So is this string of characters the public key - so each time I withdraw (using a new string of characters) into my wallet I am withdrawing into a new location on the block chain - and the Trazor wallet keeps track of all these separate locations?
OR
Is each string just a hash/signature from which a single (same) public key is calculated.
I assume its the second... and that reusing the same "hash" is not a problem because money is going into the block chain public address and not out of it.
thanks in advance.
The string of characters is called an "address". It can be thought of as the location of the bitcoins that are held in the block chain, though that is not technically correct. Each time you tell the Trezor software that you want to receive some bitcoins, it will get a new address from the hardware. Note that many people confuse "address" with "public key". They are different things, though they are related. An "address" is derived from its "public key", which is derived from its "private key", which is generated by the hardware using the "seed". Since the wallet software knows all the addresses and private keys, it can manage all the bitcoins. Reusing addresses with the same exchange is not bad since they already know who they are sending the coins to. |
|
|
|
Central Banks monetary policy is to meet inflation rate of lets say 2-3% set by Government fiscal policy right?
Why governments want prices of all the goods and services we pay for to be increased 2-3% yearly in a compounding way?
What is deflation, is it below the above mentioned target rate of 2-3% or below 0% inflation? Is there such thing as negative inflation or is just known as deflation?
The idea is that inflation discourages saving money and encourages spending it or investing it, Keynesian economists tend to believe that spending the key to prosperity. Deflation is the opposite of inflation. Prices fall. You could call it negative inflation. Central banks get their statistics/prices of good/services data from past data history right in like a price index of what we pay for stuff to see how high inflation is now? How is this consumer price index is weighted?
The question is do the central banks get this data from essential good/services like food, drink, energy, healthcare, education that we need to survive on or from non essential good/services like holidays, tv's, phones, blenders, PlayStations, cars etc.?
Most non essential goods are from china which is cheap anyway so do central banks derive their current inflation figures from this non essential data that gives a false low below target inflation reading?
Lets look at the essential food items that everybody buys to survive on like bread/milk/eggs etc., since the 2008 crash has these prices steadily gone up to all time high prices now? If that is the case then we can rule out and say there's no deflation right?
Central banks have been printing so much money this year so how do they claim current inflation is below target? Doesn't make any sense.
The inflation numbers come from government agencies (Bureau of Labor Statistics in the U.S.). The agencies track the retail prices of thousands of items and calculate various measures of inflation from the changes in those prices. In the U.S., the measure that is usually reported is the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, but there are others. The Federal Reserve looks primarily at the Personal consumption expenditures index (PCE). Inflation is measured by prices because that is what affects people directly, and there is no correlation (in the short-term) between money printing and inflation. - Looking at past charts high inflation is correlated high interest rates? Central banks say high interest rates are a sign of a good economy however why is there high inflation in a good economy when central banks don't print a lot of money in this correlated times? In this time there's less debt, savers get rewarded so what causes high inflation to make prices to sky high in this correlated time?
- Central banks say low interest rates are signs of a bad economy and they lower interest rates to get everybody borrowing cheap money at low rates to buy things that suppose to stimulate the economy higher so how this low interest rates is correlated to low inflation rates were having now when central banks are printing a lot of money in this correlated times? In this time theres more debt, debtors get rewarded so what causes low inflation to stop prices going sky high in this correlated time?
Inflation reduces the amount of money that lenders make, so higher inflation discourages lending and lowers the supply of loans, leading to higher interests. Lower inflation has the opposite effect. In a good economy, the demand for loans is high, so interest rates go up. In a bad economy, the demand for loans is lower, so interest rates go down. However, the economy is a very dynamic system. Low interest rates now tend to lead to high inflation in the future and high interest rates now tend to lead to low inflation in the future. - Will low interest rates cause real estate property prices to continue going higher because it attracts a lot of buyers to cheap mortgages at low rates that increases demand pushing prices up and vice versa when interest rates rise? Real estate was cheap back in the 80's 90's but interest rates were high back then at like 15-19% not like 2-3% were getting today.
- If interest rates go negative then that means the borrower gets paid interest right?
- Is it possible to get times that makes economic sense where there is high interest & low inflation correlated and also low interest & high inflation correlated or does it always has to be not making sense that is high interest=high inflation and also low interest = low inflation cycles that we always go through?
-Yes -Yes -High interest/low inflation or low interest/high inflation would be unusual, but note that central banks can buy and sell bonds with printed money and this gives them the special ability to lower interest rates while raising inflation and vice versa. |
|
|
|
I've been with coinbase since bitcoin was $32. I started buying through coinbase. Recently I moved some btc to my own wallet which I've always done. a few months later i login and it says my account is restricted and i need to contact support.
...
In my opinion, if you have been around that long, you should have no need for Coinbase. I was banned from Coinbase many years ago and I didn't (and still don't) care.. |
|
|
|
Therefore, if 328500 BTC is mined each year (6.25/block) and 26 PWh of electricity is produced each year with a value of $2.6 trillion (at $0.10/kWh), then the cost of mining will approach the value of all the electricity produced in the world at about $8 million per bitcoin. That implies that at that price, all of the electricity in the world will be devoted to mining bitcoins.
The halving will take care of that, it will be nearly impossible for it to reach that level before 2024, at which point it will need to grow again by 2x and 2x every 4 years. But since you're talking in a hypothetical scenario there is something else to be noted, not only is this energy consumption depends on the price but also on the available gear that could mine. Assuming last month's numbers, and rounding them pretty good we were doing around 125 exahash at 10k/coin, taking the best gear available on the market and you need 1.1 million of them. Now for 8 million a piece, you would need around 1 billion in mining gear, which will take ages to manufacture, and as the profitability goes down so will the incentive to produce gear to the limit, again not doable in this small interval. Possibly, however the price has been rising much faster than the subsidy has been halving. That's a good point about the equipment. It could take a long time to manufacture all of that mining equipment. But, lets assume it is achievable in a shorter time span. |
|
|
|
So why I can pay my visa / mastercard instantly.
But Bitcoin is not instant.?
You can pay instantly, but the money isn't received instantly. In fact, the transaction is not finalized for months because of the possibility of a chargeback. At least with Bitcoin, the transaction can be considered finalized after the first confirmation. Typically, the credit card payee is willing to take the risk of not actually receiving the money. Bitcoin is no different -- the receiver can take the risk of accepting an unconfirmed transaction. In short, both can be instant, but Bitcoin transactions are finalized more quickly. |
|
|
|
It's amazing what friend say about mining and the use of electricity for mining is of course very special if that happens, but we know that not all will be interested in bitcoin mining. because maybe also the risk of mining is not easy and it must be taken into account in all aspects before you really want to mine.
It doesn't matter who mines the bitcoins. As long as the value of the bitcoins being mined is greater than the value of the energy used to mine them, miners will increase their energy usage. So what you are saying is that no matter how affordable the energy for mining is, it will not affect the cost of mining. I do agree with you regarding the difficulty of mining as the blocks gets more hard to mine and we are also reaching a computing plateau.
That is correct. |
|
|
|
That implies that at that price, all of the electricity in the world will be devoted to mining bitcoins.
Necessity is the mother of invention. There were electric companies that weren't producing as much electricity as today but now they've got contracts with mining farms to produce and provide them with agreed upon amount of electricity every day. If the incentive keeps growing, there will also be a lot more innovation in production of electricity and more efficient and green ways of producing it will emerge or the existing ones will grow. The same way different ASICs emerged throughout the years (SHA256, scrypt, Keccak). Also if we are producing 26-27 PWh of electricity today, that's because the world needs this much not more. It seems that the only way out is to increase energy production faster than the value of a bitcoin. |
|
|
|
It is possible somewhat, the cost overtime of power production is decreasing thanks to the revolutionary renewable energy sources and a more safe nuclear energy, I think that the power generated annually will not overtake everything that we do. With renewable energy, I think that the price of mining will go down, not to mention that the mines are getting closer to the sources which drastically change the amount of money spent on power. The only reason that it becomes possible scenario is that each blocks gets progressively harder to mine which could be solved via quantum computing.
The cost of mining approaches the value of the mined bitcoins, regardless of the efficiency of the miners or the cost of the energy generation. That's just the economics of mining due to the self-adjusting difficulty and the incentives. So, when the value of a bitcoin goes up, so will the cost of mining it. |
|
|
|
The difficulty increases steadily. This means that some of the electricity may be needed to create new miner hardware.
Also not all the electricity in the world is sold at 0.10/kWh and the supply vs demand will kick into action big time when Bitcoin mining will want to take over electricity which is not surplus.
So imho in order to "eat the world" Bitcoin will have to become much more expensive than in your calculations.
If the value of the bitcoins being mined is X, then the value of the energy used to mine them will approach X, regardless of the difficulty or the cost of the energy. I agree that the price will probably have to be much higher because people will probably value other things (like food). But, that also means that everything will become more expensive because you would have compete with miners for the energy to produce other things. How would you determine that price? |
|
|
|
|
There is an apocalyptic scenario in which Bitcoin eats the world. In this scenario, a bitcoin becomes so valuable that no other activity is worth more than mining bitcoins, and all the power and resources in the world are devoted solely to Bitcoin mining.
I am interested in exploring the ramifications of this scenario and the conditions necessary to reach it.
The economics of mining dictate that the cost of the electricity necessary to mine 1 bitcoin approaches the value of 1 bitcoin. Therefore, if 328500 BTC is mined each year (6.25/block) and 26 PWh of electricity is produced each year with a value of $2.6 trillion (at $0.10/kWh), then the cost of mining will approach the value of all the electricity produced in the world at about $8 million per bitcoin. That implies that at that price, all of the electricity in the world will be devoted to mining bitcoins.
Note: this is a moderated topic. Off-topic replies will be removed. I'm not interested in price speculation and unsupported claims.
|
|
|
|
That's why the actual wallet has to be backed up if you use Bitcoin Core for example.
If you use a HD wallet instead (like Electrum), then you'll have to keep safe a mnemonic seed (12-24 words) and all the addresses in the wallet (including the change addresses) can be re-created from that seed.
I have both, Bitcoin Core as well as Electrum, because I have one on my PC and one on my mobile, but both using the same ...... ermmmm what would that be? ..... same wallet, same address, same private key, same seed ..... hope you know what I mean. Makes me wonder how that seed could recreate addresses that weren't there at the time the seed was created. I would be surprised if your Bitcoin Core and Electrum wallets are using the same addresses and private keys. To be safe, you should back up your Bitcoin Core wallet (there is an option in the menu) and save the Electrum recovery phrase (aka seed or mnemonic). If you don't back up both of them, you could lose bitcoins. Private key and mnemonic seed are different visual display for your bitcoin private key. Private key is a long string of characters but mnemonic seeds are 12 or 24 words but those words are to store your private key. They serve same purpose, store your private key. Different BIP will create different mnemonic seed from same private key. To import one private key from one wallet provider to another wallet provider, you need to have technical match from two wallets. You can learn from https://iancoleman.io/bip39/HD wallet: see the chapter 5 in Mastering bitcoin. Your explanation is completely wrong. A mnemonic/seed/recovery phrase is not a private key. It doesn't store a private key. The seed is used by the wallet to generate all the addresses and private keys that the wallet will use. In other words, every time a wallet generates a new private key and address, it uses its mnemonic/seed/recovery phrase to generate it. BIP stands for Bitcoin Improvement Protocol. BIP-32 is the system that wallets use to generate private keys from a mnemonic. A mnemonic is not created from a private key. That is exactly backwards.. |
|
|
|
|
Support and resistance are myths. The idea that investors all decide independently on the same prices to buy and sell at is absurd.
|
|
|
|
i don't follow the details of all these shitcoins but it doesn't look like a 51% attack, there is no reorgs just some group that had a little amount of hashrate and decided they wanted to create a new shitcoin (bcashabc) out of an existing shitcoin (bcash) just like another group did and created another shitcoin (bcashsv) a while back. each with different consensus rules and mostly incompatible chains. as i said before you can do the same exact thing with a single CPU too. It's a DOS attack. All blocks are being kept empty by a single miner. |
|
|
|
---------------------------------- Copied from another thread ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unfortunately, there is not anything that can be done on a technical level to prevent an entity with sufficient mining resources from executing a 51% attack.
Not quite true. It has been discussed lately and an ultimate solution has been proposed: put a cap on the depth of chain-reorg attempts. This would not stop a 51% attack. There are 'legitimate' situations in which there would be a several-block-deep reorganization. Any cap on chain-reorganization attempts would need to exceed these possible situations. A 51% attack is not simply one that double spends transactions that were confirmed 20 blocks ago. A 51% attack could also orphan blocks in a shallow chain-reorganization, which would cause the miners to follow the 51% attacker's chain in the future. It could blacklist addresses for arbitrary reasons, or force coin holders to pay an inflated fee to the attacker in order to have their transactions confirmed. None of the above would require an attacker to execute a deep reorganization. Exactly. Look at the 51% attack being executed on Bitcoin Cash ABC right now. https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-abc/blocks |
|
|
|
|
CoinJoin is probably the most effective way to consolidate your bitcoins without connecting the addresses. I would consolidate using several transactions.
|
|
|
|
One problem I have with value investing is that fundamentally it assumes that you are right and everyone else is wrong.
Does it? I can't actually see that... Value investing: Value investing is an investment strategy that involves picking stocks that appear to be trading for less than their intrinsic or book value. Value investors actively ferret out stocks they think the stock market is underestimating. ...
|
|
|
|
|
One problem I have with value investing is that fundamentally it assumes that you are right and everyone else is wrong.
|
|
|
|
Will there ever be any monetary incentives to run a full node? Why was this never implemented from the start?
There is nothing preventing a node from charging a fee to access it. |
|
|
|
|
Beyond having 4 wheels, a steering wheel, and some seats, a Tesla Model 3 is nothing like a Ford Model T, yet we still call it an automobile.
|
|
|
|
It doesn't have a wallet address because it's a "Pay to Pubkey" script. You're used to see "pay to pubkey hash" scripts... The hash of the pubkey IS the address  In this case, it's just the pubkey... There is no "address"... If you were the owner of this wallet, you could spend the funds by providing a valid signature which can be verified against the pubkey that was funded. That's about it  You're just looking at very old blocks, p2pk scripts are very rare nowadays. If you want an address, I suppose you could construct an address from the public key. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
