I want firstbits key pair for 1gig

[unclemantis]

I emailed support@firstbits.com very early this morning. I guess it appears this guy has a day job

[BurtW]

Looks like I started a shit storm Good to know I am not the only one going nuts!

Shit storm?  You call this thread a shit storm?  Have you ever visited other part of this forum?  Lending for example?  This thread is a rational breath of fresh air!!!

I emailed support@firstbits.com very early this morning. I guess it appears this guy has a day job

Not sure why.  I think all of your questions have been answered.  What exactly do you want to know?

[cbeast]

Nothing personal, but I don't trust firstbits any more than online wallets. Vanitygen is cool, but vanity really isn't my thing.

[SgtSpike]

Nothing personal, but I don't trust firstbits any more than online wallets. Vanitygen is cool, but vanity really isn't my thing.

I don't think anyone should trust it any more than an online wallet, unless they calculate the firstbits themselves.

Hmmm... that might be a decent standalone app.  Given a block001.dat, calculate the firstbits of a given address.

[dree12]

Nothing personal, but I don't trust firstbits any more than online wallets. Vanitygen is cool, but vanity really isn't my thing.

I don't think anyone should trust it any more than an online wallet, unless they calculate the firstbits themselves.

Hmmm... that might be a decent standalone app.  Given a block001.dat, calculate the firstbits of a given address.

And a block002.dat, don't forget.

[unclemantis]

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

[dree12]

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

Vanitygen doesn't support 3 addresses AFAIK, because they use a different type of hashing. You're going to have to write your own program to do it.

[unclemantis]

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

Vanitygen doesn't support 3 addresses AFAIK, because they use a different type of hashing. You're going to have to write your own program to do it.

I have said it before and I will say it again!

KAKA!

[unclemantis]

Oh and I want this address too!

1KaKAvriV1TGeM98PwwUQ2sMk8rJ7gdu1B

LOL!

[Gyrsur]

Oh and I want this address too!

1KaKAvriV1TGeM98PwwUQ2sMk8rJ7gdu1B

LOL!

too much Gin is not good for healthiness!  

[unclemantis]

Oh and I want this address too!

1KaKAvriV1TGeM98PwwUQ2sMk8rJ7gdu1B

LOL!

too much Gin is not good for healthiness!  

Touche

[BurtW]

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

[drakahn]

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 think he was just passing on a message from vanitygen

[BurtW]

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 think he was just passing on a message from vanitygen

OK, my bad, corrected statement is probably:  Prefix '3GiG' not possible using the current version of vanitygen

[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 think he was just passing on a message from vanitygen

OK, my bad, corrected statement is probably:  Prefix '3GiG' not possible using the current version of vanitygen

No, it's genuinely not valid. The first digit of any given Bitcoin address is the "version byte."

It "wastes" 2 bits (64 and 1) to accomplish aesthetic norms. Bit 64 *could* be
assigned in the future if we ever have a "crunch". By using the high bit (128)
to designate test networks, all testnet addresses will now begin with '2'.
Bitcoin script-hash (aka OP_EVAL) addresses are assigned version 5 (using the
aesthetic +1), which means they always begin with '3'. Signatures are on
version 10 and/or 11, beginning with '5'.

A standard Bitcoin address will always start with a 1, testnet addresses start with a 2. Addresses starting with a 3 are OP_EVAL addresses (for a description of OP_EVAL addresses, check this Bitcoin StackExchange question/answer). The prefix tells Bitcoin how to handle transactions involving that address, so using an OP_EVAL prefix for a standard address could cause problems in interpretation - though I've never actually seen what happens if you actually try.

There are several other prefixes in use, often indicating that an address belongs to an alternate blockchain like Namecoin or Litecoin, as well as one prefix indicating that you're looking at a Bitcoin privkey.

While not every Bitcoin client performs proper sanity checks, they should require a destination address beginning with 1 or 3 and they should require a special form of signature to re-spend coins sent to an OP_EVAL address that I don't think the default client currently supports.

[TangibleCryptography]

No, it's genuinely not valid. The first digit of any given Bitcoin address is the "version byte."

Um it is valid.  It happens to be an OP_EVAL address and OP_EVAL address ARE valid.  You go on to quote a reference indicating the "3" prefix are used for OP_EVAL addresses so how did you reach the conclusion it isn't valid?

[enmaku]

No, it's genuinely not valid. The first digit of any given Bitcoin address is the "version byte."

Um it is valid.  It happens to be an OP_EVAL address and OP_EVAL address ARE valid.  You go on to quote a reference indicating the "3" prefix are used for OP_EVAL addresses so how did you reach the conclusion it isn't valid?

If you would READ THE REST OF THE FUCKING POST you'd know that. It's not a valid standard Bitcoin Address. It's an OP_EVAL address, which (to my knowledge) vanitygen doesn't FUCKING GENERATE, the current Satoshi client DOESN'T FUCKING SUPPORT and therefore you'd be wasting your time even attempting to generate since despite being "valid" by the strictest of terms, it's not valid in any real functional way in that even though it conforms to the standard THERE'S NO ACTUAL WAY TO USE THE DAMN THINGS.

I'm so tired of the shit I get for trying to educate people on this forum. Seriously.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Nobody said it was a standard address.
Nobody said it was generated by vanitygen.

Had you actually read the thread you would notice that all that had been discussed before you came along "helping" with 100% false statements.  Then you get made when corrected.  

This was the post you responded to:

OK, my bad, corrected statement is probably:  Prefix '3GiG' not possible using the current version of vanitygen

That post was 100% accurate.

This was your post:

No, it's genuinely not valid. The first digit of any given Bitcoin address is the "version byte."

Your post is false.  You helped out by "correcting" a post which was already correct by providing an incorrect post.  Then got mad because someone informed you of the fact.   Yes it is a valid address.  Yes it can be used.  Yes it could (or one w/ same prefix) could be generated although not with the current version of vanitygen.

THERE'S NO ACTUAL WAY TO USE THE DAMN THINGS.

Another false statement.

[enmaku]

Nobody said it was a standard address.
Nobody said it was generated by vanitygen.

Had you actually read the thread you would notice that all that had been discussed before you came along "helping" with 100% false statements.  Then you get made when corrected.  

Yes it is a valid address.
Yes it can be used.
Yes it could (or one w/ same prefix) could be generated although not with the current version of vanitygen.
It is a valid address.  It can be used.  It can be generated.

Then point me to where, exactly, in the standard client I can generate an M of N address beginning with that prefix. Oh wait, it's only available in the command line bitcoind interface, which practically no one uses.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Then point me to where, exactly, in the standard client I can generate an M of N address beginning with that prefix.

That is another thing nobody claimed was possible.  Tell me exactly where I can find gold for $0.20 per ton.

An address beginning with "3" is generated from the hash of a script. 

"1" address.   private key -> public key -> 1xxxxxxx address
"3" address.   script -> hash of script -> 3xxxxxx address