Bitcoin Forum
November 15, 2019, 12:37:58 PM *
News: Help collect the most notable posts made over the last 10 years.
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 [96] 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 ... 189 »
1901  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: 200$ bounty to whomever can get my BTC transaction processed today on: November 10, 2017, 05:12:13 PM
If you sent your transaction from an account that you have with a service, then you will need to contact the service provider and inform them that their service is broken.  You will then need to wait for the service to fix their problem so they can create valid transactions.

Thank you Danny. I was worried that might be the case. The people that run that site are very unresponsive and I may have lost my money on this....uggghhhhh

I really appreciate you looking into this for me.

So, let me get this right.

You deposited money into a crowdfunding ICO - ( link us please ), they store it for you in their webwallet until the ICO ends, -> you decide that you no longer want to invest. -> Said ICO no longer wants to give / is failing to give you your money back?

If you mind giving me the link of the ICO you were investing in, if they're doing a real ICO, you're probably going to get it back, but right now it does sound like this isn't the case.

He mentioned it on the other post:

https://polynetwork.org/

This must be it.

I can't access the wallet because it asks for a login:

https://ico.polynetwork.org/login

Anyway... it is clear now that he must contact support from that ICO and pray that you aren't victim of yet another exit scam of sorts.

Also OP, what wallet do you use to store your majority of Bitcoins? might be a good time to learn about cold storage and full nodes while you are at it.
1902  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: 200$ bounty to whomever can get my BTC transaction processed today on: November 10, 2017, 04:25:37 PM
Hello. I have a huge issue. 2 days ago, I moved about 0.77 BTC away from one wallet to Bitcoin Address: 3QF3S7na14fyvDUqe1pxLfdGERpdfpuGvn

The transaction id: d35fcb3508f714163d31407a43557d61689f9d532cdba64625fd269281c96224

On that site, the transaction shows up as confirmed. It is only possible for me to see transaction details on chain.so, as it doesn't exist in blockchain. I'm terrified that I'm not going to get my money back. Can someone please help me solve?

Lastly, anyone that can get my transaction processed today, I will personally send you 200$ to your BTC wallet the second my BTC hits my wallet. I am a man of my word and will absolutely do that. Thank you.



On what site does it show up? it should show up on all sites.

https://blockchain.info/search?search=d35fcb3508f714163d31407a43557d61689f9d532cdba64625fd269281c96224&searchbar=homepage

The transaction doesn't exist. It never reached the blockchain. What wallet have you used to send the transaction?

https://blockchain.info/address/3QF3S7na14fyvDUqe1pxLfdGERpdfpuGvn

Your address shows a 0.77 BTC transaction with tx id 3cb31bdaac2a4820039be2bfae4f9956e645c020fda89149075136bc6e55d944... so it seems you sent the transaction but you are posting another tx id.
1903  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Best laptop to run a node? on: November 10, 2017, 04:13:49 PM
Qualcomm released a server chip that not only performs very well, but does not have something like ME (at least as far as my reading has led me to believe). Hopefully they did not build their own version of ME into it. However, it is also quite costly:
https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/11/08/qualcomm-datacenter-technologies-announces-commercial-shipment-qualcomm

Not a laptop chip obviously, but I figured it might be worth mentioning given that the discussion revolves about ME and similar.

I wouldn't trust this for a second. Qualcomm are direct partners with Microsoft. Deals with NSA are too juicy to bypass anymore. I would need to see someone qualified from the FSF to inspect these chips, and if they list it there then I would give it some legitimacy, which I doubt will happen.

For now an old core2duo with libreboot seems like the only solid alternative to spywarefest. I may try to run a node there for myself and see how it goes. I would only use to broadcast transactions so I guess it could do the job even if it will be annoying waiting an extra time for the blockchain to be validated but at least you have a peace of mind.

Note that we don't really know about AMD's as much but it is reasonable to be concerned about modern AMD's too.
1904  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Guy spent $85000 on B2X futures on: November 09, 2017, 06:53:14 PM
He claims that this was only a fairly small amount of his money, so I suppose this guy must be extremely rich or a liar.  If he's a liar, it's possible that he didn't invest that much in the first place.  If he's extremely rich, it doesn't matter too much because the number means less to him than it does to us.
This is crazy. One of the worst gambles I've seen. Another lesson for hardforkers... never bet big on a hardfork unless it has 99% consensus.
If you already perceive it to have 99% consensus, it wouldn't be betting big.  You might be betting a lot of money, but the risk would be negligible and the amount of money that you would gain for being correct would also be negligible.

In reality, it's very hard to measure consensus.  Where this guy went wrong is trying to measure it rather than just being part of consensus.

He looks really young, there's a pic of him on there and he looks to be on his 20's, so I don't see how he is rich, unless his parents are really rich and he is gambling with his parent's moneys, for 99% of 20 year olds $85000 is a lot of money.

It was always a bad bet. If 2x won I would be done with bitcoin and most people would too. If an contentious hard work wins you would be holding a shitcoin so if you made some $ gains better dump it quickly, fortunately they didn't get away with it once again. Everytime people lose money on these fork-bets bitcoin show's his strength by making real BTC holders richer and contentious-hardfork supporters poorer.
1905  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Best laptop to run a node? on: November 09, 2017, 06:36:06 PM
Anything with a new i7 processor and SSD is a must.

You will no need anything else other than these.
Even the RAM may be 4 GB or GPU may be SoC one.

We all know the more modern your components are the faster your full node experience will be, but OP is showing concerns in terms of privacy, and if you want to be sure you are safe against ME's bullshit, unfortunately, you have to resort to really old CPU's dating as back as 2008, because ME has not been fully reverse enginereed, and chances are it is impossible to get rid of ME completely. So if you want to be 100% sure of having a computer that's free from these backdoors, you must go the old CPU+Libreboot route, and even if you keep your coins on cold storage, when you relay your transaction into the network your node is still exposed to these backdoors unless you set it in a proper librebooted machine. Coreboot is an option too, but doesn't get rid of the entire thing.
1906  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Guy spent $85000 on B2X futures on: November 09, 2017, 05:22:27 PM
https://medium.com/@bartjellema/why-i-just-bought-90-b2x-bitcoin-segwit2x-futures-f94d0ee13eb9

Holy hell did anyone see this?

Quote
I just spent about $85.000 on buying B2X futures. This just means that once SegWit2x goes live, I’ll already have 90 coins. But why did I spent nearly a $1000/coin for coins that everyone will get for “free”?

This is crazy. One of the worst gambles I've seen. Another lesson for hardforkers... never bet big on a hardfork unless it has 99% consensus. It's a shame we will not see Roger Ver lose his BTC's. Also notice how he and a lot of other guys didn't accept the big bets proposed by Gmaxwell, Adam Back and Trace Mayer of up to 25000 BTC. Adam was looking for ridiculously low ratios lately to do OTC trading and no one accepted. I think a lot of people have been aware of this happening a long time before they cancelled. We saw massive inside trading yesterday.
1907  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Problems facing crypto, taxes, anon, etc... on: November 09, 2017, 04:25:45 PM
What major problems are crypto and btc facing in the future? One I can think of is taxes. Will there be offshore tax havens set up for people to exchange their btc, eth and other crypto into fiat without paying taxes? It's not really decentralized if you have to pay the government a cut of it.  What if you are given btc, is that still taxed?

How to spend your crypto? Will you wait until retailers accept your crypto of choice? There are options like tenx card, but what are the tax implications of using that? Even if retailers accept crypto, say monero to buy groceries or pay your rent, will you not still have to pay taxes on that?

Another problem could be power outages, internet disruption. What if there is a power outage for a year or two? What if the internet is disrupted globally?

The idea is to never go out of Bitcoin. Obtain bitcoins by offering services and products, and buy services and products in exachange of bitcoins. If you have noticed, the circle is closed now and there is no need for fiat.

If you need to go fiat, don't expect to not get into trouble. If you want fiat pay your taxes and sleep well, there's no way to bypass this. Look at Paradise Paper et al, it will always leak so it's stupid, just pay the damn taxes and deal with it, or don't ever sell.
1908  Economy / Economics / Re: Would European ATM industry benefit the crypto world? on: November 09, 2017, 03:05:57 PM
Don't you think once most of Europe is covered but such service providers, that the popularity would rise, as well as the trust and even demand? I think that having a "thing from the internet" manifest itself in your everyday life in the form of ATM would have a huge impact to the masses, who are yet to know what cryptocurrencies are or simply to the sceptics.
E.G.

https://medium.com/@coinstaker/ever-heard-of-bitcoin-atms-here-is-what-you-need-to-know-254d2d72cfb2

In Switzerland there are tons of Bitcoin ATM's. The train stations all have Bitcoin ATM's and they aren't the cheap, stupid looking ones, they look robust and solid. There are some machines that look like toys but the ones i've seen are the real deal. I've never used them, but in any case think about them as passive advertisement of Bitcoin, since it says "Bitcoin" on it.
1909  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Roger Ver dumping BTC to twist the narrative on: November 08, 2017, 06:37:42 PM
Roger Ver et al are obviously unloading big amounts of BTC to stop the pump which is exposing that no one wanted bigger blocks. As soon as the segwit2x cancellation hit the news, we saw a big pump. Now I would bet money on Roger Ver dumping big amounts to try to hide the fact that the market has reacted positively to the news of no hardfork. I hope he unloads it all and sticks to BCrash. I can picture Roger rage-quitting Mike Hearn style right now.
1910  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Segwit2x is dead, long live Bitcoin on: November 08, 2017, 05:32:59 PM
Fantastic news to end the year. Let this explosive price run be a testament for future hard forkers: The market doesn't want no fucking drama, they want certainty. Once certainty was re-established, a long green candle has been delivered, right on time for x-mas.

It looks like they pushed it until the end. Im sure they knew they would cancel it a couple of days ago and already low key bought the dip to deliver the news now. Well, at least they did (were forced to) do the right thing.
1911  Other / Meta / Re: Why after 2 months nobody answer me to my "Recovering hacked accounts" request ? on: November 08, 2017, 05:05:56 PM
Better you sign a new message from that address to make clear you are the same person who made that request two months ago. Also Include profile link and the link where we can see the address posted by you.

Please read that thread again "Recovering hacked accounts or accounts with lost passwords" and understand what is required and try not skip even a single detail that is asked by them.

this is the second signed message:

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is the second request ro recover my account brizio71
that has been hacked on August 20/21.
Please reset the email to brizio71@gmail.com.
I made the first request on 28 August 2017 !
The current date is 27 Octore 2017.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
176Ui2JZjN6MbSuFjN3y1QiZnqC8r6CVBm
IJROOpcIIZH5zcJmMt6+GmyocK3UZh/dPG6UbnXRbfD8ImBVNLx6sM3Zb+pi7RwE8ulK+iddu34JElpyAAnxFHw=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

the profile of my original account hacked is :

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=388874

someone get on my account change the associated email, post some message and the never use this account anymore !!!

then if you look on post history of brizio71 you will find my address on post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=920465.msg10156865#msg10156865



This seems to be enough cryptographic proof for you to recover your account. Keep trying and you should get it back. Have you tried PM'ing Theymos about this? You waited enough with 2 months of no reply with Cyrus. This has never happened to me, but if it happened to me and I got no reply after 2 months after having delivered the cryptographic proof asked by the mods I would be pretty annoyed. It's impossible that there are 2 months of queue of people's hacked accounts, verifying messages takes 1 minute. Let's just hope he didn't see it and keep trying, what else can you do.
1912  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: brain wallets - good or bad on: November 08, 2017, 05:00:49 PM
i would have thought they were a great idea because there is nothing to be destroyed,
Only your brain.

once you choose a system for creating your password you are sorted.
If for example you were interested in astronomy you could combine planets in our solar system with their position from the sun,
of you could combine the birth dates of you family starting with the oldest down to the youngest.

That's a good example of bad passphrase. Anyone who knows about your passion can easily crack your wallets.


ok, but "they" have to firstly know you, know your interests, try all combinations of all the interests you have, know you have Bitcoin and know they are in a brain wallet.
what about picking something you absolutely hate, or something male orientated if you are a female, it just needs to be something specific that you will remember.

It just doesn't make sense from a cryptographical point of view to carry all of your coins in a single seed, which is why you should avoid brainwallets, and electrum wallets, or anything that could generate all of your keys from a single seed of any kind for that matter.

If your keys are spread across different separated private keys, you are lowering your chances of an attack by a lot. So don't use these for anything else than spare change or temporal re-allocation of btc.
1913  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Generating a fresh non HD wallet in the newer versions of Core on: November 07, 2017, 05:22:57 PM
I said that I know Bitcoin Core's HD wallet cannot be generated by a single seed, im just asking if it adds any possible exploits. So you are saying that the new format has 0 disadvantages or attack vectors compared to the old format?
Yes.

And why would you disable the ability to create non-HD wallets in 0.16?
Because continuing to support HD wallets hinders future changes and limits what we can do with the wallet. Part of that is due to some poor design choices on our side when implementing HD wallets, but regardless, continuing to allow for non-HD wallets prevents us from making certain future changes or requires a lot of hacks to make those changes work.

Ok then, if there are no downsides and only benefits I guess I will get to work and move my coins for once, but I will do it after the segwit2x hardfork so I kill 2 birds with one stone.

And btw, does "no HD support" means that if you try to load an old format wallet.dat, your coins will not show up?

There's people often finding very old HD wallets from the -qt era, example:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2364176.0

If this guy came here with an old wallet after 0.16 is released, he would download it then try to open it and he would have problems if legacy format is not supported.
1914  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Running out of space on: November 07, 2017, 05:09:38 PM
You can't do that.

The best you can probably do is to set your datadir to be the external drive and then have symlinks for all of the files in the blocks folder that link back to the internal drive. However you will need to move the chainstate folder and basically all other files in the datadir to the external drive.

It would be better for you to just use the external drive for the datadir rather than trying to do some split drive thing.

What do you call "datadir"? the entiretiy of the "Bitcoin" folder? the "blocks" folder + "chainstate" folder?

So anyway from what I understood, it is a bad practice to try to divide the blockchain in 2 with symlinks or otherwise and I should keep everything inside a single HDD?

But this implies that the blockchain will grow slow enough to not be bigger than the current biggest HDD's? For example a "Seagate Archive HDD 8TB SATA3" would serve me for years... assuming that Bitcoin manages to remain Bitcoin at 1MB blocksize.
1915  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Running out of space on: November 07, 2017, 04:50:00 PM
Suppose my node is running out of HDD space on my computer, and I have an USB external HDD that I could use to continue downloading the blockchain. How do I do this?

What I mean is, if the latest blk file is "blk01051.dat", how do I point Bitcoin Core to keep downloading from there in the new HDD so I can keep the whole blockchain? (I don't want to use pruned mode)
1916  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: B2X is real Bitcoin? on: November 07, 2017, 04:28:33 PM
BTC divided to BTC and BCC, and will be divided to BTG and B2X.

1. B2X will become real bitcoin?
2. More BT* will appear  in future?
How did you able to calculate such thing? Bitcoin would be always the real bitcoin no matter what and those coins being created on forks are just another altcoin in the market. Try to look at on BCH what happen? It didnt really get the same support just like we saw on bitcoin itself therefore theres no point on comparing it in to those altcoins.

The market will decide ultimately. And futures are not looking good for Segwit2x:

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/segwit2x/


Oh and there's no such as "free money". When you think you are receiving free money, you are not considering that if the network wasn't attacked by contentions hardforkers, the price would be much higher than it is now, so ultimately you don't gain anything, other than wasting your time to get some extra BTC by dumping the fork.
1917  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Generating a fresh non HD wallet in the newer versions of Core on: November 07, 2017, 03:37:29 PM
....But now with all the fork nonsense I will be forced to move my coins into another wallet...

Why is that?

Well, everytime that there is a hardfork, you are forced to move your coins into a new wallet before accessing the coins on the other fork, in order to not have any problems of replay attacks. It is always recommended to not having matching addresses before you send coins to an exchange. I wish I wouldn't need to deal with any of this but can you do.



I don't like HD wallets in general, I like the old approach better. Im not sure how exactly this HD wallet works, I just like the original format. As far as I know, there is no seed, so the wallet cannot be generated unless you own the wallet.dat file which is good, I wouldn't trust a wallet that can be generated with a single seed containing all of your private keys.
Clearly you don't understand how HD wallets work. Bitcoin Core does not use a seed phrase that you are probably thinking of. Seed phrases are not required for an HD wallet; you still have to own and hold the wallet.dat file. The only thing that changes is how the private keys are generated; everything else about how they are stored and the backup and security measures that you must take still exist with Bitcoin Core's HD wallets. It still uses a HD wallet and the private keys are still stored in the exact same format as before.

What are the pros and cons of the new HD enabled wallet.dat compared to the original format? I've had the same wallet.dat since Bitcoin-qt in 2013-ish and I never had any problems with it. But now with all the fork nonsense I will be forced to move my coins into another wallet, and when I tried to generate a new wallet in the new versions of Core it was HD-enabled.
With an HD wallet, you can restore any backup of your wallet.dat and still be able to access your Bitcoin whereas with non-HD wallets older backups may no longer be valid (they don't contain later private keys). However if your wallet.dat file is stolen, then all of your private keys for that wallet.dat file (including those that have not yet been generated used) are revealed. But you should be using a new wallet.dat file anyways if yours is ever stolen, regardless of HD or not.

To disable HD wallets, you must start Bitcoin Core with the -usehd=0 option. However this option and the ability to create a non-HD wallet has been removed for Bitcoin Core 0.16.


I said that I know Bitcoin Core's HD wallet cannot be generated by a single seed, im just asking if it adds any possible exploits. So you are saying that the new format has 0 disadvantages or attack vectors compared to the old format?

And why would you disable the ability to create non-HD wallets in 0.16?
1918  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Ethereum Hacked - AGAIN! on: November 07, 2017, 02:19:57 PM
It seems they can't go more than a few months without getting hacked!


https://paritytech.io/blog/security-alert.html

Security Alert
7 November 2017
Severity: Critical

Product affected: Parity Wallet (multi-sig wallets)

Summary: A vulnerability in the Parity Wallet library contract of the standard multi-sig contract has been found.


 Shocked Shocked Shocked

Parity was always weak. It looks great, it syncs fast, but it's not safe. I warned about how Parity for Bitcoin was a mistake too when a lot of people were exciting.

Ethereum is such a clusterfuck. The official client can't properly sync a full node anymore due the massive bloat on the blockchain, you can't properly download it.

Then if you want to use Parity, you are not getting the full blockchain and you aren't safe anyway as we can see with all these exploits. Full turin complete was always a mistake and we will see ETH have these problems forever.
1919  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: Best laptop to run a node? on: November 07, 2017, 01:29:20 AM
If you want something that's composed of only free open source software including the bios, I don't know many other options than the Libreboot, the latest being the Libreboot T400:

https://minifree.org/product-category/laptops/

It comes with Trisquel installed. It's old hardware, because as you said, you simply can't expect any privacy from modern hardware, unfortunately. Another reason to not make nodes more resource consuming.

If you are in the US, you also got this option, which is very similar:

https://shop.libiquity.com/product/taurinus-x200

Purism is a good initiative but you are trusting their reverse-engineering is effective, so not ideal.
1920  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Generating a fresh non HD wallet in the newer versions of Core on: November 06, 2017, 06:53:18 PM
If I wanted to generate an empty fresh non-HD wallet using Bitcoin 0.15.0.1, how would I go about it? or is this not possible?

I don't like HD wallets in general, I like the old approach better. Im not sure how exactly this HD wallet works, I just like the original format. As far as I know, there is no seed, so the wallet cannot be generated unless you own the wallet.dat file which is good, I wouldn't trust a wallet that can be generated with a single seed containing all of your private keys.

What are the pros and cons of the new HD enabled wallet.dat compared to the original format? I've had the same wallet.dat since Bitcoin-qt in 2013-ish and I never had any problems with it. But now with all the fork nonsense I will be forced to move my coins into another wallet, and when I tried to generate a new wallet in the new versions of Core it was HD-enabled.
Pages: « 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 [96] 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 ... 189 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!