the next few years as it will continue to grow in representation of tangible goods... or it will crumble down because banks and governments will win the war (I don't think so, but everything is still possible). |
|
|
|
Gold, hands down.
Bitcoin is for gambling/trading volatility on steroids, not a serious long term store of wealth.
LOL you are going to regret this post |
|
|
|
Gold is the investment of last resorts. When the stock market and other markets (like Bitcoin) are doing better people are motivated to get on board, trying to ride and capitalize off the wave of appreciation.
I wouldn't dabble in gold to much. There's significantly less appreciation potential in gold than there is in other assets.
I agree with this, gold was very precious in past times, but more recently other metals have acquired much more importance and gold price is no more as stable as before. I wouldn't buy gold for my savings. |
|
|
|
ehhh...how to say this politely...You're wrong.
First of all, its 1626 words. 1626^12 = 3.4 * 10^38.
It's the same as 2^128, or 128 bits of security, which is the same for any bitcoin address
that has already spent funds. ECDSA for Bitcoin is 256 bits which provides 128 bits of
security. Unspent addresses benefit from additional security because of RIPEMD-160 hash,
increasing it to 160 bits. However, electrum uses key stretching of an 100,000 round hash
once you know the seed, increasing the security to 144 bits.
You ARE correct that human generated phrases POTENTIALLY could have much higher
levels of security, but it doesn't matter because A) 128 bits is beyond brute forcing
by any form of classical computing (do the math and see how many super computers
and millions of years you need) and B) Bitcoin is limited to 160 bits of security no
matter what.
However, its impossible to measure with certainty the entropy level of a human generated
phrase and potential for error exists that does not exist with computer generated pass phrases.
Great explanation, thank you! And it's not rude to say that someone is just wrong, we can't know everything However, as the two methods give presumably good enough protection, we are still on the line that a human generated phrase can be remembered more easily than a group of random words. It wouldn't require too much work at all to allow a user to write his sentence, check that he uses caps, lower letters, punctuation and possibly numbers. The random words method could be left active as an option. I agree 100% that its possible to create a good passphrase with a very high probability of it being ultra secure IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING. But since many people do not know what they are doing, Electrum chose to idiot-proof it. As I wrote: it's easy to put a check in it. You press enter and there's no punctuation and no caps and the sentence is not long enough and various enough: the program won't accept it. Easy. |
|
|
|
ehhh...how to say this politely...You're wrong.
First of all, its 1626 words. 1626^12 = 3.4 * 10^38.
It's the same as 2^128, or 128 bits of security, which is the same for any bitcoin address
that has already spent funds. ECDSA for Bitcoin is 256 bits which provides 128 bits of
security. Unspent addresses benefit from additional security because of RIPEMD-160 hash,
increasing it to 160 bits. However, electrum uses key stretching of an 100,000 round hash
once you know the seed, increasing the security to 144 bits.
You ARE correct that human generated phrases POTENTIALLY could have much higher
levels of security, but it doesn't matter because A) 128 bits is beyond brute forcing
by any form of classical computing (do the math and see how many super computers
and millions of years you need) and B) Bitcoin is limited to 160 bits of security no
matter what.
However, its impossible to measure with certainty the entropy level of a human generated
phrase and potential for error exists that does not exist with computer generated pass phrases.
Great explanation, thank you! And it's not rude to say that someone is just wrong, we can't know everything However, as the two methods give presumably good enough protection, we are still on the line that a human generated phrase can be remembered more easily than a group of random words. It wouldn't require too much work at all to allow a user to write his sentence, check that he uses caps, lower letters, punctuation and possibly numbers. The random words method could be left active as an option. |
|
|
|
Are you telling me that... the dictionary used in Electrum is well known and available? So I'm sorry, but this fixed automatic method to generate the seed is TOTAL AND UTTER BULLSHIT and my proposed method is infinitely better. Why? Because if I'm an hacker I can just test all the WORDS, I DON'T NEED TO TEST CHARACTER AFTER CHARACTER! I know the words! So I only need to swap ENTIRE WORDS instead than CHARACTERS, it's so fuckin stupid! If the dictionary is 1000 words, then the number of possible combinations in the seed is 1000^12! That's 1 followed by 36 0. I don't say it's little, but it's surely waaaaaay less than a sentence human generated with some punctuation, numbers and caps. Basically, this automatic seed generation is 12 "bytes" long: the number of words used in the seed! Only a Byte is 256 combinations, while the dictionary has 1000 combinations (I don't know how many words are in the dictionary). But SURELY this method has NOTHING with testing characters, any hacker could just test WORDS. Really, I wonder how nobody can see this. Shit, I thought the dictionary was internal and encripted in the software, this is incredible, an incredible fallacy.  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
