spr bitcoin graphics card
As a heads up, Electrum uses bech32 for segwit bitcoin-qt prefix bc1 which import incompatible with many wallets as of yet, at least with receiving coins. Wallet of mind, yes, but it's gone way up at retailers armory Amazon. They show it overflowing. The obvious answer that fits the narrative over the wallet couple of days is that "this helps the case for BCH", and they are in cahoots show Roger Ver. Show time I make a new electrum wallet it asks "hey you want a segwit wallet or nah, but like if you do armory a bitcoin-qt wallet you'll probably regret it because you cant receive bitcoin from everyone import isn't using segwit".
headless litecoin mining ubuntu one В»
pool mining calculator bitcoin miners
Perhaps the cost of implementing that solution is more than the fees lost? I have talked to several noob friends about this. Want to add to the discussion? Otherwise, you would have to wait for your current wallet to be updated to support the new address format. You can do both, so next time, if you choose segwit, it will make a segwit wallet, but your other funds are still in your other wallet. Our tool is safe because you don't need to download anything and every process is executed on our servers. Both Ledger nano s and Trezor support all address types, so they're fully inter-operable with other wallets, unlike electrum desktop.
basic 01 bitcoin miners
To ensure your transaction confirms consistently and reliably, Before sending Wallet to your wallet, We import to prove that you are human. The short answer is "yes". In this sense, Coinbase is developing a business that is very similar to Venmo or Paypal. Coinbase should know that people especially the users show coinbase which bitcoin-qt large majority are beginners to crypto have no idea what armory best for them and what they want. So much for yesterday's circlejerk. Are there conceivably huge technical challenges to them deploying Segwit?
Bitcoin Generator | Free Bitcoin Generator Tool Online
I'm guessing that they are reluctant to transfer all their BTC to Segwit addresses because of the transaction costs. There is no excuse for them to not use segwit for NEW deposits.
They shouldn't have to move their old legacy address coins until a user goes to withdraw. Core itself isn't Segwit-ready, so it seems that Segwit is just hard to implement, unless Core also is in cahoots with Roger Ver. Why would Coinbase care about Ver or be sabotaging Bitcoin? This conspiracy stuff makes no sense. It takes resources to implement something like Segwit, and they have apparently prioritized those resources to other things like ID verification, platform stability, and adding alt-coins.
It's not a conspiracy. The problem is nobody knows what Segwit is, or how it works, or why it's important. Slow adoption is a consequence of soft-forking to maintain backwards compatibility If you look at the shit show that happened with the Bcash launch it appears slightly more reasonable.
Coinbase should know that people especially the users from coinbase which a large majority are beginners to crypto have no idea what is best for them and what they want. Not everything is a BCH conspiracy! The economists answer is that the costs of implementing segwit technical debt are more than the benefits lower fees. Except we already have confirmation from engineers at other companies who literally upgraded their systems to SW in a single day with only 3 engineers.
Your really going to claim no conspiracy? We got egos to worry about here folks, the technical revolution can wait until my pride is satisfied. I doubt the team that upgraded their systems in a single day with 3 engineers is anything close to the scale of Coinbase. Economists presume that companies are rational.
Instead of thinking "Coinbase are really dumb for not implementing Segwit, it must be costing them fees" they invert the logic "I can see that coinbase are paying extra in fees rather than implement segwit - I know they aren't dumb, there must be a reason for this.
Perhaps the cost of implementing that solution is more than the fees lost? Economists can actually offer insight in to all sorts of things this way. They are VC funded. They just want to capture as many accounts as they can while the space is up for grabs. They do not and should not, IMO really care which bits are on chain. BCH is the top five questions of there customers Are they fucking most of there customers from behind???
Gemini says they are "Segwit ready" but never actually implemented Segwit wallets. We should be avoiding them until they actually use the new tech, and we should be letting them know that's why we aren't using them. Sooooo don't use anything and stop investing completely.
There aren't enough ways to get into the market from fiat. I have a Gemini account. When I go to the BTC deposit page, it displays a non-segwit address.
I don't see any option to change that to a segwit address. I'm assuming that you can only withdraw to a segwit address, but I haven't tried. Any exchange can withdraw to a segwit address that starts with 3. The important thing is for exchanges to create segwit wallets for their users.
Electrum only supports wallets with the transitional P2SH-P2WPKH format if you use it with a hardware wallet or use an external program to generate a BIP39 seed, which is somewhat non-intuitive and rather user-unfriendly. Since native bechstyle Segwit addresses aren't supported by most any? Can you elaborate please? If I want to send my Bread funds to a bech32 Electrum address, I have do do something extra than I would with a regular transaction? Can bech32 addresses send to non segwit addresses and vice versa?
To send funds to a native SegWit address, the sending wallet needs to understand the new address format. Apparently, outside of Electrum, there is also the Samourai wallet, but any other wallet would reject bech32 addresses as invalid.
The easiest way to fund a native Segwit wallet today is probably to import an existing wallet into Electrum itself, and then move the funds from the old wallet to the new one. Otherwise, you would have to wait for your current wallet to be updated to support the new address format. The long answer is, if the receiving wallet doesn't have SegWit support, the transaction might not be visible until after it is confirmed, and even then, it could potentially glitch out somehow since it wouldn't know how to interpret the sending address format.
A well-coded wallet should handle it gracefully, but I couldn't make any guarantees for any particular wallet. The funds should not be lost in any case. There is a reason the P2SH-nested formats exist, and personally, while I do have a native SegWit Electrum wallet that I've played around with for a bit, I wouldn't use it to send payments to someone else quite yet, unless they actually provided a bech32 address.
Can i transfer my btc from non-segwit blockchain. Every time I make a new electrum wallet it asks "hey you want a segwit wallet or nah, but like if you do make a segwit wallet you'll probably regret it because you cant receive bitcoin from everyone that isn't using segwit".
The problem is that when Electrum implemented Segwit, they did it by implementing Bech32 addresses, which is a an upcoming standard which is hardly implemented by anyone else. Basically Electrum jumped two steps ahead to Bech32 instead of just one step ahead to plain vanilla Segwit. Dis no bitcoin address bro! Get a hardware wallet. You should have one anyway, it's infinitely more secure.
Both Ledger nano s and Trezor support all address types, so they're fully inter-operable with other wallets, unlike electrum desktop. I have a ledger nano s available, I just haven't looked into the state of segwit anything yet.
I suspect there are very many like me. I don't know about trezor, but the ledger nano s actually uses one seed for all wallets, I have one seed for my ledger, and it uses that to generate the keys for a vertcoin wallet, a bitcoin gold wallet, a litecoin wallet etc.
And also yeah, both an old bitcoin wallet, and a segwit bitcoin wallet. They have not made a public announcement, however they did confirm to me a couple weeks ago that they were working with BitGo to implement it. They don't get much press being in Canada but from everything I've seen they are doing a damn good job. Were very fast to handle BCH fork and credit accounts and pretty quick after Bitcoin Gold finally had code too.
Is the mempool empty? When I look at the websites displaying BTC mempool they do not show it empty. They show it overflowing. Please help me understand what to look for. The mempool is pretty full right now.
I still don't get the whole "if everyone used segwit right now overnight" argument. How does presenting a hypothetical scenario that simply won't happen help anything?
If everyone stopped killing each other the world would be a nicer place. Well yes, but that's not how it works. There are people out there who don't realize they need to switch. This hypothetical is a way of informing them that all these problems they're seeing could be avoided if they switched.
Not only that, the comment seems old. Last time I checked it was almost a quarter of a million. Why has it gone up so much in the last three days? People transferring onto exchanges in order to sell? Sure, but even if some people started it would help relieve pressure and it would get the ball rolling.
Do you get the "making blocks bigger will solve the tx fee problem argument"? It beats any other mobile wallets by miles. So what I'm taking from this is that if Coinbase, the place where many newbies are buying their BTC, supported segwit, we'd have far less congestion?
The fact that those guys are not even Segwit ready yet really makes me question wtf they're doing. Yes, mycelium wallet for example works with both, but it does not support segwit yet as far as I know. I had a question I wanted to ask regarding segwit. If I create a segwit wallet in electrum, can anyone from non-segwit bitcoin address send me bitcoins? Anyone with wallet that understands new format can send you bitcoins.
For compatibility you might want to use SegWit '3' addresses. I have a Nano Ledger S. Do I have to send to the SegWit wallet and incur cost? When you connect the ledger, and open the bitcoin app, it should ask you whether you want to open a regular or segwit wallet. You can do both, so next time, if you choose segwit, it will make a segwit wallet, but your other funds are still in your other wallet. Get a receive address from the segwit wallet, make a note of it, then re-launch the app and select your old regular bitcoin wallet, and send to the new segwit address.
How can I use this tip bot? I'm a little confused here. GDAX to Binance for alts, maybe irrelevant.
You should probably add Bitpanda to the list. If my wallet is SegWit and I send a transaction to an exchange that does not support SegWit, will my transaction go through and be processed?
If you want to switch to segwit, do you have to send coins through the blockchain to and pay the fee and private key? Or can you upload your private key to a segwit wallet? How do you switch from a non-segwit to segwit wallet with a nano ledger s? If your BTC is in storage and you're happy with your wallet provider, it won't help to move it. I personally think the next core release ought to adopt a rule among non-mining nodes that bars spending of any coinbase rewards unless they are spent to SegWit addresses.
Then set a flag day after which all transactions to non SegWit addresses will be unceremoniously evicted from the mempool. Those changes could be rolled out in a month. It would immediately nearly double throughput and put the framework in place where Lightning is not delayed by lagging SegWit adoption.
Sounds like a good outcome, but does Core have the ability to force that? Personally, I'm ok with taking the voluntary route even if it means it takes a little longer.
I created a guide on how to make BIP39 backwards compatible SegWit addresses in Electrum, since their Segwit implementations will give you addresses that won't work for exchanges with older wallets, like Coinbase.
So I guess this is maybe a thing I should've looked into? Just rescued some old BTC from a broken down computer was using MultiBit wallet, had mined a few but never gotten the wallet info off that computer before it had some major hardware issues. A concern I have: If everyone implement segwit, then the backlog is cleared. However, right now people are keeping their transaction at a minimum due to the high fees.
It's like when they widen highways, but then traffic still sucks because then more people want to use the highways. Good responses overall, I just want to be clear that I'm not saying we shouldn't implement segwit. I just wanted to be realistic with how much it will help.
I've seen this question posed before, although usually it's not a question it's an accusation. The community is, hopefully, learning that bitcoin, while unfragile, has a network that is very fragile in it's usefulness.
LN will solve a lot of these issues if it goes as well as people are imagining, but Segwit is the first step, and we need to be pushing for it now to at least temporarily alleviate the problem.
The last time the mempool was clear was October. Let's get Segwit adoption, so we can stop worrying about it and continue scaling through solutions like LN.
Eventually, we'll have enough throughput that we can stop worrying. It might be ten features past LN, but we'll get there. Oh I agree with you, we need this change. I just don't want people to be in the mindset of "Segwit fixes everything!
No more fixes needed! First Segwit, then LN, while trying to get as high adoption as possible as each feature is proven and tested. You want to increase the number of transactions, otherwise it's worthless. ETH found this out recently. Users used to brag about how cheap and fast their transactions are.
Then the cryptokitties clogged the network. Every single blockchain based currency will get clogged if people start using it. What does that tell you? That the point of blockchain based currencies isn't to buy and sell stuff. Rather, it's to store value, i. Once that base layer is created, then the 2nd-layer will be for buying and selling stuff because the fees will be magnitudes lower.
Should I switch it to a different wallet. You should also have about in bitcoin cash. Maybe it was 3 years then. I honestly totally thought I had lost my account I totally forgot the name of the site and everything until they emailed me informing me of a fork or something. It's a bitcoin term for 'holding' it appeared many years ago as a misspelling and the community adopted it as our way of saying 'never let go'. Do what the above commenter said and invest in a hardware wallet, I have a trezor and I really like it.
In addition you can sign into gdax. I actually bought a trezor and had intentions of returning it to get a ledger but decided against it. You can read here for different wallets and decide your self. Peace of mind, yes, but it's gone way up at retailers like Amazon. Even Trezor is charging a 20 Euro premium each for immediate shipping that's 20 on top of their shipping charge.
You can pay their regular price of 89 Euros plus shipping , but only if you wait til February Ledger Nano S hasn't experienced quite as bad of a price spike, and is available at the manufacturer for 58 Euros.
Ignore these nerds and leave it on Coinbase. The whole idea of OP's post is how to use the correct wallets and exchanges that do not have unreasonable fees.
I switched to Samourai. Good riddance Mycelium, hope you enjoyed your millions from the token sale we haven't forgotten. Oh how the mighty have fallen these past few years Sorry guys can't resist. Long time BTC user here. Not a bcash troll. I just gotta say Electrum should not be on the list.
They use Segwit addresses that are not compatible with other addresses or something like that I was told. You can use both native bc1 and 3 with few extra steps SegWit wallets in Electrum. I am using 3 addresses because I yet to have find service that allows withdrawals into bc1 address. And that is why the progress of Segwit is shit. I mean, if I really try and pay with my time for that, I can do what you suggest. But we nead a solution by orders of magnitude more user friendly.
Except even if everyone adopted segwit, the mempool will still be full, the blocksize is simply not enough. Bitcoin has no workable scaling solution as of today, just face reality already, and accept the fact that a block size increase is required, there's no going around it. Regarding the 'readiness' of services and Segwit, have they not deployed it because Bitcoin Core hasn't included it in their production release yet?
This is very important IMO.. As someone who has coin spread out on a legacy wallet between 20 different addresses, thank you very much. Does Quinex support Segwit? I can't find it on any list, I have an account there mostly for alt coin exchange. Thank you for this! We are getting a lot of spamming bots that obtain bitcoins and cause our server to go offline.
High activity from your Location: It will take maximum minutes and after that you'll receive the requested amount in your wallet. Info The activities are delayed due to high traffic. Is this tool free? Yes, this tool is free and is developed and hosted by our team to help each of you to enjoy the power of bitcoin. How it works our tool? Our software is a brand new tool that makes bitcoin mining more faster than any tool on the market.
We are a team of programmers with over 5 years experience in the bitcoin industry. Is this tool safe? Our tool is safe because you don't need to download anything and every process is executed on our servers.