You are comparing the cost to make $150 then against the cost to make $35000 today. How much would the equipment cost to make $150 today, or $35000 then? Those would be fair comparisons.

Nope. I have as much information as you. I read the description and it looks like the right command to use, but I have never used it.

With.a block explorer, you can trace where bitcoins came from, so it might be possible to see the transactions going into the addresses that you think are in your old wallets and match them up with records of your sales. That is going to be tedious and it might not work very well.

The best option is to recover your old wallets so that they can show you all of the transactions that you care about.

Another option is to just estimate the number of bitcoins you received and their values using the records of your sales.


No. Coinbase will send you bitcoins from a different address every time. It is more likely that it is an old blockchain.info wallet. However, if you did receive bitcoins in a Coinbase account, they will have records of your transactions.

My advice (and it might be really bad advice) is to just do the best you can, even if involves making guesses or estimates.

Your post explains nothing.

Money doesn't represent all of the wealth in the world. Except for a notable few, the richest people in the world together own 0 BTC. And while Musk may be the wealthiest person in the world, I bet 99% of his wealth is not from money stored in bank accounts.

If you want to know the amount of btc currently at an address, you would sum all the UTXOs associated with that address (using "scantxoutset"?).

Dogecoin is a fork of Litecoin, which is a fork of Bitcoin. Addresses are constructed similarly, except that Dogecoin uses a prefix of 0x1e to prevent confusion with other coins. The wallet software should have rejected the Bitcoin address because a prefix of 0x00 is not valid for dogecoin.

$300 each? Did you buy Bitcoin (BTC) or Bitcoin Cash (BCH). There is a big difference.

I did some investigating...

The wallet should not have let you you send to that address. There is a bug in the wallet software -- it is not correctly validating the address that you entered.

Here are the address details:


The fact that the pubkeyhash is the same for both indicates that the wallet software accepted the bitcoin address and used it in the transaction as if it were a valid dogecoin address.

It may be possible to recover your dogecoins. In general, the way to recover coins sent to an address of a different coin is to take the private key of the incorrect address and import it into the wallet of the correct coin type. In your case, obtain the private key of 12n1ZixhsJYtYx1kKaVBZmJdyxLQbTMRiF and import it into a dogecoin wallet. I don't know enough about dogecoin and that wallet to tell you if that will work, but the wallet developers can help you. I would raise a big stink if they don't since it is clearly a bug in their software.

It is possible that there is a bug in the wallet that somehow allowed you to do that. It is very unlikely.

The wallet should show information on the transaction. There is not much we can do without that info. Post it here.


You can't say that because you don't have enough information, and the coins don't "automatically collide and disappear"

There are no addresses in the block chain that start with 1Fd3tFCq

https://www.walletexplorer.com/?q=1Fd3tFCq

I believe the advantage of USDC is that it is easier and faster to transfer to another exchange.

Bitcoin is not "backed by" electricity.

 1111111111111111111114oLvT2 is also a popular burn address.

That's what bots are for.

There are a few problems with your idea. One is that you have multiple orders at the same prices. I suppose maybe you can do that. Also, you have 2 sell orders for 1 BTC so you will need to have 2 BTC in your account, and you have to 2 by orders for $23k, so you will need $46k in your account.

I'm not a lawyer or an expert, but I think my statement explains why funds held by Silk Road were confiscated and not returned to their owners. In the U.S., your property can be confiscated if it is involved in crime whether you are involved in the crime or not. Maybe banks are a special case and maybe not, or maybe it would be political suicide to confiscate the assets of a bank so it isn't done.

How is it fair that one person is must pay $1 million in taxes and another must pay 0, especially when the person that pays 0 gets more in benefits? Wouldn't it be fair only if each person pays the same amount of taxes and receives the same amount of benefits? It is argued that the wealthier person pays more because they can, but is that fair? It seems more like extortion to me.


If you ever become rich, I will remember your post. I will claim that you are dirty because you are rich and most rich people are dirty, and I will use your post to make my point.

If the marketplace is committing a crime, then any money or property held or managed by the marketplace would be involved in the crime. While you did not commit a crime and you did not transact directly with the marketplace, the bitcoins you received came from it.

One interesting bit of complexity comes from the fact that once a UTXO is spent, the bitcoins in it can no longer be distinguished from other bitcoins. That is why "taint" is always a percentage. This is similar to the problem of identifying tainted money in a bank account. However, while money is legally fungible (in the U.S.), bitcoins are not, and so they must be treated differently. I look forward to seeing how laws are applied and misapplied to this situation.

If there are laws that give all the wealth to the poor, then eventually there will be no more wealthy people. Then, how will the poor survive?

You are entitled to your opinion, but I think your comments about Bitcointalk are not accurate.

– If you want to know what cronyism and paranoia look like, visit this forum. All newbies are treated like scammers, and their account lacks features that senior members have.

The posting restrictions for newbies are not based on cronyism and paranoia. There is a healthy suspicion of newbies because of the many scammers coming to Bitcointalk and trying to defraud you. As a newbie, you may not be not aware of this.

If you don't want to be labeled as a scammer, don't promote sites that might look like a scam. In fact, don't promote sites at all because there is always a chance that you are promoting a scam site.

There is also the problem of spam. Most new members have joined to post spam or earn money from signature campaigns. Their purpose is counter to purpose of this site, which is to be a place to discuss and learn about Bitcoin.

If you don't want to be labeled as a spammer, don't post spam. Don't post referral or affiliate links. Don't promote stuff. Don't treat this site as money-making opportunity. If you want to be taken seriously, don't join a signature campaign.

– Unfair “Trust” system where old users can destroy a new member’s reputation without any proof.

I agree that the trust system has been abused by certain users. The good news is that it really isn't important if you aren't doing anything that requires others to trust you. I have negative trust, but I am still here.

– It is almost impossible to become a senior member on the forum since old members don’t give ” Merit” points to new members.

Rank must be earned, and it is difficult to earn because you must make posts that others feel are worthy of merit. A random comment or opinion is not going to gain merit, but a thoughtful and well-constructed post might. The more time you spend on a post, the more likely it will be to gain merit.

My advice is that you don't worry about rank. You don't need a high rank in order to post.