Modifying the CSV is unfortunately your only option. Using specific spreadsheet shortcuts to calculate the value to pay to each user and it would be fairly quick as well.

Electrum checks and treats the value after the comma in BTC and isn't linked to the fiat conversion. Perhaps make an issue on Github as a feature enhancement?

While security by obscurity is something that most secure element manufacturers uses, it doesn't apply in this case. The vulnerability is an inherent weakness in the chip and IIRC, the chip itself is closed source.

SD card encryption only works if you're able to isolate them from one another. If the attacker can get both your SD card and your Trezor, then there'll be no point.

Yes. You need to use Taproot addresses to be able to reap the benefits. The hardware wallet has to support Schnorr rsignature as the signing is done on the hardware wallet itself. I haven't heard about any developments on this though.
Nope. Taproot activation is still quite far away on mainnet.

There is actually a way. It would work only if the nodes have already purged your transaction from their mempool.

Import your Blockchain.com wallet into Electrum, the one containing the transaction for your 10sat/byte transaction. Check if your transaction has a computer symbol on the left, right click and press Remove. Your transactions should be removed from the wallet and you can resend your transaction.

The current minimum fee to enter the mempool is higher than the fee rates of your first transaction and that should result in most nodes purging your transaction.

Hmm I'm wrong then. Fees were much lower when I last checked.

Electrum removed the TX fees settings from their settings and I haven't gotten the chance to test it out yet. I believe they moved it from the settings for it to be promoted to the user when creating a transaction.

What kind of wallet are you using? Is it a normal wallet or is it a 2FA wallet with TrustedCoin?

I'm ruling out the fees as the issue, the transaction fees shouldn't be that high and the dialog is displayed when the user initiates a transaction (IIRC).

Probably compatibility. Wallets like Blockchain.com or several other services do not recognize bech32 addresses. If you want to switch to a bech32 wallet, you'll need a non-bech32 address first.

Hmm, why bother structuring your topic as a question when you could've just made your statement as the OP

Calculation for the quantum computer is off by a couple of billion of qubits, estimates puts it at about ~1200 I think. I'm almost certain that your math and assertions are not correct. Perhaps try to show us a working example instead?

What wallet are you using?

The process will be different for all the wallets. Generally for any wallet other than Electrum, seed types are interchangable and is only dependent on how the wallet treats the seeds.

Don't think government can really stop Bitcoin even if they want to. The lack of a central authority makes it very difficult to cripple the system and any attempts would involve censorship of their internet.

Bitcoin can probably last for a long time, the branding that is. Bitcoin in a few years would look very different from the version that we have today. Allowing it to evolve continually gives it a chance to survive against any threats.

Any subsequent transactions spending from that or a derivative of that will not be confirmed until all of the transactions in that chain has confirmed.

IMO, it is not worth to create a CPFP for this; you'll be paying for 4 transactions worth of fees. Since it is sent from the service, the responsibility of the fees lies on them and not you. 102 sat/vbyte is decent, just that it has spiked recently. It shouldn't take too long to confirm.

The latter is not true. As for the former, people won't buy Bitcoins that are taint free, that is just impractical. If exchanges cannot accept that the coins that they have will have some degree of taint, then they wouldn't be able to operate at all.

Has there been any exchanges that blocked your deposit specifically because of taint arising from it being mixed with tainted coins? All that I know is that they do not accept mixers or coins directly from restricted activities; gambling sites for example.

That is a problem with your service, not with Bitcoin. You should probably talk to them about it.
Exchanges flags coins that comes directly from a mixer but they do not specifically check for any degree of taint. Coins from an exchange is not exactly taint free either, Localbitcoins functions on a similar way like an exchange with their deposit/withdrawal system. I'm not sure how people get so much discount on LocalBitcoins, I've never seen it before unless they're outright scamming.

Look, if the concept of taint bothers you that much, then Bitcoin is probably not for you. I'll repeat this again; Taint does not exist on a protocol level. If you're supporting businesses that classifies any sort of privacy preserving activities as something that is against their ToS, then you probably would want to avoid them; they will probably collect more information about you. Most of the Bitcoins today are tainted, refusing to accept any taint Bitcoin will net you no business at all and your competitors would surely thank you for giving them your customers.

FWIW, that is the warning which Blockchain.com displays when any transaction has been purged from their explorer. It is wildly misleading as more often than not, there isn't any conflicting transactions of that sort. This has been going on for quite a while, do try to avoid using their block explorer.

No, the complexity of something like this is too high. With a quantum computer, you can lower the difficulty sufficiently with Shor's Algorithm. Problem being that currently none of the quantum computers are anywhere near the required qubit.
Yes. They probably wouldn't be able to find one though. The key space is way too big and the probability of getting another address which has already been used before is astronomically low.

It is not shown in the UI to prevent confusion.

Go to Window>Console and type in these (omit the first if it is not encrypted with a password):

walletpassphrase ....


You should see your change address along with the receiving address.

*Clarified below: Makes sense since addresses are visible without any decryption.

It is probably your change address.

Since Bitcoin UTXOs are spent completely, the remainder after the recipient amount is assumed to be used as fees. As a result, the wallet has to send the funds or the change to the new address within your wallet. As long as the amount from your transaction is -(0.001 + fees) then you are fine. The change addresses are not shown in Core (IIRC) to avoid confusing the users.

Unlike what people think, governments cannot print money at will. There are severe repercussions when a government prints money at above normal rates, which actually could result in a failure of the economic systems.

Governments, at least as of now still rakes a significant portion of money through cryptomining by the employment, taxes, ASICs manufacturers, etc. There is just simply no incentives for them to kill of the whole industry; an attack like this happens once. After that, the attack gets exponentially harder to reap any benefits and another Bitcoin with a different algorithm springs out. You have just wasted all your ASICs and your electricity and crypto survives.
In PoS, you are not exchanging anything. PoW functions on the premise that some form of resources is being used up in exchange for getting a block. If those who holds a greater "stake" are permanently at an advantage, then why wouldn't the network be worse off? What would be the deterrent if the government manages enough resources to seize/purchase enough funds?

Yup. Though for your use case, would probably not be recommended.

Go to the transaction tab in Bitcoin Core and starting from the latest transaction, right click it and click on abandon transaction. Do so for all of the transactions till the first parent transaction. The function merely marks the transaction as abandoned so it'll be spendable again. It does not cause any changes in the network, for your case. After which, you should be able to spend the funds again.

They are, I don't see any of the transactions in my node. The blockexplorers are not indicative of the default client's behavior. Bitcoin Core cannot rebroadcast it because the nodes are not accepting it.

Abandon transaction would do what you describe but if OP wants to preserve all of them then this won't be an option.

It doesn't have to. BIP38 is just another way to conveniently encrypt things but they do have a version byte identifier. Advantage of BIP38 is that the identifier allows you to see that it is a BIP38 encrypted key and probably an encrypted private key. The encryption used for BIP38 can be used anywhere and it is.

Not needed. If you have to do so, then there is probably no point for a hardware wallet.