If you want to have some fun, give that seed phrase to any scammer that asks for your seed phrase. The result will hopefully be one scammer scammed by another.

Consider the plight of a child born to parents who were in the U.S. temporarily (legally or not). That child is a U.S. citizen, whether they want to be or not, and they must pay U.S. taxes.

Furthermore, if the person opens an account at a bank and the bank finds out that they are a U.S. citizen, it will pass their information to the IRS.

In addition, the person may not be able to open a bank account because many banks do not allow U.S. citizens to have accounts.

If it is a Single Address account, then select it and go to "Export Account Key".

As a very frugal person, here are my tips.

• 1. Decide on how much you are willing to save and then automatically deduct that from your pay, or at least immediately move it to your savings. If you never see the money, you will never feel like you have to spend it.
• 2. If you don't have enough left over to pay bills, then you are living above your means, and you must cut back. That includes where you live and what you drive.
• 3. Pay off your credit cards every month. If you can't pay off your credits cards every month, then you are spending more than you make.
• 4. There are many people that get by with less money than you. If they can do it, so can you.
• 5. Stop showing off. Nobody is actually impressed or intimidated by your expensive shit.

I started at a low-paying job and saved about 10%. As my pay increased, so did my percentage. Now I am saving 30% of my pay. I don't miss it because I live like my pay is 30% less than it actually is.

The assumption is that it is easier to memorize a pattern than it is to memorize a list of unrelated words, so a pattern can be more complex than a brain wallet, and this makes it harder to crack.

However, I think there are also disadvantages.

1. If you lose the grid, you have lost your wallet (unless you use the deterministic option).
2. The pattern is not random, so if an attacker gains access to the grid, it will much easier to brute force the phrase because there is a limited number of patterns that people will memorize. And just like passwords, some patterns will be used more than others. But, it would still be harder to crack than a brain wallet because it could be more complex.


You have misunderstood the process. In short, you generate a grid of words, apply a memorized pattern to the grid, and then use the words in the pattern along with a memorized word as the seed phrase for your wallet.

If you don't want to store the grid itself, you can store a BIP-39 phrase that represents the grid instead. This option makes the process equivalent to using a BIP-39 seed phrase with a memorized pattern plus an additional word as a password. While more complicated, it is much more secure than storing a seed phrase and memorizing a passphrase.

Is this whole thread just an ad for that site?

If you have the blockchain.com mnemonic phrase, then don't use that site. Just go here:

The fact that the private key is derived using SHA-256 does not make it a brain wallet. A HD wallet seed comes from the SHA-512 hash of the BIP-39 seed phrase. Does that make an HD wallet a brain wallet? A brain wallet is derived from something that can be memorized. That is why it is called a "brain" wallet. The mini-key is a random sequence and is not intended to be memorized so it is not basically a SHA-256 brain wallet.


Another minor correction: The hash of the string concatenated with a '?' must have a first byte of 0, and not the hash of the string itself. It does reduce the number of keys that must be checked as you noted, but the derived private key itself does not always begin with a 0-byte.

@nullius, how about starting a thread in Scam Accusations instead of hijacking this thread?

Bubbles are caused by people that only pretend it is valuable. Real value comes from utility.

Really, any scarce asset is an inflation hedge if its value is not tied to the value of a fiat currency.

By not pegging the value of a Bitcoin to a fiat currency like other earlier attempts at cryptocurrencies and by limiting the number to a finite amount, Bitcoin was explicitly created as an inflation hedge.

Inflation is not a component of recession. There are recessions both with and without inflation. However, inflation has typically preceded recessions that are the result of speculative bubbles or central bank action.

That statement demonstrates a misunderstanding about the economics of Bitcoin mining.

Here is how it works: If a miner feels that they are not being adequately compensated for mining (simply stated, they aren't making a profit), they will stop mining, and the difficulty will adjust to increase the compensation for the miners that remain. That process will continue until the remaining miners feel that they are being adequately compensated. So, only in an exceptional scenarios will transaction fees not be enough to compensate miners.

However, as @tadamichi also states, there is a danger that low transaction fees could become a security risk. It is the value of the block reward (and not the number of miners) that determines the level of security against a 51% attack.

Seriously, I think you should seek help. The feelings of fear, anxiety, and paranoia are coming from inside your head and are not caused by other people. Try talking about your fears with a therapist. It will help a lot.

As for someone turning you gay, that can't happen if you don't want it, so you really have nothing to worry about. It's your unrealistic concern is the real problem.

I think that your claim would gain more support if you would just provide something to back it up.

I'm really shocked by the number of companies in this industry making under-collateralized loans, loans with risky collateral, or simply not reacting quickly enough. I hope lenders and depositors have learned something from this catastrophe. One good rule of thumb is to avoid depositing money in any company that has its own token -- it is basically a pyramid scheme and it is destined to fail.

If every bank produced their own stablecoin, there would be a huge problem of interoperability. For example, I have Bank of America coins but the merchant only accepts Wells Fargo coins. A few coins would be manageable, but if there are 1000 coins it would never work.

So, that brings up the next problem. If there can only be a few coins, it would put small banks out of business because they couldn't compete with the big banks.

Regardless, the idea of a CBDC really doesn't make sense. A CBDC would not provide any benefit beyond what banks and central banks already provide. At least in the U.S., the Federal Reserve is run by banks, so it would not do anything that would put banks out of business.


The advantage of the stablecoin is that you can send the coins directly, something that you would not be able to do with a CBDC. In order to allow sending coins directly, the central bank would have to give up control of the money, and that's something it will never do.


What are you talking about? I use online dollars to pay my bills and send money to friends all the time. I use credit and debit cards to buy stuff with online dollars.

Your questions are not clear, perhaps because you are confused by the terms.

A UTXO (unspent transaction output) is simply the output of a transaction that has not yet been spent. For example if you send 1 BTC to an address (legacy or segwit), you will create a UTXO that remains until that 1 BTC has been spent.

By "cost of energy", I mean the cost to purchase a joule of energy. In short, the energy consumption (in joules) to produce a bitcoin, E, approaches

E ⟶  P  / C

where

P is the average price of a bitcoin in $
C is the average cost of electricity in $/J

The reason that hash rate and efficiency are irrelevant is that the difficulty adjustments keep production constant, regardless of the hash rate, the amount of energy used, the efficiency of the equipment, and the amount miners are willing to spend.

However, assuming that miners (in the aggregate) are striving to be profitable, they will spend as much as they can on energy up to the value of the bitcoins they produce. So, the value of the energy consumed producing a bitcoin (E x C) approaches the value of the bitcoin (P). Thus, E ⟶  P  / C. Note that there are other variable costs, but energy is the biggest and it's what we are concerned about here.



Small contradiction there. If using the same amount of energy, the energy required per bitcoin would be the same and would not increase. Note that I am assuming a time frame that includes difficulty adjustments and time for miners to add or remove equipment. An increase in efficiency would reduce energy consumption at least until the next difficulty adjustment, but consumption would return as miners compete for a bigger share.

The ultimate display of laziness is complaining about the lack of a feature in open source software.

In order to stop Bitcoin, you must stop mining everywhere. You can't stop Bitcoin by stopping some people from mining. Even if mining is prohibited in the EU, it can be mined somewhere. Even the ban on mining in China has not stopped Bitcoin.