Actually years ago I once tried ElectrumX before but my old laptop's pathetic hardware seems insufficient for it. Thus I turned to EPS then. I may tried Electrs later. Thanks for your suggestion. -snip-
Time to move on to other substitutions maybe.
Heads-up, those other Electrum server implementations aren't as " lightweight" as EPS. If you're looking for similar implementation, Sparrow wallet has a very similar approach to connect to Bitcoin Core but supports descriptor wallet. That's if you're open to switch from Electrum to Sparrow. In case someone is interested to merge EPS to Electrum, Please consider replying to this issue ( posted by the dev himself): Fix EPS and build it into Electrum #8142Yeah, the lightweight one I seek. But I notice that Sparrow wallet doesn't come with an android version while Electrum does. Could I use an Electrum installed android phone to sign transactions generated by sparrow watch-only wallet? If so, it may save me much time and efforts as I don't need to install linux deploy things on my old cellphones. |
|
|
|
|
I reinstalled it last night.
It requires a legacy wallet created in bitcoin-core to serve as an rpc bridge to get onboard the full node.
If the wallet is not a legacy one, then comes the "Only legacy wallets are supported by this command" things when EPS fails to start.
However legacy wallets can't be created in bitcoin-core v26 the latest version neitherby GUI nor commandline nowadays.
I need to add deprecatedrpc=create_bdb in bitcoin.conf at first, then manually create a legacy wallet through commandline.
This whole process above reminds me that EPS is out of date. Time to move on to other substitutions maybe.
|
|
|
|
|
At least he knows one truth: Many morons can't distinguish paper bitcoin from true bitcoin on chain.
For those who don't own keys, paper bitcoin looks similar but can be created out from thin air thus cares no shit about 21m cap.
How does he know? Bcz he and his company involve minting those paper shit. He is among the scammers.
|
|
|
|
I don't wan't to use those so-called change addresses provided by Electrum.
Thus I always use pay to many function so I can manually chose change addresses. If you are not using the provided change addresses so you can redirect the change to a different wallet, perhaps a different address type to confuse transaction heuristics and blockchain analysis, or perhaps to deposit to an account at a service, then that's a great idea and good use of your change. If, however, you are doing as NeuroticFish suspects and just sending the change back to the same address it came from, then can I ask why you are doing that? It achieves absolutely nothing beneficial, it does not make future transactions any smaller, it does not save you on fees, but it does compromise your privacy and the privacy of other people you are transacting with (and potentially even your security in rare cases). I haven't reused addresses for quite a few years. Most time I just choose the next address to the spend address in the wallet address list, and electrum would colour it green so I know it's my wallet's address. Change jumping to different wallet address of mine happens sometimes for some certain transactions for the benefit you mentioned. |
|
|
|
|
I don't wan't to use those so-called change addresses provided by Electrum.
Thus I always use pay to many function so I can manually chose change addresses.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you still have thoughts of picking Bitcoin over Ethereum(Or any shitcoins being pumped higher).
Haven't you guys realised that any arguements you made against gold for bitcoin that can be simply changed and used against bitcoin for shitcoins, are invalid.
|
|
|
|
|
I may answer yes without hesitation 4 years ago.
But no at this time.
Is gold anti-inflation?
Check out gold price if you wish, then think why.
I don't think bitcoin in the future could bypass the tricks getting gold price entrapped right now.
|
|
|
|
What happens to the folks wanting to run a full-node in 20+ years when downloading the entire blockchain takes months and months to complete?
The size of the Bitcoin blockchain is increasing by linear progression (about 100GB every two years), while technological advancements in the IT industry continue to grow exponentially. For example, a decade ago, most personal computers had disks drives with a capacity of 320GB or 500GB. Nowadays, most new PCs come with drives that hold 2TB or even 4TB. In fact, storage capacity is doubling every few years and data transfer speeds are increasing even more rapidly.  https://www.statista.com/statistics/647523/worldwide-bitcoin-blockchain-size/So, unless the rate at which new blocks are generated dramatically changes, there is no concern that blockchain data will surpass the limits of technological advancement in the foreseeable future. Note:This figure only considers blocks data. If we include chainstate and txindex, it might have crossed 400GB right now. |
|
|
|
|
Staking bitcoin then got sth else(maybe you call it interest) is an attack vector to bitcoin supply limit.
|
|
|
|
|
OP doesn't understand why alts are needed.
Most people need alts bcz they are good pump&dump scam tools.
While bitcoin could also be used as such a scam tool but not as good as alts.
|
|
|
|
Based on their decisions they might as well just get on with it and ban Bitcoin every week.
As for Tor, can they even actually use it? As using VPNs are illegal as far as I know.
Some VPN providers in China are actually those guys who set up GFW. They build the wall then make extra money from drilling some holes. |
|
|
|
That’s the same thing with every country, if you’re using VPN to access a website that the government has declared illegal then it is illegal. I don’t think VPN itself is what is illegal in China, it is what you’re using it for; if you use it for something illegal, then it is illegal.
It is not the logic of CCP. In China, establishing international communication channels(VPN e.g.) without the permision from authority is illegal. (So placing a satelite receiver in China to download bitcoin blocks from blockstream satelite is illegal as well) While China gov never declared twitter, facebook or bitcointalk illegal.They just block them using GFW and they never admit they block those sites. But if anyone in China wants to explore those sites without permision, one has to violate the law. |
|
|
|
|
According to bitnodes and ethernodes, there are around 150 BTC public nodes and 400 ETH public nodes located in China.
CCP hasn't launched an ISP level blockade yet which is one of the few cards reserved in their hands.
Since BTC has 3000+ nodes in TOR (Can't tell how many ETH nodes in TOR) , I think users in China could still have access to full nodes then.
|
|
|
|
|
That bill will be read on July 14th.
BTW: Not Pass is one of the possible results.
|
|
|
|
I know this is not a perfect example but isn't it the same country blocked lots of other popular websites? I haven't seen such websites "collapse" because chain blocked them Just to show you how China is ridiculously full of censorship, check out how many websites and apps they have blocked so far  01. Gmail 02. Dropbox 03. Google Apps (Drive, Docs, Calendar, Maps etc.) 04. Microsoft OneDrive 05. Slack 06. Google Play (i.e. no downloading Android apps) 07. Hootsuite 08. Facebook 09. Instagram 10. Twitter 11. Snapchat 12. Pinterest 13. Quora 14. Tumblr 15. Reddit 16. AO3 17. YouTube 18. DailyMotion 19. Vimeo 20. Twitch 21. Periscope 22. Pandora 23. Spotify 24. Soundcloud 25. New York Times 26. BBC 27. Financial Times 29. Wall Street Journal 30. Reuters 31. CNN 32. TIME 33. Google (text and voice) 34. Amazon (Alexa) 35. Wikipedia 36. DuckDuckGo 37. WhatsApp 38. Facebook Messenger 39. Telegram 40. Line 41. Signal 42. KaKao Talk (Korean) 43. Medium 44. Blogspot 45. Skype (although it sometimes works, it’s not reliable) 46. Google Hangouts 47. Viber 48. Porn websites 49. VPN websites 50. Politically sensitive sites So it's just another day in China. 51. Bitcointalk since 2013. Besides, there is a bit difference between the block OP mentioned and you listed. When users enter those words in your list on chinese serching engines, there are still results. China gov block the access when clicking the result. But this time, no result about those exchanges would show up. BTW: Funny thing is, when entering coinbase on baidu, there are still results and valid address returned. |
|
|
|
|
It may damage the total mining hashrate. However it would also make the cost per hash higher.
Sum of the cost matters. So no help , no damage either.
|
|
|
|
|
I read some info from twitter.
They didn't recover 100% payment but 85% instead.
I guess
1.The hacker didn't move all the funds to certain exchange.
or
2.FBI didn't control 100% addresses of the mixer service which hacker used.
|
|
|
|
|
Forget scalability since fungibility definately has priority。
I doubt he would feel pity that bitcoin growing too fast that the fungibility update might never have a chance to be applied on bitcoin in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
Just another Bitcoin Foundation.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
