I want firstbits key pair for 1gig

[TTBit]

Got it:

5HrGsm6TekRMjjB3MvLD9E8Sbe29EBseNcsGGXEQkhL3t3pfHaU

[1715641419]

1715641419

[1715641419]

1715641419

[1715641419]

1715641419

[1715641419]

1715641419

[SgtSpike]

Got it:

5HrGsm6TekRMjjB3MvLD9E8Sbe29EBseNcsGGXEQkhL3t3pfHaU

1ButNahUW8pD9cX1xLbRYHfP5KSumJCchP

[enmaku]

Where there is a will there is a way and what ever the way is I will find it!

No, there's not. This has been proven many many times over. If "where there's a will, there's a way" were true, those hippies in the 60s would have successfully levitated the pentagon. There is no way for you to 1) get the privkey for that address without contacting its rightful owner or 2a) get another key to match those firstbits without 2b) changing the algorithm behind firstbits, which you also can't do.

Just give up on the 1gig firstbits man, it is literally an impossibility.

[rxw]

unclemantis if you obtain the privkey for that address we all might as well give up and go home because it would imply that bitcoin is fundamentally broken

[bg002h]

unclemantis if you obtain the privkey for that address we all might as well give up and go home because it would imply that bitcoin is fundamentally broken

Or the owner responds and gives you the private key. I doubt he even knows he has it in his wallet, presuming its not lost.

[SgtSpike]

unclemantis if you obtain the privkey for that address we all might as well give up and go home because it would imply that bitcoin is fundamentally broken

Or the owner responds and gives you the private key. I doubt he even knows he has it in his wallet, presuming its not lost.

He could send a binary message via satoshis and include his email address or something in it.

[molecular]

Where there is a will there is a way and what ever the way is I will find it!

No, there's not. This has been proven many many times over. If "where there's a will, there's a way" were true, those hippies in the 60s would have successfully levitated the pentagon. There is no way for you to 1) get the privkey for that address without contacting its rightful owner or 2a) get another key to match those firstbits without 2b) changing the algorithm behind firstbits, which you also can't do.

Just give up on the 1gig firstbits man, it is literally an impossibility.

oh, but there is a way! just: it's going to take too long. so "an impossibility" is correct for all practical purposes.

[enmaku]

Prefix '3GiG' not possible
Hint: valid bitcoin addresses begin with "1"

Are you sure?

How do you explain this address then?

https://blockchain.info/address/3A5XQWZPzG4GrpVeYFaDBZ1s4sXkYB69Wf

But don't let a fact get in the way of a strongly held belief

I'm not understanding how the 3 addresses aren't valid...their relation to op_eval, multisig, hashes of scripts, etc....but by this link it appears to me that a 3 address can both store Bitcoins and transfer them to a 1 address: https://blockchain.info/address/3DLCRW4v2zcMoWfk8HH95JvMtQgCKhgKYt

Now, please, I don't want to be responsible for killing anyone...if you feel you might rupture an intracranial aneurysm, please stop reading and go see an interventional neuroradiologist or neurosurgeon.

 

OK so differentiating between "valid" and "usable" is a bit pedantic IMHO but let's go ahead and change the language we're using anyway. Whether or not they're valid, they're not USABLE. Let's see what happens if we try to send coins to 3DLCRW4v2zcMoWfk8HH95JvMtQgCKhgKYt with some various clients/services:

Blockchain.info wallet:


MtGox withdrawal:


BitcoinSpinner Android Client:


Bitcoin Wallet for Android by Andreas Schildbach:


I haven't had a chance to test with the Satoshi client yet since this is a work PC and I don't (can't) have Bitcoin installed on it, will update when I get home. At the very least I can say at this moment that none of the web-based or Android-based clients support this Bitcoin address version yet, which makes it largely unusable. I suspect that the 0.6.3 Satoshi client doesn't support them without special configuration either. Even if it does, none of the exchanges, eWallets or other services will send to such an address so it would only be usable in the one direction.

I suspect that all the 3* addresses in the blockchain folks are linking to as "proof" are live tests of OP_EVAL using experimental forks.

[dree12]

Prefix '3GiG' not possible
Hint: valid bitcoin addresses begin with "1"

Are you sure?

How do you explain this address then?

https://blockchain.info/address/3A5XQWZPzG4GrpVeYFaDBZ1s4sXkYB69Wf

But don't let a fact get in the way of a strongly held belief

I'm not understanding how the 3 addresses aren't valid...their relation to op_eval, multisig, hashes of scripts, etc....but by this link it appears to me that a 3 address can both store Bitcoins and transfer them to a 1 address: https://blockchain.info/address/3DLCRW4v2zcMoWfk8HH95JvMtQgCKhgKYt

Now, please, I don't want to be responsible for killing anyone...if you feel you might rupture an intracranial aneurysm, please stop reading and go see an interventional neuroradiologist or neurosurgeon.

 

OK so differentiating between "valid" and "usable" is a bit pedantic IMHO but let's go ahead and change the language we're using anyway. Whether or not they're valid, they're not USABLE. Let's see what happens if we try to send coins to 3DLCRW4v2zcMoWfk8HH95JvMtQgCKhgKYt with some various clients/services:

Blockchain.info wallet:


MtGox withdrawal:


BitcoinSpinner Android Client:


Bitcoin Wallet for Android by Andreas Schildbach:


I haven't had a chance to test with the Satoshi client yet since this is a work PC and I don't (can't) have Bitcoin installed on it, will update when I get home. At the very least I can say at this moment that none of the web-based or Android-based clients support this Bitcoin address version yet, which makes it largely unusable. I suspect that the 0.6.3 Satoshi client doesn't support them without special configuration either. Even if it does, none of the exchanges, eWallets or other services will send to such an address so it would only be usable in the one direction.

I suspect that all the 3* addresses in the blockchain folks are linking to as "proof" are live tests of OP_EVAL using experimental forks.

Satoshi client will send to 3* addresses. It's also the most common client. 3 addresses are usable, Q.E.D.

[BkkCoins]

I already tried with the Satoshi client. It doesn't allow sending to 3* addresses. You get an error message on 6.3 anyway.

But I'm not up on how these script addresses work anyway. Maybe they can only be the result of a script or something. Maybe you can only send from such an address? Or maybe it's just not supported yet. Don't know. Do care - as I wouldn't mind having that 3gig firstbit.

[dree12]

I already tried with the Satoshi client. It doesn't allow sending to 3* addresses.
But I'm not up on how these script addresses work anyway. Maybe they can only be the result of a script or something. Maybe you can only send from such an address? Or maybe it's just not supported yet. Don't know. Do care - as I wouldn't mind having that 3gig firstbit.

I just tried again. It went through.

[dree12]

I already tried with the Satoshi client. It doesn't allow sending to 3* addresses.
But I'm not up on how these script addresses work anyway. Maybe they can only be the result of a script or something. Maybe you can only send from such an address? Or maybe it's just not supported yet. Don't know. Do care - as I wouldn't mind having that 3gig firstbit.

I just tried again. It went through.

Honestly, I'm not sure which "satoshi client" you people are using.

[BkkCoins]

I already tried with the Satoshi client. It doesn't allow sending to 3* addresses.
But I'm not up on how these script addresses work anyway. Maybe they can only be the result of a script or something. Maybe you can only send from such an address? Or maybe it's just not supported yet. Don't know. Do care - as I wouldn't mind having that 3gig firstbit.

I just tried again. It went through.

Well, I should mention that I tried with a version 6 address not version 5. Maybe that's it. I forgot that initially but remember now I used vanitygen to make a 3gig variant and wanted to lock it up.

[enmaku]

Oh, and he couldn't get firstbits 3gig right now anyway since firstbits doesn't seem to support those address versions either:



Granted, this is probably erroneous, but it does lend further credence to my "invalid vs unusable" argument.

[BkkCoins]

Oh, and he couldn't get firstbits 3gig right now anyway since firstbits doesn't seem to support those address versions either:



Granted, this is probably erroneous, but it does lend further credence to my "invalid vs unusable" argument.

Even if Firstbits doesn't yet support it - having the trx in the chain would mean someday if it were supported you would "own" it.

[dree12]

Oh, and he couldn't get firstbits 3gig right now anyway since firstbits doesn't seem to support those address versions either:



Granted, this is probably erroneous, but it does lend further credence to my "invalid vs unusable" argument.

Blockchain.info is probably more popular and does support version 5 address firstbits.

[enmaku]

Oh, and he couldn't get firstbits 3gig right now anyway since firstbits doesn't seem to support those address versions either:



Granted, this is probably erroneous, but it does lend further credence to my "invalid vs unusable" argument.

Blockchain.info is probably more popular and does support version 5 address firstbits.

I'll concede that, given that I had blockchain.info bookmarked and firstbits.com wasn't, but it just further makes the point that "coverage is spotty" for v5 addresses, spotty enough to make them largely unusable.

[bg002h]

Prefix '3GiG' not possible
Hint: valid bitcoin addresses begin with "1"

Are you sure?

How do you explain this address then?

https://blockchain.info/address/3A5XQWZPzG4GrpVeYFaDBZ1s4sXkYB69Wf

But don't let a fact get in the way of a strongly held belief

I'm not understanding how the 3 addresses aren't valid...their relation to op_eval, multisig, hashes of scripts, etc....but by this link it appears to me that a 3 address can both store Bitcoins and transfer them to a 1 address: https://blockchain.info/address/3DLCRW4v2zcMoWfk8HH95JvMtQgCKhgKYt

Now, please, I don't want to be responsible for killing anyone...if you feel you might rupture an intracranial aneurysm, please stop reading and go see an interventional neuroradiologist or neurosurgeon.

 

OK so differentiating between "valid" and "usable" is a bit pedantic IMHO but let's go ahead and change the language we're using anyway. Whether or not they're valid, they're not USABLE. Let's see what happens if we try to send coins to 3DLCRW4v2zcMoWfk8HH95JvMtQgCKhgKYt with some various clients/services:

Blockchain.info wallet:


MtGox withdrawal:


BitcoinSpinner Android Client:


Bitcoin Wallet for Android by Andreas Schildbach:


I haven't had a chance to test with the Satoshi client yet since this is a work PC and I don't (can't) have Bitcoin installed on it, will update when I get home. At the very least I can say at this moment that none of the web-based or Android-based clients support this Bitcoin address version yet, which makes it largely unusable. I suspect that the 0.6.3 Satoshi client doesn't support them without special configuration either. Even if it does, none of the exchanges, eWallets or other services will send to such an address so it would only be usable in the one direction.

I suspect that all the 3* addresses in the blockchain folks are linking to as "proof" are live tests of OP_EVAL using experimental forks.

So 3* addresses are usable by clever folk, not people like us

[enmaku]

So 3* addresses are usable by clever folk, not people like us

Well I personally count myself in that "clever folk" category, but I also count myself in the "way too lazy to deal with experimental software" and "entirely too lazy to deal with git and a compiler when an executable is available" - either way, the effect is similar 

[Raoul Duke]

"way too lazy to deal with experimental software"

You shouldn't be using Bitcoin at all, then.