Bitcoin Core address

[qopel]

I just downloaded and synced bitcoin Core.

So what address do I use to receive bitcoins?

It doesn't seem to tell me what it is.

When I click request payment, it generates a new address every time.
I don't want a new wallet address for every transaction. I'll never be able to keep track of them all.

I just want one address to use with this wallet. Is that even possible???

What am I doing wrong?

[1713566931]

1713566931

[1713566931]

1713566931

[1713566931]

1713566931

[saddambitcoin]

I just downloaded and synced bitcoin Core.

So what address do I use to receive bitcoins?

It doesn't seem to tell me what it is.

When I click request payment, it generates a new address every time.
I don't want a new wallet address for every transaction. I'll never be able to keep track of them all.

I just want one address to use with this wallet. Is that even possible???

What am I doing wrong?

It is recommended to use a new address every time - for privacy and for security. You can simply reuse the same receiving address but it is not best practice. Lots of people do it though.

Your Bitcoin Core wallet has already generated a pool of (100) addresses for you to use. Every time you hit "request payment" it shows you another one. 

[qopel]

It is recommended to use a new address every time - for privacy and for security. You can simply reuse the same receiving address but it is not best practice. Lots of people do it though.

Your Bitcoin Core wallet has already generated a pool of (100) addresses for you to use. Every time you hit "request payment" it shows you another one. 

So if I post an address on a website and multiple people sent bitcoin to it I'll be OK? I'll get all the coin?

100 addresses? That's insane. That's like going to the bank and them giving you 100 checking account numbers.  WTF? I thought it was safe to post and use an address?
 

[Quokka]

So if I post an address on a website and multiple people sent bitcoin to it I'll be OK? I'll get all the coin?

100 addresses? That's insane. That's like going to the bank and them giving you 100 checking account numbers.  WTF? I thought it was safe to post and use an address?
 

Yes, it's fine to use a single address if that's easier. The reason people use multiple addresses, however, is because all Bitcoin transactions are entirely public and recorded and so using a different address for each transaction is a good way to retain privacy.

[qopel]

OK, but I heard darkcoin is private. Wouldn't that be better to use than bitcoin then?

Or will bitcoin start to use darkcoin technology to be private?

[ncsupanda]

OK, but I heard darkcoin is private. Wouldn't that be better to use than bitcoin then?

Or will bitcoin start to use darkcoin technology to be private?

I think it is best for you to begin to do more research on both Bitcoin and Darkcoin before asking questions about being "private" (which is more commonly referred to as anonymity).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin
http://wiki.darkcoin.eu/wiki/Main_Page

[justusranvier]

100 addresses? That's insane. That's like going to the bank and them giving you 100 checking account numbers.

No, addresses are not account numbers.

Addresses are single-use payment identifiers.

Using the same one more than once is a security and privacy vulnerability.

[qopel]

100 addresses? That's insane. That's like going to the bank and them giving you 100 checking account numbers.

No, addresses are not account numbers.

Addresses are single-use payment identifiers.

Using the same one more than once is a security and privacy vulnerability.

OK, so how do you get a mass amount of people to donate bitcoins to you securely??
Put out 100 different ads with different addresses?!? Seriously?

[justusranvier]

OK, so how do you get a mass amount of people to donate bitcoins to you securely??
Put out 100 different ads with different addresses?!? Seriously?

That's precisely what stealth addresses are good for.

You're right that it's a travesty that only two clients are interested in incorporating them at the moment.

[qopel]

That's precisely what stealth addresses are good for.

You're right that it's a travesty that only two clients are interested in incorporating them at the moment.
[/quote]


...and how does one get one of these amazing "stealth addresses"?

[justusranvier]

...and how does one get one of these amazing "stealth addresses"?

Right now, the only option unfortunately is to use Dark Wallet.

If you really need to receive donations from hundreds of people and stealth addresses are not practical yet (they aren't) then you should set up a web site where donors can go to be given a unique donation address.

Alternately you can add to the privacy pollution by giving out a single static donation address. That's a solution that's easy for you and will cause harm to other people in the future, but lots of other people are doing it...

[saddambitcoin]

It is recommended to use a new address every time - for privacy and for security. You can simply reuse the same receiving address but it is not best practice. Lots of people do it though.

Your Bitcoin Core wallet has already generated a pool of (100) addresses for you to use. Every time you hit "request payment" it shows you another one.  

So if I post an address on a website and multiple people sent bitcoin to it I'll be OK? I'll get all the coin?

100 addresses? That's insane. That's like going to the bank and them giving you 100 checking account numbers.  WTF? I thought it was safe to post and use an address?
 

LOL.

It is safe to post and use a public address anywhere you want to receive bitcoin.

Just use common sense and realize that the blockchain is completely public and people can track  your transactions if they so wished, based on linking your identity to a certain address and following it through other known addresses.

If you are interested in real anonymous coin privacy you should look into Monero - it uses ring signatures and has  anonymous capability right now. Very early stages so it is not user friendly for everyone. Darkcoin is just marketing.

[qopel]

This stuff is getting waaaay too complicated and insecure for the average user.
I now doubt seriously that bitcoin can become main stream with all the problems with it.

Oh well

[Newar]

[...] I'll never be able to keep track of them all. [...]

You don't need to, the software does it for you.

[qopel]

[...] I'll never be able to keep track of them all. [...]

You don't need to, the software does it for you.

The software generates the addresses, but I have to figure out who I give what address to.

With paypal, you just give your e-mail address.

With bitcoin you got some crazy random address and if you get one digit wrong...oh well. All transactions are final.

And the block chain is already at 20gb. What happens when it's 20tb?

and it's so easy to lose your coins. Just lose your password, or have your hard drive blow up.
and people have been able to steal bitcoins.

This will never catch on main stream.

[Quokka]

and people have been able to steal bitcoins.

Right, completely unlike PayPal, credit cards, or online bank accounts obviously. Every problem you've pointed out has a solution and it doesn't seem like you have much interest in figuring that out.

[itod]

With bitcoin you got some crazy random address and if you get one digit wrong...oh well. All transactions are final.

You can not get one digit (or letter) wrong, the Bitcoin public address has a checksum, if you enter a wrong digit software will notify you before you can send a transaction.

[qopel]

and people have been able to steal bitcoins.

Right, completely unlike PayPal, credit cards, or online bank accounts obviously. Every problem you've pointed out has a solution and it doesn't seem like you have much interest in figuring that out.

I didn't invent BitCoin. I want to use it. Why should I figure it out?
Aren't there enough computer nerds?

[atledenin]

It is recommended to use a new address every time - for privacy and for security. You can simply reuse the same receiving address but it is not best practice. Lots of people do it though.

Your Bitcoin Core wallet has already generated a pool of (100) addresses for you to use. Every time you hit "request payment" it shows you another one. 

So if I post an address on a website and multiple people sent bitcoin to it I'll be OK? I'll get all the coin?

100 addresses? That's insane. That's like going to the bank and them giving you 100 checking account numbers.  WTF? I thought it was safe to post and use an address?
 

Rather look at those 100 addresses like you've been given 100 individually coded cheques

[qopel]

Rather look at those 100 addresses like you've been given 100 individually coded cheques

I'm trying to receive money, not pay money!

[Quokka]

I didn't invent BitCoin. I want to use it. Why should I figure it out?
Aren't there enough computer nerds?

Because it's your money? I know BitcoinTalk is generally against using web wallets, and for good reason considering the security risks present with a lot of them, but hosting your own wallet is only more secure if you actually know what you're doing with it. If you're not comfortable using Bitcoin Core there are a plethora of web wallets out there. Of course that would require some amount of calculated risk and that's for "computer nerds". I'm personally a big Bitcoin user but I wouldn't go recommending Bitcoin to someone who wasn't willing to put in the time to learn how to use it. Bitcoin is, after all, still considered in beta.

[qopel]

I'm personally a big Bitcoin user but I wouldn't go recommending Bitcoin to someone who wasn't willing to put in the time to learn how to use it. Bitcoin is, after all, still considered in beta.
[/quote]


Tell that to all the Libertarians who insist BitCoin will be the end-all, be-all, of money everywhere.

[Quokka]

Tell that to all the Libertarians who insist BitCoin will be the end-all, be-all, of money everywhere.

Bitcoin is, after all, still considered in beta.

I apologize if new technology isn't user friendly enough for you but I hardly see a reason to disqualify the entire concept.

[Abdussamad]

This stuff is getting waaaay too complicated and insecure for the average user.
I now doubt seriously that bitcoin can become main stream with all the problems with it.

Oh well

Let me spell it out for you:

- Pick an address in your wallet

- Send said address to all the people you want to receive money from

- Profit

Don't worry about the privacy aspect of it. If you have to receive money from multiple people you reuse a single address. This is how everyone does it. The anal retentive among us can do multiple addresses but you don't have to be like that.

edit: And, for future reference, don't post in this section of the forums. This is for technical people. Yo should have posted in beginners and help and you would have gotten answers more appropriate for a newbie.

[qopel]

edit: And, for future reference, don't post in this section of the forums. This is for technical people. Yo should have posted in beginners and help and you would have gotten answers more appropriate for a newbie.

My original question was technical. The answers I got sounded like they were from newbies.

[justusranvier]

If you have to receive money from multiple people you reuse a single address. This is how everyone does it. The anal retentive among us can do multiple addresses but you don't have to be like that.

If you have toxic waste to dispose of just dump it in the East River. This is how everyone does it. The anal retentive among us can properly dispose of their waste, but you don't have to be like that.

Thanks for proving me right:

Alternately you can add to the privacy pollution by giving out a single static donation address. That's a solution that's easy for you and will cause harm to other people in the future, but lots of other people are doing it...

[Abdussamad]

If you have to receive money from multiple people you reuse a single address. This is how everyone does it. The anal retentive among us can do multiple addresses but you don't have to be like that.

If you have toxic waste to dispose of just dump it in the East River. This is how everyone does it. The anal retentive among us can properly dispose of their waste, but you don't have to be like that.

Thanks for proving me right:

Alternately you can add to the privacy pollution by giving out a single static donation address. That's a solution that's easy for you and will cause harm to other people in the future, but lots of other people are doing it...

I don't think a newbie should have to worry about this when he's just getting started.

[saddambitcoin]

I don't know about you guys but I personally enjoy giving out a new address for every receiving transaction...so fresh and clean. You also reveal less information about yourself. It's like using a seatbelt, yes you can drive without it but why not take advantage of it?

[itod]

I don't know about you guys but I personally enjoy giving out a new address for every receiving transaction...so fresh and clean. You also reveal less information about yourself. It's like using a seatbelt, yes you can drive without it but why not take advantage of it?

Exactly. That obsession with single address is so noobish, I remember when I've was first using the wallet was so pissed-off that change was not sent back to sending address, was even trying hard to find out if Bitcoin-QT can be set to do that. Even payed transaction fee to send it all back manually to vanity addy from time to time. Now I understand that default behaviour should not be allowed to be changed, but it took time for me to figure that out.

We seem to be trained to use only one address for some reason, maybe because we don't change street, email addresses, or bank accounts so often, or because it is such a large string. It takes time to get used to the fact that's just another key, used now and never again. I guess every new Bitcoin noob has to learn that himself.

[konradp]

I don't know about you guys but I personally enjoy giving out a new address for every receiving transaction...so fresh and clean. You also reveal less information about yourself. It's like using a seatbelt, yes you can drive without it but why not take advantage of it?

Exactly. That obsession with single address is so noobish, I remember when I've was first using the wallet was so pissed-off that change was not sent back to sending address, was even trying hard to find out if Bitcoin-QT can be set to do that. Even payed transaction fee to send it all back manually to vanity addy from time to time. Now I understand that default behaviour should not be allowed to be changed, but it took time for me to figure that out.

We seem to be trained to use only one address for some reason, maybe because we don't change street, email addresses, or bank accounts so often, or because it is such a large string. It takes time to get used to the fact that's just another key, used now and never again. I guess every new Bitcoin noob has to learn that himself.

I disagree, really a lot of people just *don't care* about being anonymous. In the same moment 99% of members of this forum talk about it. Hence the misunderstanding.  The OP did say nothing about anonymity, he simply wants to receive money. Using many receive addresses scare off beginners. Why not tell them, that "yes - you can use one address, but if you want to improve your anonymity, better use a lot of them?".

[Razick]

100 addresses? That's insane. That's like going to the bank and them giving you 100 checking account numbers.

No, addresses are not account numbers.

Addresses are single-use payment identifiers.

Using the same one more than once is a security and privacy vulnerability.

A privacy vulnerability yes, but that's not always a concern. I don't see how it's a security vulnerability though.

[justusranvier]

I disagree, really a lot of people just *don't care* about being anonymous.

The problem is their actions don't only affect themselves. People with bad habits like address reuse harm, not just their own privacy, but the privacy of anyone else they interact with. It's exactly like pollution.

I don't see how it's a security vulnerability though.

http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/08/google-confirms-critical-android-crypto-flaw-used-in-5700-bitcoin-heist/

Treating public keys as single-use protects you from a 0 day vulnerabilities in a way that reusing them does not.

[konradp]

I disagree, really a lot of people just *don't care* about being anonymous.

The problem is their actions don't only affect themselves. People with bad habits like address reuse harm, not just their own privacy, but the privacy of anyone else they interact with. It's exactly like pollution.

But this really scare off people. They don't know it, they don't understand it. If we want bitcoin to be more popular we just can't tell them to use hundreds of receiving adresses!

[drawingthesun]

So if I post an address on a website and multiple people sent bitcoin to it I'll be OK? I'll get all the coin?

100 addresses? That's insane. That's like going to the bank and them giving you 100 checking account numbers.  WTF? I thought it was safe to post and use an address?
 

Yes, it's fine to use a single address if that's easier. The reason people use multiple addresses, however, is because all Bitcoin transactions are entirely public and recorded and so using a different address for each transaction is a good way to retain privacy.

I don't know about you guys but I personally enjoy giving out a new address for every receiving transaction...so fresh and clean. You also reveal less information about yourself. It's like using a seatbelt, yes you can drive without it but why not take advantage of it?

Exactly. That obsession with single address is so noobish, I remember when I've was first using the wallet was so pissed-off that change was not sent back to sending address, was even trying hard to find out if Bitcoin-QT can be set to do that. Even payed transaction fee to send it all back manually to vanity addy from time to time. Now I understand that default behaviour should not be allowed to be changed, but it took time for me to figure that out.

We seem to be trained to use only one address for some reason, maybe because we don't change street, email addresses, or bank accounts so often, or because it is such a large string. It takes time to get used to the fact that's just another key, used now and never again. I guess every new Bitcoin noob has to learn that himself.

I disagree, really a lot of people just *don't care* about being anonymous. In the same moment 99% of members of this forum talk about it. Hence the misunderstanding.  The OP did say nothing about anonymity, he simply wants to receive money. Using many receive addresses scare off beginners. Why not tell them, that "yes - you can use one address, but if you want to improve your anonymity, better use a lot of them?".

Although many addresses only ends up giving an illusion of privacy, eventually your coins will mix unless you're so rich you don't have to combine them.

Also the privacy issue is huge for companies, I talked to the son of a billionaire about this, and they investigated the use of Bitcoin but concluded it would be too easy for their competitors to watch their monetary movements, in fact they were surprised people were so foolish to use such an open system. That kind of spurred my own research into anonymity systems and that is why I have been advocating for the use of the alt currency Monero.

The user has just one address and can keep track of payments with a payment ID, thus the user does not have to manage many addresses. Under the hood Monero has many one times addresses, but the user never sees this mechanic.

[drawingthesun]

I disagree, really a lot of people just *don't care* about being anonymous.

The problem is their actions don't only affect themselves. People with bad habits like address reuse harm, not just their own privacy, but the privacy of anyone else they interact with. It's exactly like pollution.

But this really scare off people. They don't know it, they don't understand it. If we want bitcoin to be more popular we just can't tell them to use hundreds of receiving adresses!

Monero only gives the user one address. Remember cryptocurrencies are very new, I'm personally very interested in Monero because it solves this particular issue so well.

[konradp]

All of you are still talking about anonymity, while in the same moment most people don't give a shit about it. They just want a simple way to transfer and receive bitcoin.

[drawingthesun]

All of you are still talking about anonymity, while in the same moment most people don't give a shit about it. They just want a simple way to transfer and receive bitcoin.

Read my posts, most people don't care about it, but for companies and rich people to start using it, the public ledger needs to be addressed.

You'll notice that the 95% of the people that don't give a crap about privacy are the 95% poorest too. :p

[BurtW]

All of you are still talking about anonymity, while in the same moment most people don't give a shit about it. They just want a simple way to transfer and receive bitcoin.

NO.  We are talking about privacy, not anonymity.  They are different.  Address reuse should be discouraged from day one.  If someone does nto want to take the 15 minutes it takes to learn how to properly use Bitcoin then they should not use it.

[drawingthesun]

All of you are still talking about anonymity, while in the same moment most people don't give a shit about it. They just want a simple way to transfer and receive bitcoin.

NO.  We are talking about privacy, not anonymity.  They are different.  Address reuse should be discouraged from day one.  If someone does nto want to take the 15 minutes it takes to learn how to properly use Bitcoin then they should not use it.

Perhaps, but what do you do when a competing crypto-coin comes along and solves this user interface issue and makes address reuse happen behind the scenes? For example Monero gives you just one address and that is all, yet the address is anonymous and the money is actually stored in behind the scenes one time addresses. The good thing is we have a GUI on the way and then you can redirect these users that should not use Bitcoin to Monero, because then they don't have to keep making lots of addresses, one address forever, how simple is that?

[itod]

All of you are still talking about anonymity, while in the same moment most people don't give a shit about it. They just want a simple way to transfer and receive bitcoin.

NO.  We are talking about privacy, not anonymity.  They are different.  Address reuse should be discouraged from day one.  If someone does nto want to take the 15 minutes it takes to learn how to properly use Bitcoin then they should not use it.

Perhaps, but what do you do when a competing crypto-coin comes along and solves this user interface issue and makes address reuse happen behind the scenes? For example Monero gives you just one address and that is all, yet the address is anonymous and the money is actually stored in behind the scenes one time addresses. The good thing is we have a GUI on the way and then you can redirect these users that should not use Bitcoin to Monero, because then they don't have to keep making lots of addresses, one address forever, how simple is that?

It's so simple that it doesn't work, few days ago there was a user who was crying he lost his "temporary transaction key" (read Monero docs to find out what it is) and he can not prove the payment is made to the second party. They don't claim he had not payed, just both sides can't find the transaction if their life depends on it, no matter they know both sending and receiving addresses. Please don't tell me that system is superior.

[justusranvier]

If we want bitcoin to be more popular we just can't tell them to use hundreds of receiving adresses!

What you do is tell them to use a client that handles that in the background for them.

Users should never need to know or care how many addresses their client is managing for them.

Most of the desktop clients get this right - user clicks "receive bitcoins" then the client selects a new one and returns it. After that they just see a balance without needing to know or care what kinds of scripts are attached to the unspent outputs they control.

[the joint]

I just downloaded and synced bitcoin Core.

So what address do I use to receive bitcoins?

It doesn't seem to tell me what it is.

When I click request payment, it generates a new address every time.
I don't want a new wallet address for every transaction. I'll never be able to keep track of them all.

I just want one address to use with this wallet. Is that even possible???

What am I doing wrong?

Judging solely from this post and the questions you're asking, I think it's probably best that you spend a lot more time researching BTC and how it works before using it.   Too many BTC have been lost by users who try to rush into making transactions.  There is no safety net here to catch you if you screw up

[drawingthesun]

All of you are still talking about anonymity, while in the same moment most people don't give a shit about it. They just want a simple way to transfer and receive bitcoin.

NO.  We are talking about privacy, not anonymity.  They are different.  Address reuse should be discouraged from day one.  If someone does nto want to take the 15 minutes it takes to learn how to properly use Bitcoin then they should not use it.

Perhaps, but what do you do when a competing crypto-coin comes along and solves this user interface issue and makes address reuse happen behind the scenes? For example Monero gives you just one address and that is all, yet the address is anonymous and the money is actually stored in behind the scenes one time addresses. The good thing is we have a GUI on the way and then you can redirect these users that should not use Bitcoin to Monero, because then they don't have to keep making lots of addresses, one address forever, how simple is that?

It's so simple that it doesn't work, few days ago there was a user who was crying he lost his "temporary transaction key" (read Monero docs to find out what it is) and he can not prove the payment is made to the second party. They don't claim he had not payed, just both sides can't find the transaction if their life depends on it, no matter they know both sending and receiving addresses. Please don't tell me that system is superior.

It works, and it's very easy to tell if someone has paid without the payment ID, you just check to see if the incoming amount is the same.

Anyway, the official GUI isn't out yet, it soon will be. Once the project has a GUI it'll be really hard to screw up, and again, all you need is a payment ID.

This is exactly like how a bank transfer works now, you send to your money to the other person and put in a customer reference number.

Monero replicates an average user's experience with internet banking far better than Bitcoin. Everyone knows what a customer reference number is, that is exactly how Monero works too.

[itod]

All of you are still talking about anonymity, while in the same moment most people don't give a shit about it. They just want a simple way to transfer and receive bitcoin.

NO.  We are talking about privacy, not anonymity.  They are different.  Address reuse should be discouraged from day one.  If someone does nto want to take the 15 minutes it takes to learn how to properly use Bitcoin then they should not use it.

Perhaps, but what do you do when a competing crypto-coin comes along and solves this user interface issue and makes address reuse happen behind the scenes? For example Monero gives you just one address and that is all, yet the address is anonymous and the money is actually stored in behind the scenes one time addresses. The good thing is we have a GUI on the way and then you can redirect these users that should not use Bitcoin to Monero, because then they don't have to keep making lots of addresses, one address forever, how simple is that?

It's so simple that it doesn't work, few days ago there was a user who was crying he lost his "temporary transaction key" (read Monero docs to find out what it is) and he can not prove the payment is made to the second party. They don't claim he had not payed, just both sides can't find the transaction if their life depends on it, no matter they know both sending and receiving addresses. Please don't tell me that system is superior.

It works, and it's very easy to tell if someone has paid without the payment ID, you just check to see if the incoming amount is the same.

I see the smylie at the end of your sentence, but I don't think it's funny. The site that received the transaction gets many transactions, not just one, they could never match the amounts. I think it was deposit to some exchange, and that money is lost *forever*. Losing transaction ID == losing the money, when you know both sending and receiving address is not how any money sending system works, let alone traditional banking. Many altcoin fanatics are so delusional in their perceived superiority of their altcoin specifics, it's laughable how they don't want to see the particular system is broken. Bitcoin at least has honest discussions about the problems and BIPs, things like this one could never pass as "nothing happened, move along people" attitude.

[drawingthesun]

All of you are still talking about anonymity, while in the same moment most people don't give a shit about it. They just want a simple way to transfer and receive bitcoin.

NO.  We are talking about privacy, not anonymity.  They are different.  Address reuse should be discouraged from day one.  If someone does nto want to take the 15 minutes it takes to learn how to properly use Bitcoin then they should not use it.

Perhaps, but what do you do when a competing crypto-coin comes along and solves this user interface issue and makes address reuse happen behind the scenes? For example Monero gives you just one address and that is all, yet the address is anonymous and the money is actually stored in behind the scenes one time addresses. The good thing is we have a GUI on the way and then you can redirect these users that should not use Bitcoin to Monero, because then they don't have to keep making lots of addresses, one address forever, how simple is that?

It's so simple that it doesn't work, few days ago there was a user who was crying he lost his "temporary transaction key" (read Monero docs to find out what it is) and he can not prove the payment is made to the second party. They don't claim he had not payed, just both sides can't find the transaction if their life depends on it, no matter they know both sending and receiving addresses. Please don't tell me that system is superior.

It works, and it's very easy to tell if someone has paid without the payment ID, you just check to see if the incoming amount is the same.

I see the smylie at the end of your sentence, but I don't think it's funny. The site that received the transaction gets many transactions, not just one, they could never match the amounts. I think it was deposit to some exchange, and that money is lost *forever*. Losing transaction ID == losing the money, when you know both sending and receiving address is not how any money sending system works, let alone traditional banking. Many altcoin fanatics are so delusional in their perceived superiority of their altcoin specifics, it's laughable how they don't want to see the particular system is broken. Bitcoin at least has honest discussions about the problems and BIPs, things like this one could never pass as "nothing happened, move along people" attitude.

Both the user and exchange have time and amount, it's quite easy to fix. This is the same as internet banking, you'd never send money without a customer ID to a business, if you do you may be able to fix it with those two variables.

At the end of the day, Monero replicates the traditional banking experience, one account and a reference(id) number to differentiate a user. I'm not following why this is so hard, even on my internet banking there is a warning about sending money without customer reference numbers.