Bitcoin Mining Overview. Out of my intellectual curiosity ...

Bitcoin MMT (Magic Monetary Theory)

What if Bitcoin is nature's way of preserving itself?
Considering everything the ecosystem is going through presently, it seems plausible that what may seem like merely a new computer technology is actually much more in a wider view.
Stepping back, one may notice that everything that is happening in this moment is on purpose. There is no such thing as coincidence. In the highly egocentric western world, many people see themselves as outside of nature instead of part of it. The reason for this is the abandonment of certain parts of ourselves and surroundings, more or less because of the cultural programming implemented in us from a young age.
Glance back to the first boom of usefulness for Bitcoin. It played a massive role in supporting black market activity, making it a valuable tool for transferring wealth and illegal goods in a nuanced and relatively safe manner.
Arguably, plant medicines that have been used by humankind for thousands of years to evolve consciousness now deemed illegal by mainstream culture are so rooted in the subconscious of our species that those very organisms used those willing to explore the forbidden mystery within them to eventually create Bitcoin and propagate for the benefit of all living systems.
When a psychedelic compound such a psilocybin present in magic mushrooms is comsumed, it's very apparent that it dissolves one’s sense of self in a way not fathomable in any other form that is legal besides maybe meditation with much practice. It breaks one down to one's most simple self, an observer of the universe unfolding, leaving one scraping away for any bit of sanity that culture has peddled if the ego fights the experience in any way, lost in a loop of hellish abyss.
Once the realization is had that all one can do is let the experience happen as there is no use fighting what the substance is trying to reveal is submitted to, it is as though a huge weight is lifted, catapulting consciousness into a wild, ego shattering understanding of unconditional love and interconnection. Having such an experience surely causes any “rational” being to question the nature of reality with a more scrupulous eye.
In an age where it is becoming more apparent by the day that the current power structure is not only not serving the majority of people, but ultimately destroying one’s physical/mental/emotional/spiritual health, it is a dire time that people need to come together, back to a sense of balance.
As many know, the disparity of wealth in the world is wider than ever before. This is not by accident. The parasites at the top thrive on fear and greed to cultivate and maintain their power over the masses. Many tactics, including banning psychedelic organisms to keep people disconnected and unhappy with whom they truly are so to disempower, continues the endless cycle of chasing false hopes in order to do their bidding.
Fractional reserve banking, responsible namely for the US dollar is arguably the sole reason all of this is possible, as every person on the planet must spend the majority of their life finding ways to collect pieces of paper in hopes of survival.
That does not mean there is anything inherently wrong with money. In fact, it is a rather useful invention. The problem is most people hardly understand anything about fiat currency, yet slave away for it every day for the majority of their healthy life.
This is why Bitcoin was birthed. Its purpose is to expose the rampant fraud we're all subject to. Debt based money solely derives its value on faith, where which that earned today is worth less tomorrow, selling future generations prosperity away now.
Many people don't yet view Bitcoin as a reliable store of value, but can one imagine where it would be today if regulators didn't have the authority to step in and put restrictions on its usage? Namely, KYC & AML laws that bar people from buying/selling without a bank license and require exchanges to demand the identity of every user with multiple forms of government identification. So too with capital gains tax. These regulations solely function to slow the inevitable growth of this unstoppable technology. At its grassroots, none of that ever being needed for Bitcoin to function is how it was brought into mainstream view following eventual restrictions.
Arguably, if those laws weren’t placed upon Bitcoin, there would already be an even more thriving new economy backed by it firmly in place. Instead, it's being stunted by the currently insolvent and collapsing system that is built on the premise of "too big to fail" corporations that pillage the world's labor and resources so a few can live absurdly lavish lives.
Fact is, it is one’s birthright to freely exchange ideas and goods with anyone else voluntarily. When denied of such interactions, our very nature to be liberated is denied,which creates inevitable resistance and strife.
Looking at what many see as the solution to this corruption that causes such wealth disparity – the undeniable craving for unity and respect for the planet seen widely in the democratic-socialist movement in America calling for redistribution of wealth and addressing rampant pollution of the earth is partially misled in the sense it calls for more government intervention that relies on stealing from people. That is what allowed this mess to happen to begin with. America is already socialist for the “too big to fail” class in the form of endless money printing, claiming it is a capitalist nation where the rest of the people are deemed too small to survive, scrambling for the scraps that are supposed to trickle down though a rigged economy. What society actually needs is to go back basics with fulfilling simple living backed by sound money that can’t be manipulated by an either ignorant or conspiring ruling class.
As the Bitcoin motto goes, "don't trust, verify". As long as the system is propped up by infinitely printable money, it can be used to corrupt those put in power, continuing a war on the people around the world.
Everything that is going on right now is supposed to happen. For the exact same reason Bitcoin is trustworthy because it is mathematical, so too is the universe. Nature constantly breaks down to build itself back up, over and over again. In this time of uncertainty, on the cusp of watching society as we know it crumble, a new paradigm is unfolding.
It is no coincidence this is all happening as Bitcoin has more people interested in it than ever before. This is the beginning of a potentially very prosperous age, unfathomable to most in the current moment.
People are not meant to be domesticated, controlled by others granted higher status. We are all the same at the end of the day. Psychedelic experiences can reveal this truth of oneness; a push against mindlessly obeying authority that further attempts to rob critical thinking to create better life for all.
Just as mushroom mycelium works as a network to break down old organic material to feed the forest and all who inhabit it, the internet and Bitcoin network work to break down centralized control of information and money that no longer serve the ecosystem.
All in all, Bitcoin is a peaceful protest against the current system that is much needed. So too are consciousness shifting psychoactive plants that originally propagated the technology, as though to say to those that unjustly assert authority, “you fucked with the wrong organism. May the love be spread all around”!
Thanks for reading! One love.
submitted by MrDogeMeister to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Mobile Wallets in 2018 (Android/iOS)

Whenever i install a mobile wallet on some of my friends or families phone i try to only install open source software that definitely has you in charge of your private keys! There are some key things that every bitcoin wallet should provide, like segwit support for example.

So far my knowledge is this:

- Samourai (Android only / Still in Alpha / wont let you use BitPay / Full Segwit support / Open source / Experimental privacy features)
- GreenAddress (Not the most modern Interface / Privacy concerns with email/sms login? but ok / Segwit support (fully supported? not sure?) / Open source / iOS & Android supported )
- Blue Wallet (iOS only / Still early development / Full Segwit support / Open Source )
- Edge (Only client side open source / focus not only bitcoin / actually not sure if the fully support segwit) <- actually im quite skeptical about this wallet for some reason maybe someone knows more about it

all the other apps like CoPay, Mycelium, Electrum, Jaxx, Enjin either dont support segwit fully or are not fully open source.
what am i missing? are these the only few options if you want full segwit support, open source bitcoin wallets? its ok if the wallet i am looking for is only supporter on either iOS or Android but it seems there are still few options that live up to high standarts.
Id like to hear your alternatives or your thoughts for this topic since i think its a very critical thing for user adoption not to have scammy wallets full of advertising with no security or privacy standards.
I mainly use Samourai myself but its not a officially stable wallets by the developers even but i support them so this is why i use it. But you can't recommend it to someone new or as a standard kind of soloution.
For iOS my experience is very limited since i never owned an iPhone but its a huge market and i used to recommend Copay but i think its not a very good option.. for the moment i would go for GreenAddress or BlueWallet.

Let me know what ou think please





submitted by opencryptotools to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

An in-depth overview of different mobile wallets

Disclaimer: A lot of time went into writing this and more research than I anticipated. Errors are not just possible, they are certain. If you find any mistakes, please reach out to me and I'll edit. Furthermore I know I probably missed a couple apps, there are a lot out there. If I missed a big one, then again contact me and I'll consider adding it. If you are reading this in the future, note that these apps update regularly, anything mentioned here may have changed by the time you are reading it.

What is a mobile wallet?

A mobile Bitcoin wallet is an application for a mobile device which acts as a lightweight wallet and allows you to store, send and receive Bitcoin (or other cryptocurrencies and tokens). Mobile wallets use SPV (Simplified Payment Verification) to allow wallet functionality without having to download the whole blockchain. This is very important as barely any mobile phones have enough storage space required for the full blockchain. Mobile wallets are also considered hotwallets, meaning they have an active connection to the internet. The mere fact of being 'online' allows for a number of attack vectors and as such should never be used to store large amounts. It is however not unsafe per se. Private keys are stored locally and encrypted. Some wallets keep backups of those encrypted private keys on a server of their own, and this is something to take note of, but not to fear. So without further ado, lets get to it. I focused on Android wallets, but many of the wallets mentioned here have iOS versions.

Quick overview

Name Segwit Multisig Backup Other coins Fee Choice Privacy Options Depth/Complexity
Samourai Yes No 12 word seed + passphrase No Custom A ton Advanced
Bread No No 12 word seed No 2 Options No Beginner
GreenAddress Yes Yes 24 word seed No Custom Tor Optional Intermediate
AirBitz No No Private seed No Custom-ish No Beginner
Electrum Yes Yes 12 word seed No Custom Proxy possible Intermediate
Copay No Yes 12 word seed No Custom No Beginner
ArcBit No No 12 word seed No Fixed or Dynamic No Beginner
CoinSpace No No 12 word seed BCH/LTC/ETH 3 Options No Intermediate
Simple Bitcoin No No 12 word seed No None No Beginner
Bither No No 12 word seed BCH/BCG 4 choices No Intermediate
GreenBits Yes No 24 word seed No Custom No Beginner
Jaxx No No 12 word seed A ton 3 options No Advanced
Xapo / / / / / Public /
Coinomi No No 18 word seed A ton Custom No Advanced
Mycelium No No 12 word seed No Scrollwheel Tor Optional Intermediate

Wallet Breakdown

Samourai

Samourai focusses heavily on anonymity and obfuscation. Addresses are never used more than once. When making a transaction there is an obfuscation slider. Samourai has had SegWit enabled since October. Furthermore it offers a plethora of different features, too much to sum up here. If you are an advanced crypto-user you should definitely check out this wallet and their website which explains all of the different features. The UI takes a bit of getting used to though.

Breadwallet

Breadwallet is a very simple to use, straightforward app. The UI is slick and intuitive and in-app support to basic questions is very well incorporated. This could be a good wallet for a new person to the scene. The lack of advanced features will make this app not the go-to for more experienced users. It does however feature fingerprint authentication, which is cool, as well as BCH extraction. The lack of SegWit and complete absence of custom fee's is a problem though, especially since fees have gone up during the recent BTC spike. With only 2 fee options to choose from I simply can not recommend this wallet to people who are looking to make frequent transactions.

GreenAddress

When I first started with Greenaddress I didn't like the UI, I found it a bit clumsy. So definitely not user-friendly for a beginner. On the plus side it allows a choice of 2FA settings. Furthermore it has SegWit enabled and it has some advanced features like nLockTime transactions and it offers a service for instant transactions. This all feels very Lightning Network-y, which makes sense as GreenAddress is a part of Blockstream. Our friends in the other sub will most likely have something to say about this. I'll refrain from this and just say the following: this is an advanced wallet with promising features. If they clean up their UI a bit I could see myself using this without hesitation. The fact that they have MultiSig is a big plus as most mobile wallets do not have this functionality.

AirBitz

Unlike any other wallet I fired up at that point, this app did not prompt me with a 12- or 24-word seed. Instead it made me make an account, the regular username/password combo. After some research I found that these are not stored in a local database on their end. Which means that recovering your password in case of loss like with every other username/password login method we are so used to, is not possible. It is merely a different representation of an encryption key, allowing you access to your private keys. It features some interesting stuff though, NFC-compliant transactions and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) for example. Clearly this app is meant to be a bridge between users and merchants and has focus on making regular in-person transactions. Thus it mimics some non-crypto related payment apps that we have. Personally, I am not a fan, but I can appreciate the design philosophy and I would't be surprised if their design model worked very well in the future with the LN or with other crypto's that focus on small payments. As for the UI, it's fairly simple, yet horribly cluttered with partnered services. Good for non-techies maybe, but not for more experienced crypto-enthusiasts.

Electrum

Much like the desktop wallet I used years ago when I first started with Bitcoin, the mobile wallet is minimal. Straightforward and without fancy colors or UI. For those of us who have known the internet before Facebook, this app will feel strangely familiar. This is a classic example of a no-nonsense wallet with the features that really matter. SegWit and MultiSig enabled. A further lack of advanced options might be a turn-off for some users out there though. I did however find the option to spend coins from unconfirmed transactions. This could be very useful in case you want to cancel out a previously stuck or erroneous transaction and ensure it's never cleared. One downside to this wallet is the very primitive way of setting a custom fee. No guidelines, scrollwheel or info. Just a simple box in which to put your fee which won't help intermediate users, only experienced users.
Edit: sidenote on the SegWit implementation by Electrum http://www.crypto-economy.net/electrum-3-0-enables-bech32-segwit-addresses/?lang=en

CoPay

Of all the apps I've tried up to this point, CoPay had the best initializing phase, succinctly explaining risk and security. I can not imagine a better intro to a wallet for a first time bitcoiner. It being of a product of BitPay, of which I am personally not a fan, I have to admit though. This app looks clean, feels fast and is easy to use. It successfully demystified MultiSig functionality in its UI and partnered services are not obtrusive in the design. Downsides are lack of fee setting possibilities and SegWit. The latter I really do not understand given their main core of business. If it wasn't for those last two points, I would not see why not to recommend this wallet.

ArcBit

This app dissapointed me a bit. It starts out of the box, not mentioning any backup seeds or tutorial on the wallet itself or Bitcoin. It has no SegWit, no MultiSig, a lack of features and whilst a backup seed can still be requested from the settings, I feel it is of the utmost importance that such a security measure is not quickly overlooked. The lack of fee management tops it off. While this wallet works just fine and looks just fine, there are too many alternatives out there with better options and functionality for me to ever advise anyone to use this wallet.

CoinSpace

CoinSpace is one of those apps that could be really cool, but completely missed the boat on some other design choices. In-app ads unless you pay 1.6$ or something. Settings hidden behind a CoinSpace login screen. It features multiple tokens though with built in conversion through ShapeShift, which could have been awesome. But the excessive ads are just a big no-no. Lack of SegWit and limited fee options make this one of the least interesting wallets out there.

Simple Bitcoin Wallet

Simple Bitcoin is a very basic, barebone wallet. Feels like a one-man project. Almost no settings possible at all. There's much better out there.

Bither

I oddly liked Bither because of its design that reminded me of websites from the 2005-ish era using lots of gradients. Its one of those apps that you either like or you don't. The UI is not bad, but could be better, there's some functionality hidden in the settings, but not enough to satisfy. One very useful feature is built in BCH and BCG extraction. This is the first app I encountered with built in Bitcoin Gold access. It also has a separate tab with just market price information, which is really useful for the price ticker addicts among us. Furthermore it features Cold/Hot Storage View which allows you to monitor cold storage and with a nice graph shows you the distribution between Hot and Cold. Cool stuff. I would suggest to check it out, I'm sure some people will like and some won't. Do note, no SegWit. I would personally use this as a view-wallet only. Not as a spending wallet.

GreenBits

GreenBits is like the light version of GreenAddress. I tried looking for why one team would make 2 wallets but could not find a definitive answer asides from GreenBits being Android-native. And while some resources state MultiSig functionality and Tor through Orbot, I couldn't find those in this app. It does however sport SegWit and custom fees like GreenAddress. On the UI front I feel much more comfortable with this app though and I could see it being better received by average users. Looks like a good spending wallet without much extra.

Jaxx

Jaxx is a rather large wallet that supports many many many different coins with built in ShapeShift functionality. It did suffer from a hack earlier this year which is why this wallet has been discredited. I would however suggest looking into this one if you are invested in multiple different coins and regularly swap between them to get some financial edge. Lack of SegWit and fee options don't make this an ideal app for Bitcoin-only users.

Xapo

Xapo, known for its cold storage solutions was one of the apps I was eager to check out. Upon starting I however first had to verify through a text message, giving up my phone number, after which I was greeted by a 'Continue with Facebook or email' - screen. Upon choosing email, I was further asked to give up personal information. Nothing personal against these types of business models, but this is not what I am looking for in a mobile wallet. Centralization of personal information is quite in contrast with the decentralized and pseudonymous qualities of cryptocurrencies. This being the 13th wallet I've fired up tonight, I decided to give this one a pass.

Coinomi

Coinomi is very similar to Jaxx in the way that it supports a crapload of different currencies and in-app conversions between different tokens through ShapeShift and additionally Changelly. It does look quite a bit more straightforward though. A good alternative to Jaxx for those multicrypto traders among us. Unfortunately yet again not the best for straight Bitcoiners due to lack of SegWit. It has custom fees though, but much like Electrum, there's no real help here and it's just a manual input.

Mycelium

Mycelium has been my wallet app for a couple years now. Unfortunately the delay in SegWit adoption has me looking elsewhere and in succession writing this article. I really liked the recent addition of the fee scrollwheel, which is still the most detailed and succesful implementation of custom fees in any app I've seen. Having tried out many other apps at this point I can now see Mycelium, while not particulary user-unfriendly, could still very much improve its UI. It is however not a bad wallet, never crashed on me, always ran smooth through multiple updates. But let's not get sentimental here, it's a solid app, but its time for me and maybe you as well to try out something different ;-)

Conclusion

In this excruciatingly long article I've ran through a couple different wallet apps. One thing to learn is that not a single one of these is perfect and there's still room for improvement on many fronts. Which wallet holds your preference today depends largely on what you are looking for in a wallet. Do you want the cheapest transactions, then go for one of the SegWit enabled wallets. Do you like cool functionality, then check out Bither. Is anonymity of a concern to you then Samourai looks like the clear winner. More into multiple coins at once, then Coinomi or Jaxx is the way to go. And this is mobile wallets only, you have your desktop wallets, hardware wallets, cold storage solutions, paper wallets. But I'm all out of ink tonight!
I can't give you specific advice. In this world of cryptocurrencies we are in control of our own money. Being in control of your own money means being responsible for its security too. So make your own decision and due diligence.
Edit: Thanks everyone for the awesome responses. I've had some requests to further mention some important information regarding the wallets. I will write these down here as a memo to myself in the future, at which point I will review the state of mobile apps in greater detail once again. - Open Source or not - iOS version or not - Adding iOS only wallet apps
submitted by Zyntra to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

What is a Cryptocurrency Wallet?

What is a Cryptocurrency Wallet?
Use this straightforward guide to learn what a cryptocurrency wallet is, how they work and discover which ones are the best on the market.
A cryptocurrency wallet is a software program that stores private and public keys and interacts with various blockchain to enable users to send and receive digital currency and monitor their balance. If you want to use Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency, you will need to have a digital wallet.
How do they work?
Millions of people use cryptocurrency wallets, but there is considerable misunderstanding about how they work. Unlike traditional ‘pocket’ wallets, digital wallets don’t store currency. In fact, currencies don’t get stored in any single location or exist anywhere in any physical form. All that exists are records of transactions stored on the blockchain.
Cryptocurrency wallets are software programs that store your public and private keys and interface with various blockchain so users can monitor their balance, send money and conduct other operations. When a person sends you bitcoins or any other type of digital currency, they are essentially signing off ownership of the coins to your wallet’s address. To be able to spend those coins and unlock the funds, the private key stored in your wallet must match the public address the currency is assigned to. If public and private keys match, the balance in your digital wallet will increase, and the senders will decrease accordingly. There is no actual exchange of real coins. The transaction is signified merely by a transaction record on the blockchain and a change in balance in your cryptocurrency wallet.
What are the different types of Cryptocurrencywallets?
There are several types of wallets that provide different ways to store and access your digital currency. Wallets can be broken down into three distinct categories – software, hardware, and paper. Software wallets can be a desktop, mobile or online.
Are Cryptocurrency wallets secure?
Wallets are secure to varying degrees. The level of security depends on the type of wallet you use (desktop, mobile, online, paper, hardware) and the service provider. A web server is an intrinsically riskier environment to keep your currency compared to offline. Online wallets can expose users to possible vulnerabilities in the wallet platform which can be exploited by hackers to steal your funds. Offline wallets, on the other hand, cannot be hacked because they simply aren’t connected to an online network and don’t rely on a third party for security.
Although online wallets have proven the most vulnerable and prone to hacking attacks, diligent security precautions need to be implemented and followed when using any wallet. Remember that no matter which wallet you use, losing your private keys will lead you to lose your money. Similarly, if your wallet gets hacked, or you send money to a scammer, there is no way to reclaim lost currency or reverse the transaction. You must take precautions and be very careful!
Although Bitcoin is by far the most well-known and popular digital currency, hundreds of newcryptocurrencies (referred to as altcoins) have emerged, each with distinctive ecosystems and infrastructure. If you’re interested in using a variety of cryptocurrencies, the good news is, you don’t need set up a separate wallet for each currency. Instead of using a cryptocurrency wallet that supports a single currency, it may be more convenient to set up a multi-currency wallet which enables you to use several currencies from the same wallet.
Are there any transaction fees?
There is no straightforward answer here.
In general, transaction fees are a tiny fraction of traditional bank fees. Sometimes fees need to be paid for certain types of transactions to network miners as a processing fee, while some transactions don’t have any fee at all. It’s also possible to set your own fee. As a guide, the median transaction size of 226 bytes would result in a fee of 18,080 satoshis or $0.12. In some cases, if you choose to set a low fee, your transaction may get low priority, and you might have to wait hours or even days for the transaction to get confirmed. If you need your transaction completed and confirmed promptly, then you might need to increase the amount you’re willing to pay. Whatever wallet you end up using, transaction fees are not something you should worry about. You will either pay minuscule transaction fees, choose your own fees or pay no fees at all. A definite improvement from the past!
Are cryptocurrency wallets anonymous?
Kind of, but not really. Wallets are pseudonymous. While wallets aren’t tied to the actual identity of a user, all transactions are stored publicly and permanently on the blockchain. Your name or personal street address won’t be there, but data like your wallet address could be traced to your identity in a number of ways. While there are efforts underway to make anonymity and privacy easier to achieve, there are obvious downsides to full anonymity. Check out the DarkWallet project that is looking to beef up privacy and anonymity through stealth addresses and coin mixing.
Which Cryptocurrency wallet is the best?
There is an ever-growing list of options. Before picking a wallet, you should, however, consider how you intend to use it.
Bread Wallet
Bread Wallet is a simple mobile Bitcoin digital wallet that makes sending bitcoins as easy as sending an email. The wallet can be downloaded from the App Store or Google Play. Bread Wallet offers a standalone client, so there is no server to use when sending or receiving bitcoins. That means users can access their money and are in full control of their funds at all times. Overall, Bread Wallet’s clean interface, lightweight design and commitment to continually improve security, make the application safe, fast and a pleasure to use for both beginners and experienced users alike.
Mycelium
Advanced users searching for a Bitcoin mobile digital wallet, should look no further than mycelium. The Mycelium mobile wallet allows iPhone and Android users to send and receive bitcoins and keep complete control over bitcoins. No third party can freeze or lose your funds! With enterprise-level security superior to most other apps and features like cold storage and encrypted PDF backups, an integrated QR-code scanner, a local trading marketplace and secure chat amongst others, you can understand why Mycelium has long been regarded as one of the best wallets on the market.
Exodus
Exodus is a relatively new and unknown digital wallet that is currently only available on the desktop. It enables the storage and trading of Bitcoin, Ether, Litecoins, Dogecoins and Dash through an incredibly easy to use, intuitive and beautiful interface. Exodus also offers a very simple guide to backup your wallet. One of the great things about Exodus is that it has a built-in shapeshift exchange that allows users to trade altcoins for bitcoins and vice versa without leaving the wallet.
Copay
Created by Bitpay, Copay is one of the best digital wallets on the market. If you’re looking for convenience, Copay is easily accessed through a user-friendly interface on desktop, mobile or online. One of the best things about Copay is that it’s a multi-signature wallet so friends or business partners can share funds. Overall, Copay has something for everyone. It’s simple enough for entry-level users but has plenty of additional geeky features that will impress more experienced players as well.
Jaxx
Jaxx is a multi-currency Ether, Ether Classic, Dash, DAO, Litecoin, REP, Zcash, Rootstock, Bitcoin wallet and user interface. Jaxx has been designed to deliver a smooth Bitcoin and Ethereum experience. It is available on a variety of platforms and devices (Windows, Linux, Chrome, Firefox, OSX, Android mobile & tablet, iOS mobile & tablet) and connects with websites through Firefox and Chrome extensions. Jaxx allows in wallet conversion between Bitcoin, Ether and DAO tokens via Shapeshift and the import of Ethereum paper wallets. With an array of features and the continual integration of new currencies, Jaxx is an excellent choice for those who require a multi-currency wallet.
Armory
Armory is an open source Bitcoin desktop wallet perfect for experienced users that place emphasis on security. Some of Armory’s features include cold storage, multi-signature transactions, one-time printable backups, multiple wallets interface, GPU-resistant wallet encryption, key importing, key sweeping and more. Although Armory takes a little while to understand and use to it’s full potential, it’s a great option for more tech-savvy bitcoiners looking to keep their funds safe and secure.
Trezor is a hardware Bitcoin wallet that is ideal for storing large amounts of bitcoins. Trezor cannot be infected by malware and never exposes your private keys which make it as safe as holding traditional paper money. Trezor is open source and transparent, with all technical decisions benefiting from wider community consultation. It’s easy to use, has an intuitive interface and is Windows, OS X and Linux friendly. One of the few downsides of the Trezor wallet is that it must be with you to send bitcoins. This, therefore, makes Trezor best for inactive savers, investors or people who want to keep large amounts of Bitcoin highly secure.
Ledger Nano
The Ledger Wallet Nano is a new hierarchical deterministic multisig hardware wallet for bitcoin users that aims to eliminate a number of attack vectors through the use of a second security layer. This tech-heavy description does not mean much to the average consumer, though, which is why I am going to explain it in plain language, describing what makes the Ledger Wallet Nano tick. In terms of hardware, the Ledger Wallet Nano is a compact USB device based on a smart card. It is roughly the size of a small flash drive, measuring 39 x 13 x 4mm (1.53 x 0.51 x 0.16in) and weighing in at just 5.9g.
Pros:
Cons:
Green Address
Green Address is a user-friendly Bitcoin wallet that’s an excellent choice for beginners. Green Address is accessible via desktop, online or mobile with apps available for Chrome, iOS, and Android. Features include multi-signature addresses & two-factor authentications for enhanced security, paper wallet backup, and instant transaction confirmation. A downside is that Green Address is required to approve all payments, so you do not have full control over your spending
Blockchain (dot) info
Blockchain is one of the most popular Bitcoin wallets. Accessing this wallet can be done from any browser or smartphone. Blockchain.info provides two different additional layers. For the browser version, users can enable two-factor authentication, while mobile users can activate a pin code requirement every time the wallet application is opened. Although your wallet will be stored online and all transactions will need to go through the company’s servers, Blockchain.info does not have access to your private keys. Overall, this is a well-established company that is trusted throughout the Bitcoin community and makes for a solid wallet to keep your currency.
submitted by Tokenberry to NewbieZone [link] [comments]

Is anyone else freaked out by this whole blocksize debate? Does anyone else find themself often agreeing with *both* sides - depending on whichever argument you happen to be reading at the moment? And do we need some better algorithms and data structures?

Why do both sides of the debate seem “right” to me?
I know, I know, a healthy debate is healthy and all - and maybe I'm just not used to the tumult and jostling which would be inevitable in a real live open major debate about something as vital as Bitcoin.
And I really do agree with the starry-eyed idealists who say Bitcoin is vital. Imperfect as it may be, it certainly does seem to represent the first real chance we've had in the past few hundred years to try to steer our civilization and our planet away from the dead-ends and disasters which our government-issued debt-based currencies keep dragging us into.
But this particular debate, about the blocksize, doesn't seem to be getting resolved at all.
Pretty much every time I read one of the long-form major arguments contributed by Bitcoin "thinkers" who I've come to respect over the past few years, this weird thing happens: I usually end up finding myself nodding my head and agreeing with whatever particular piece I'm reading!
But that should be impossible - because a lot of these people vehemently disagree!
So how can both sides sound so convincing to me, simply depending on whichever piece I currently happen to be reading?
Does anyone else feel this way? Or am I just a gullible idiot?
Just Do It?
When you first look at it or hear about it, increasing the size seems almost like a no-brainer: The "big-block" supporters say just increase the blocksize to 20 MB or 8 MB, or do some kind of scheduled or calculated regular increment which tries to take into account the capabilities of the infrastructure and the needs of the users. We do have the bandwidth and the memory to at least increase the blocksize now, they say - and we're probably gonna continue to have more bandwidth and memory in order to be able to keep increasing the blocksize for another couple decades - pretty much like everything else computer-based we've seen over the years (some of this stuff is called by names such as "Moore's Law").
On the other hand, whenever the "small-block" supporters warn about the utter catastrophe that a failed hard-fork would mean, I get totally freaked by their possible doomsday scenarios, which seem totally plausible and terrifying - so I end up feeling that the only way I'd want to go with a hard-fork would be if there was some pre-agreed "triggering" mechanism where the fork itself would only actually "switch on" and take effect provided that some "supermajority" of the network (of who? the miners? the full nodes?) had signaled (presumably via some kind of totally reliable p2p trustless software-based voting system?) that they do indeed "pre-agree" to actually adopt the pre-scheduled fork (and thereby avoid any possibility whatsoever of the precious blockchain somehow tragically splitting into two and pretty much killing this cryptocurrency off in its infancy).
So in this "conservative" scenario, I'm talking about wanting at least 95% pre-adoption agreement - not the mere 75% which I recall some proposals call for, which seems like it could easily lead to a 75/25 blockchain split.
But this time, with this long drawn-out blocksize debate, the core devs, and several other important voices who have become prominent opinion shapers over the past few years, can't seem to come to any real agreement on this.
Weird split among the devs
As far as I can see, there's this weird split: Gavin and Mike seem to be the only people among the devs who really want a major blocksize increase - and all the other devs seem to be vehemently against them.
But then on the other hand, the users seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of a major increase.
And there are meta-questions about governance, about about why this didn't come out as a BIP, and what the availability of Bitcoin XT means.
And today or yesterday there was this really cool big-blockian exponential graph based on doubling the blocksize every two years for twenty years, reminding us of the pure mathematical fact that 210 is indeed about 1000 - but not really addressing any of the game-theoretic points raised by the small-blockians. So a lot of the users seem to like it, but when so few devs say anything positive about it, I worry: is this just yet more exponential chart porn?
On the one hand, Gavin's and Mike's blocksize increase proposal initially seemed like a no-brainer to me.
And on the other hand, all the other devs seem to be against them. Which is weird - not what I'd initially expected at all (but maybe I'm just a fool who's seduced by exponential chart porn?).
Look, I don't mean to be rude to any of the core devs, and I don't want to come off like someone wearing a tinfoil hat - but it has to cross people's minds that the powers that be (the Fed and the other central banks and the governments that use their debt-issued money to run this world into a ditch) could very well be much more scared shitless than they're letting on. If we assume that the powers that be are using their usual playbook and tactics, then it could be worth looking at the book "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins, to get an idea of how they might try to attack Bitcoin. So, what I'm saying is, they do have a track record of sending in "experts" to try to derail projects and keep everyone enslaved to the Creature from Jekyll Island. I'm just saying. So, without getting ad hominem - let's just make sure that our ideas can really stand scrutiny on their own - as Nick Szabo says, we need to make sure there is "more computer science, less noise" in this debate.
When Gavin Andresen first came out with the 20 MB thing - I sat back and tried to imagine if I could download 20 MB in 10 minutes (which seems to be one of the basic mathematical and technological constraints here - right?)
I figured, "Yeah, I could download that" - even with my crappy internet connection.
And I guess the telecoms might be nice enough to continue to double our bandwidth every two years for the next couple decades – if we ask them politely?
On the other hand - I think we should be careful about entrusting the financial freedom of the world into the greedy hands of the telecoms companies - given all their shady shenanigans over the past few years in many countries. After decades of the MPAA and the FBI trying to chip away at BitTorrent, lately PirateBay has been hard to access. I would say it's quite likely that certain persons at institutions like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs and the Fed might be very, very motivated to see Bitcoin fail - so we shouldn't be too sure about scaling plans which depend on the willingness of companies Verizon and AT&T to double our bandwith every two years.
Maybe the real important hardware buildout challenge for a company like 21 (and its allies such as Qualcomm) to take on now would not be "a miner in every toaster" but rather "Google Fiber Download and Upload Speeds in every Country, including China".
I think I've read all the major stuff on the blocksize debate from Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn, Greg Maxwell, Peter Todd, Adam Back, and Jeff Garzick and several other major contributors - and, oddly enough, all their arguments seem reasonable - heck even Luke-Jr seems reasonable to me on the blocksize debate, and I always thought he was a whackjob overly influenced by superstition and numerology - and now today I'm reading the article by Bram Cohen - the inventor of BitTorrent - and I find myself agreeing with him too!
I say to myself: What's going on with me? How can I possibly agree with all of these guys, if they all have such vehemently opposing viewpoints?
I mean, think back to the glory days of a couple of years ago, when all we were hearing was how this amazing unprecedented grassroots innovation called Bitcoin was going to benefit everyone from all walks of life, all around the world:
...basically the entire human race transacting everything into the blockchain.
(Although let me say that I think that people's focus on ideas like driverless cabs creating realtime fare markets based on supply and demand seems to be setting our sights a bit low as far as Bitcoin's abilities to correct the financial world's capital-misallocation problems which seem to have been made possible by infinite debt-based fiat. I would have hoped that a Bitcoin-based economy would solve much more noble, much more urgent capital-allocation problems than driverless taxicabs creating fare markets or refrigerators ordering milk on the internet of things. I was thinking more along the lines that Bitcoin would finally strangle dead-end debt-based deadly-toxic energy industries like fossil fuels and let profitable clean energy industries like Thorium LFTRs take over - but that's another topic. :=)
Paradoxes in the blocksize debate
Let me summarize the major paradoxes I see here:
(1) Regarding the people (the majority of the core devs) who are against a blocksize increase: Well, the small-blocks arguments do seem kinda weird, and certainly not very "populist", in the sense that: When on earth have end-users ever heard of a computer technology whose capacity didn't grow pretty much exponentially year-on-year? All the cool new technology we've had - from hard drives to RAM to bandwidth - started out pathetically tiny and grew to unimaginably huge over the past few decades - and all our software has in turn gotten massively powerful and big and complex (sometimes bloated) to take advantage of the enormous new capacity available.
But now suddenly, for the first time in the history of technology, we seem to have a majority of the devs, on a major p2p project - saying: "Let's not scale the system up. It could be dangerous. It might break the whole system (if the hard-fork fails)."
I don't know, maybe I'm missing something here, maybe someone else could enlighten me, but I don't think I've ever seen this sort of thing happen in the last few decades of the history of technology - devs arguing against scaling up p2p technology to take advantage of expected growth in infrastructure capacity.
(2) But... on the other hand... the dire warnings of the small-blockians about what could happen if a hard-fork were to fail - wow, they do seem really dire! And these guys are pretty much all heavyweight, experienced programmers and/or game theorists and/or p2p open-source project managers.
I must say, that nearly all of the long-form arguments I've read - as well as many, many of the shorter comments I've read from many users in the threads, whose names I at least have come to more-or-less recognize over the past few months and years on reddit and bitcointalk - have been amazingly impressive in their ability to analyze all aspects of the lifecycle and management of open-source software projects, bringing up lots of serious points which I could never have come up with, and which seem to come from long experience with programming and project management - as well as dealing with economics and human nature (eg, greed - the game-theory stuff).
So a lot of really smart and experienced people with major expertise in various areas ranging from programming to management to game theory to politics to economics have been making some serious, mature, compelling arguments.
But, as I've been saying, the only problem to me is: in many of these cases, these arguments are vehemently in opposition to each other! So I find myself agreeing with pretty much all of them, one by one - which means the end result is just a giant contradiction.
I mean, today we have Bram Cohen, the inventor of BitTorrent, arguing (quite cogently and convincingly to me), that it would be dangerous to increase the blocksize. And this seems to be a guy who would know a few things about scaling out a massive global p2p network - since the protocol which he invented, BitTorrent, is now apparently responsible for like a third of the traffic on the internet (and this despite the long-term concerted efforts of major evil players such as the MPAA and the FBI to shut the whole thing down).
Was the BitTorrent analogy too "glib"?
By the way - I would like to go on a slight tangent here and say that one of the main reasons why I felt so "comfortable" jumping on the Bitcoin train back a few years ago, when I first heard about it and got into it, was the whole rough analogy I saw with BitTorrent.
I remembered the perhaps paradoxical fact that when a torrent is more popular (eg, a major movie release that just came out last week), then it actually becomes faster to download. More people want it, so more people have a few pieces of it, so more people are able to get it from each other. A kind of self-correcting economic feedback loop, where more demand directly leads to more supply.
(BitTorrent manages to pull this off by essentially adding a certain structure to the file being shared, so that it's not simply like an append-only list of 1 MB blocks, but rather more like an random-access or indexed array of 1 MB chunks. Say you're downloading a film which is 700 MB. As soon as your "client" program has downloaded a single 1-MB chunk - say chunk #99 - your "client" program instantly turns into a "server" program as well - offering that chunk #99 to other clients. From my simplistic understanding, I believe the Bitcoin protocol does something similar, to provide a p2p architecture. Hence my - perhaps naïve - assumption that Bitcoin already had the right algorithms / architecture / data structure to scale.)
The efficiency of the BitTorrent network seemed to jive with that "network law" (Metcalfe's Law?) about fax machines. This law states that the more fax machines there are, the more valuable the network of fax machines becomes. Or the value of the network grows on the order of the square of the number of nodes.
This is in contrast with other technology like cars, where the more you have, the worse things get. The more cars there are, the more traffic jams you have, so things start going downhill. I guess this is because highway space is limited - after all, we can't pave over the entire countryside, and we never did get those flying cars we were promised, as David Graeber laments in a recent essay in The Baffler magazine :-)
And regarding the "stress test" supposedly happening right now in the middle of this ongoing blocksize debate, I don't know what worries me more: the fact that it apparently is taking only $5,000 to do a simple kind of DoS on the blockchain - or the fact that there are a few rumors swirling around saying that the unknown company doing the stress test shares the same physical mailing address with a "scam" company?
Or maybe we should just be worried that so much of this debate is happening on a handful of forums which are controlled by some guy named theymos who's already engaged in some pretty "contentious" or "controversial" behavior like blowing a million dollars on writing forum software (I guess he never heard that reddit.com software is open-source)?
So I worry that the great promise of "decentralization" might be more fragile than we originally thought.
Scaling
Anyways, back to Metcalfe's Law: with virtual stuff, like torrents and fax machines, the more the merrier. The more people downloading a given movie, the faster it arrives - and the more people own fax machines, the more valuable the overall fax network.
So I kindof (naïvely?) assumed that Bitcoin, being "virtual" and p2p, would somehow scale up the same magical way BitTorrrent did. I just figured that more people using it would somehow automatically make it stronger and faster.
But now a lot of devs have started talking in terms of the old "scarcity" paradigm, talking about blockspace being a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" - which seems kinda scary, and antithetical to much of the earlier rhetoric we heard about Bitcoin (the stuff about supporting our favorite creators with micropayments, and the stuff about Africans using SMS to send around payments).
Look, when some asshole is in line in front of you at the cash register and he's holding up the line so they can run his credit card to buy a bag of Cheeto's, we tend to get pissed off at the guy - clogging up our expensive global electronic payment infrastructure to make a two-dollar purchase. And that's on a fairly efficient centralized system - and presumably after a year or so, VISA and the guy's bank can delete or compress the transaction in their SQL databases.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if some guy buys a coffee on the blockchain, or if somebody pays an online artist $1.99 for their work - then that transaction, a few bytes or so, has to live on the blockchain forever?
Or is there some "pruning" thing that gets rid of it after a while?
And this could lead to another question: Viewed from the perspective of double-entry bookkeeping, is the blockchain "world-wide ledger" more like the "balance sheet" part of accounting, i.e. a snapshot showing current assets and liabilities? Or is it more like the "cash flow" part of accounting, i.e. a journal showing historical revenues and expenses?
When I think of thousands of machines around the globe having to lug around multiple identical copies of a multi-gigabyte file containing some asshole's coffee purchase forever and ever... I feel like I'm ideologically drifting in one direction (where I'd end up also being against really cool stuff like online micropayments and Africans banking via SMS)... so I don't want to go there.
But on the other hand, when really experienced and battle-tested veterans with major experience in the world of open-souce programming and project management (the "small-blockians") warn of the catastrophic consequences of a possible failed hard-fork, I get freaked out and I wonder if Bitcoin really was destined to be a settlement layer for big transactions.
Could the original programmer(s) possibly weigh in?
And I don't mean to appeal to authority - but heck, where the hell is Satoshi Nakamoto in all this? I do understand that he/she/they would want to maintain absolute anonymity - but on the other hand, I assume SN wants Bitcoin to succeed (both for the future of humanity - or at least for all the bitcoins SN allegedly holds :-) - and I understand there is a way that SN can cryptographically sign a message - and I understand that as the original developer of Bitcoin, SN had some very specific opinions about the blocksize... So I'm kinda wondering of Satoshi could weigh in from time to time. Just to help out a bit. I'm not saying "Show us a sign" like a deity or something - but damn it sure would be fascinating and possibly very helpful if Satoshi gave us his/hetheir 2 satoshis worth at this really confusing juncture.
Are we using our capacity wisely?
I'm not a programming or game-theory whiz, I'm just a casual user who has tried to keep up with technology over the years.
It just seems weird to me that here we have this massive supercomputer (500 times more powerful than the all the supercomputers in the world combined) doing fairly straightforward "embarassingly parallel" number-crunching operations to secure a p2p world-wide ledger called the blockchain to keep track of a measly 2.1 quadrillion tokens spread out among a few billion addresses - and a couple of years ago you had people like Rick Falkvinge saying the blockchain would someday be supporting multi-million-dollar letters of credit for international trade and you had people like Andreas Antonopoulos saying the blockchain would someday allow billions of "unbanked" people to send remittances around the village or around the world dirt-cheap - and now suddenly in June 2015 we're talking about blockspace as a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" and partially centralized, corporate-sponsored "Level 2" vaporware like Lightning Network and some mysterious company is "stess testing" or "DoS-ing" the system by throwing away a measly $5,000 and suddenly it sounds like the whole system could eventually head right back into PayPal and Western Union territory again, in terms of expensive fees.
When I got into Bitcoin, I really was heavily influenced by vague analogies with BitTorrent: I figured everyone would just have tiny little like utorrent-type program running on their machine (ie, Bitcoin-QT or Armory or Mycelium etc.).
I figured that just like anyone can host a their own blog or webserver, anyone would be able to host their own bank.
Yeah, Google and and Mozilla and Twitter and Facebook and WhatsApp did come along and build stuff on top of TCP/IP, so I did expect a bunch of companies to build layers on top of the Bitcoin protocol as well. But I still figured the basic unit of bitcoin client software powering the overall system would be small and personal and affordable and p2p - like a bittorrent client - or at the most, like a cheap server hosting a blog or email server.
And I figured there would be a way at the software level, at the architecture level, at the algorithmic level, at the data structure level - to let the thing scale - if not infinitely, at least fairly massively and gracefully - the same way the BitTorrent network has.
Of course, I do also understand that with BitTorrent, you're sharing a read-only object (eg, a movie) - whereas with Bitcoin, you're achieving distributed trustless consensus and appending it to a write-only (or append-only) database.
So I do understand that the problem which BitTorrent solves is much simpler than the problem which Bitcoin sets out to solve.
But still, it seems that there's got to be a way to make this thing scale. It's p2p and it's got 500 times more computing power than all the supercomputers in the world combined - and so many brilliant and motivated and inspired people want this thing to succeed! And Bitcoin could be our civilization's last chance to steer away from the oncoming debt-based ditch of disaster we seem to be driving into!
It just seems that Bitcoin has got to be able to scale somehow - and all these smart people working together should be able to come up with a solution which pretty much everyone can agree - in advance - will work.
Right? Right?
A (probably irrelevant) tangent on algorithms and architecture and data structures
I'll finally weigh with my personal perspective - although I might be biased due to my background (which is more on the theoretical side of computer science).
My own modest - or perhaps radical - suggestion would be to ask whether we're really looking at all the best possible algorithms and architectures and data structures out there.
From this perspective, I sometimes worry that the overwhelming majority of the great minds working on the programming and game-theory stuff might come from a rather specific, shall we say "von Neumann" or "procedural" or "imperative" school of programming (ie, C and Python and Java programmers).
It seems strange to me that such a cutting-edge and important computer project would have so little participation from the great minds at the other end of the spectrum of programming paradigms - namely, the "functional" and "declarative" and "algebraic" (and co-algebraic!) worlds.
For example, I was struck in particular by statements I've seen here and there (which seemed rather hubristic or lackadaisical to me - for something as important as Bitcoin), that the specification of Bitcoin and the blockchain doesn't really exist in any form other than the reference implementation(s) (in procedural languages such as C or Python?).
Curry-Howard anyone?
I mean, many computer scientists are aware of the Curry-Howard isomorophism, which basically says that the relationship between a theorem and its proof is equivalent to the relationship between a specification and its implementation. In other words, there is a long tradition in mathematics (and in computer programming) of:
And it's not exactly "turtles all the way down" either: a specification is generally simple and compact enough that a good programmer can usually simply visually inspect it to determine if it is indeed "correct" - something which is very difficult, if not impossible, to do with a program written in a procedural, implementation-oriented language such as C or Python or Java.
So I worry that we've got this tradition, from the open-source github C/Java programming tradition, of never actually writing our "specification", and only writing the "implementation". In mission-critical military-grade programming projects (which often use languages like Ada or Maude) this is simply not allowed. It would seem that a project as mission-critical as Bitcoin - which could literally be crucial for humanity's continued survival - should also use this kind of military-grade software development approach.
And I'm not saying rewrite the implementations in these kind of theoretical languages. But it might be helpful if the C/Python/Java programmers in the Bitcoin imperative programming world could build some bridges to the Maude/Haskell/ML programmers of the functional and algebraic programming worlds to see if any kind of useful cross-pollination might take place - between specifications and implementations.
For example, the JavaFAN formal analyzer for multi-threaded Java programs (developed using tools based on the Maude language) was applied to the Remote Agent AI program aboard NASA's Deep Space 1 shuttle, written in Java - and it took only a few minutes using formal mathematical reasoning to detect a potential deadlock which would have occurred years later during the space mission when the damn spacecraft was already way out around Pluto.
And "the Maude-NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) Protocol Analyzer (Maude-NPA) is a tool used to provide security proofs of cryptographic protocols and to search for protocol flaws and cryptosystem attacks."
These are open-source formal reasoning tools developed by DARPA and used by NASA and the US Navy to ensure that program implementations satisfy their specifications. It would be great if some of the people involved in these kinds of projects could contribute to help ensure the security and scalability of Bitcoin.
But there is a wide abyss between the kinds of programmers who use languages like Maude and the kinds of programmers who use languages like C/Python/Java - and it can be really hard to get the two worlds to meet. There is a bit of rapprochement between these language communities in languages which might be considered as being somewhere in the middle, such as Haskell and ML. I just worry that Bitcoin might be turning into being an exclusively C/Python/Java project (with the algorithms and practitioners traditionally of that community), when it could be more advantageous if it also had some people from the functional and algebraic-specification and program-verification community involved as well. The thing is, though: the theoretical practitioners are big on "semantics" - I've heard them say stuff like "Yes but a C / C++ program has no easily identifiable semantics". So to get them involved, you really have to first be able to talk about what your program does (specification) - before proceeding to describe how it does it (implementation). And writing high-level specifications is typically very hard using the syntax and semantics of languages like C and Java and Python - whereas specs are fairly easy to write in Maude - and not only that, they're executable, and you state and verify properties about them - which provides for the kind of debate Nick Szabo was advocating ("more computer science, less noise").
Imagine if we had an executable algebraic specification of Bitcoin in Maude, where we could formally reason about and verify certain crucial game-theoretical properties - rather than merely hand-waving and arguing and deploying and praying.
And so in the theoretical programming community you've got major research on various logics such as Girard's Linear Logic (which is resource-conscious) and Bruni and Montanari's Tile Logic (which enables "pasting" bigger systems together from smaller ones in space and time), and executable algebraic specification languages such as Meseguer's Maude (which would be perfect for game theory modeling, with its functional modules for specifying the deterministic parts of systems and its system modules for specifiying non-deterministic parts of systems, and its parameterized skeletons for sketching out the typical architectures of mobile systems, and its formal reasoning and verification tools and libraries which have been specifically applied to testing and breaking - and fixing - cryptographic protocols).
And somewhat closer to the practical hands-on world, you've got stuff like Google's MapReduce and lots of Big Data database languages developed by Google as well. And yet here we are with a mempool growing dangerously big for RAM on a single machine, and a 20-GB append-only list as our database - and not much debate on practical results from Google's Big Data databases.
(And by the way: maybe I'm totally ignorant for asking this, but I'll ask anyways: why the hell does the mempool have to stay in RAM? Couldn't it work just as well if it were stored temporarily on the hard drive?)
And you've got CalvinDB out of Yale which apparently provides an ACID layer on top of a massively distributed database.
Look, I'm just an armchair follower cheering on these projects. I can barely manage to write a query in SQL, or read through a C or Python or Java program. But I would argue two points here: (1) these languages may be too low-level and "non-formal" for writing and modeling and formally reasoning about and proving properties of mission-critical specifications - and (2) there seem to be some Big Data tools already deployed by institutions such as Google and Yale which support global petabyte-size databases on commodity boxes with nice properties such as near-real-time and ACID - and I sometimes worry that the "core devs" might be failing to review the literature (and reach out to fellow programmers) out there to see if there might be some formal program-verification and practical Big Data tools out there which could be applied to coming up with rock-solid, 100% consensus proposals to handle an issue such as blocksize scaling, which seems to have become much more intractable than many people might have expected.
I mean, the protocol solved the hard stuff: the elliptical-curve stuff and the Byzantine General stuff. How the heck can we be falling down on the comparatively "easier" stuff - like scaling the blocksize?
It just seems like defeatism to say "Well, the blockchain is already 20-30 GB and it's gonna be 20-30 TB ten years from now - and we need 10 Mbs bandwidth now and 10,000 Mbs bandwidth 20 years from - assuming the evil Verizon and AT&T actually give us that - so let's just become a settlement platform and give up on buying coffee or banking the unbanked or doing micropayments, and let's push all that stuff into some corporate-controlled vaporware without even a whitepaper yet."
So you've got Peter Todd doing some possibly brilliant theorizing and extrapolating on the idea of "treechains" - there is a Let's Talk Bitcoin podcast from about a year ago where he sketches the rough outlines of this idea out in a very inspiring, high-level way - although the specifics have yet to be hammered out. And we've got Blockstream also doing some hopeful hand-waving about the Lightning Network.
Things like Peter Todd's treechains - which may be similar to the spark in some devs' eyes called Lightning Network - are examples of the kind of algorithm or architecture which might manage to harness the massive computing power of miners and nodes in such a way that certain kinds of massive and graceful scaling become possible.
It just seems like a kindof tiny dev community working on this stuff.
Being a C or Python or Java programmer should not be a pre-req to being able to help contribute to the specification (and formal reasoning and program verification) for Bitcoin and the blockchain.
XML and UML are crap modeling and specification languages, and C and Java and Python are even worse (as specification languages - although as implementation languages, they are of course fine).
But there are serious modeling and specification languages out there, and they could be very helpful at times like this - where what we're dealing with is questions of modeling and specification (ie, "needs and requirements").
One just doesn't often see the practical, hands-on world of open-source github implementation-level programmers and the academic, theoretical world of specification-level programmers meeting very often. I wish there were some way to get these two worlds to collaborate on Bitcoin.
Maybe a good first step to reach out to the theoretical people would be to provide a modular executable algebraic specification of the Bitcoin protocol in a recognized, military/NASA-grade specification language such as Maude - because that's something the theoretical community can actually wrap their heads around, whereas it's very hard to get them to pay attention to something written only as a C / Python / Java implementation (without an accompanying specification in a formal language).
They can't check whether the program does what it's supposed to do - if you don't provide a formal mathematical definition of what the program is supposed to do.
Specification : Implementation :: Theorem : Proof
You have to remember: the theoretical community is very aware of the Curry-Howard isomorphism. Just like it would be hard to get a mathematician's attention by merely showing them a proof without telling also telling them what theorem the proof is proving - by the same token, it's hard to get the attention of a theoretical computer scientist by merely showing them an implementation without showing them the specification that it implements.
Bitcoin is currently confronted with a mathematical or "computer science" problem: how to secure the network while getting high enough transactional throughput, while staying within the limited RAM, bandwidth and hard drive space limitations of current and future infrastructure.
The problem only becomes a political and economic problem if we give up on trying to solve it as a mathematical and "theoretical computer science" problem.
There should be a plethora of whitepapers out now proposing algorithmic solutions to these scaling issues. Remember, all we have to do is apply the Byzantine General consensus-reaching procedure to a worldwide database which shuffles 2.1 quadrillion tokens among a few billion addresses. The 21 company has emphatically pointed out that racing to compute a hash to add a block is an "embarrassingly parallel" problem - very easy to decompose among cheap, fault-prone, commodity boxes, and recompose into an overall solution - along the lines of Google's highly successful MapReduce.
I guess what I'm really saying is (and I don't mean to be rude here), is that C and Python and Java programmers might not be the best qualified people to develop and formally prove the correctness of (note I do not say: "test", I say "formally prove the correctness of") these kinds of algorithms.
I really believe in the importance of getting the algorithms and architectures right - look at Google Search itself, it uses some pretty brilliant algorithms and architectures (eg, MapReduce, Paxos) which enable it to achieve amazing performance - on pretty crappy commodity hardware. And look at BitTorrent, which is truly p2p, where more demand leads to more supply.
So, in this vein, I will close this lengthy rant with an oddly specific link - which may or may not be able to make some interesting contributions to finding suitable algorithms, architectures and data structures which might help Bitcoin scale massively. I have no idea if this link could be helpful - but given the near-total lack of people from the Haskell and ML and functional worlds in these Bitcoin specification debates, I thought I'd be remiss if I didn't throw this out - just in case there might be something here which could help us channel the massive computing power of the Bitcoin network in such a way as to enable us simply sidestep this kind of desperate debate where both sides seem right because the other side seems wrong.
https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/neil.ghani/papers/ghani-calco07
The above paper is about "higher dimensional trees". It uses a bit of category theory (not a whole lot) and a bit of Haskell (again not a lot - just a simple data structure called a Rose tree, which has a wikipedia page) to develop a very expressive and efficient data structure which generalizes from lists to trees to higher dimensions.
I have no idea if this kind of data structure could be applicable to the current scaling mess we apparently are getting bogged down in - I don't have the game-theory skills to figure it out.
I just thought that since the blockchain is like a list, and since there are some tree-like structures which have been grafted on for efficiency (eg Merkle trees) and since many of the futuristic scaling proposals seem to also involve generalizing from list-like structures (eg, the blockchain) to tree-like structures (eg, side-chains and tree-chains)... well, who knows, there might be some nugget of algorithmic or architectural or data-structure inspiration there.
So... TL;DR:
(1) I'm freaked out that this blocksize debate has splintered the community so badly and dragged on so long, with no resolution in sight, and both sides seeming so right (because the other side seems so wrong).
(2) I think Bitcoin could gain immensely by using high-level formal, algebraic and co-algebraic program specification and verification languages (such as Maude including Maude-NPA, Mobile Maude parameterized skeletons, etc.) to specify (and possibly also, to some degree, verify) what Bitcoin does - before translating to low-level implementation languages such as C and Python and Java saying how Bitcoin does it. This would help to communicate and reason about programs with much more mathematical certitude - and possibly obviate the need for many political and economic tradeoffs which currently seem dismally inevitable - and possibly widen the collaboration on this project.
(3) I wonder if there are some Big Data approaches out there (eg, along the lines of Google's MapReduce and BigTable, or Yale's CalvinDB), which could be implemented to allow Bitcoin to scale massively and painlessly - and to satisfy all stakeholders, ranging from millionaires to micropayments, coffee drinkers to the great "unbanked".
submitted by BeYourOwnBank to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

An in-depth overview of 15 different mobile Bitcoin wallets

Disclaimer: A lot of time went into writing this and more research than I anticipated. Errors are not just possible, they are certain. If you find any mistakes, please reach out to me and I'll edit. Furthermore I know I probably missed a couple apps, there are a lot out there. If I missed a big one, then again contact me and I'll consider adding it. If you are reading this in the future, note that these apps update regularly, anything mentioned here may have changed by the time you are reading it.

What is a mobile wallet?

A mobile Bitcoin wallet is an application for a mobile device which acts as a lightweight wallet and allows you to store, send and receive Bitcoin (or other cryptocurrencies and tokens). Mobile wallets use SPV (Simplified Payment Verification) to allow wallet functionality without having to download the whole blockchain. This is very important as barely any mobile phones have enough storage space required for the full blockchain. Mobile wallets are also considered hotwallets, meaning they have an active connection to the internet. The mere fact of being 'online' allows for a number of attack vectors and as such should never be used to store large amounts. It is however not unsafe per se. Private keys are stored locally and encrypted. Some wallets keep backups of those encrypted private keys on a server of their own, and this is something to take note of, but not to fear. So without further ado, lets get to it. I focused on Android wallets, but many of the wallets mentioned here have iOS versions.

Quick overview

Name Segwit Multisig Backup Other coins Fee Choice Privacy Options Depth/Complexity
Samourai Yes No 12 word seed + passphrase No Custom A ton Advanced
Bread No No 12 word seed No 2 Options No Beginner
GreenAddress Yes Yes 24 word seed No Custom Tor Optional Intermediate
AirBitz No No Private seed No Custom-ish No Beginner
Electrum Yes Yes 12 word seed No Custom Proxy possible Intermediate
Copay No Yes 12 word seed No Custom No Beginner
ArcBit No No 12 word seed No Fixed or Dynamic No Beginner
CoinSpace No No 12 word seed BCH/LTC/ETH 3 Options No Intermediate
Simple Bitcoin No No 12 word seed No None No Beginner
Bither No No 12 word seed BCH/BCG 4 choices No Intermediate
GreenBits Yes No 24 word seed No Custom No Beginner
Jaxx No No 12 word seed A ton 3 options No Advanced
Xapo / / / / / Public /
Coinomi No No 18 word seed A ton Custom No Advanced
Mycelium No No 12 word seed No Scrollwheel Tor Optional Intermediate

Wallet Breakdown

Samourai

Samourai focusses heavily on anonymity and obfuscation. Addresses are never used more than once. When making a transaction there is an obfuscation slider. Samourai has had SegWit enabled since October. Furthermore it offers a plethora of different features, too much to sum up here. If you are an advanced crypto-user you should definitely check out this wallet and their website which explains all of the different features. The UI takes a bit of getting used to though.

Breadwallet

Breadwallet is a very simple to use, straightforward app. The UI is slick and intuitive and in-app support to basic questions is very well incorporated. This could be a good wallet for a new person to the scene. The lack of advanced features will make this app not the go-to for more experienced users. It does however feature fingerprint authentication, which is cool, as well as BCH extraction. The lack if SegWit and complete absence of custom fee's is a problem though, especially since fees have gone up during the recent BTC spike. With only 2 fee options to choose from I simply can not recommend this wallet to people who are looking to make frequent transactions.

GreenAddress

When I first started with Greenaddress I didn't like the UI, I found it a bit clumsy. So definitely not user-friendly for a beginner. On the plus side it allows a choice of 2FA settings. Furthermore it has SegWit enabled and it has some advanced features like nLockTime transactions and it offers a service for instant transactions. This all feels very Lightning Network-y, which makes sense as GreenAddress is a part of Blockstream. Our friends in the other sub will most likely have something to say about this. I'll refrain from this and just say the following: this is an advanced wallet with promising features. If they clean up their UI a bit I could see myself using this without hesitation. The fact that they have MultiSig is a big plus as most mobile wallets do not have this functionality.

AirBitz

Unlike any other wallet I fired up at that point, this app did not prompt me with a 12- or 24-word seed. Instead it made me make an account, the regular username/password combo. After some research I found that these are not stored in a local database on their end. Which means that recovering your password in case of loss like with every other username/password login method we are so used to, is not possible. It is merely a different representation of an encryption key, allowing you access to your private keys. It features some interesting stuff though, NFC-compliant transactions and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) for example. Clearly this app is meant to be a bridge between users and merchants and has focus on making regular in-person transactions. Thus it mimics some non-crypto related payment apps that we have. Personally, I am not a fan, but I can appreciate the design philosophy and I would't be surprised if their design model worked very well in the future with the LN or with other crypto's that focus on small payments. As for the UI, it's fairly simple, yet horribly cluttered with partnered services. Good for non-techies maybe, but not for more experienced crypto-enthusiasts.

Electrum

Much like the desktop wallet I used years ago when I first started with Bitcoin, the mobile wallet is minimal. Straightforward and without fancy colors or UI. For those of us who have known the internet before Facebook, this app will feel strangely familiar. This is a classic example of a no-nonsense wallet with the features that really matter. SegWit and MultiSig enabled. A further lack of advanced options might be a turn-off for some users out there though. I did however find the option to spend coins from unconfirmed transactions. This could be very useful in case you want to cancel out a previously stuck or erroneous transaction and ensure it's never cleared. One downside to this wallet is the very primitive way of setting a custom fee. No guidelines, scrollwheel or info. Just a simple box in which to put your fee which won't help intermediate users, only experienced users.

CoPay

Of all the apps I've tried up to this point, CoPay had the best initializing phase, succinctly explaining risk and security. I can not imagine a better intro to a wallet for a first time bitcoiner. It being of a product of BitPay, of which I am personally not a fan, I have to admit though. This app looks clean, feels fast and is easy to use. It successfully demystified MultiSig functionality in its UI and partnered services are not obtrusive in the design. Downsides are lack of fee setting possibilities and SegWit. The latter I really do not understand given their main core of business. If it wasn't for those last two points, I would not see why not to recommend this wallet.

ArcBit

This app dissapointed me a bit. It starts out of the box, not mentioning any backup seeds or tutorial on the wallet itself or Bitcoin. It has no SegWit, no MultiSig, a lack of features and whilst a backup seed can still be requested from the settings, I feel it is of the utmost importance that such a security measure is not quickly overlooked. The lack of fee management tops it off. While this wallet works just fine and looks just fine, there are too many alternatives out there with better options and functionality for me to ever advise anyone to use this wallet.

CoinSpace

CoinSpace is one of those apps that could be really cool, but completely missed the boat on some other design choices. In-app ads unless you pay 1.6$ or something. Settings hidden behind a CoinSpace login screen. It features multiple tokens though with built in conversion through ShapeShift, which could have been awesome. But the excessive ads are just a big no-no. Lack of SegWit and limited fee options make this one of the least interesting wallets out there.

Simple Bitcoin Wallet

Simple Bitcoin is a very basic, barebone wallet. Feels like a one-man project. Almost no settings possible at all. There's much better out there.

Bither

I oddly liked Bither because of its design that reminded me of websites from the 2005-ish era using lots of gradients. Its one of those apps that you either like or you don't. The UI is not bad, but could be better, there's some functionality hidden in the settings, but not enough to satisfy. One very useful feature is built in BCH and BCG extraction. This is the first app I encountered with built in Bitcoin Gold access. It also has a separate tab with just market price information, which is really useful for the price ticker addicts among us. Furthermore it features Cold/Hot Storage View which allows you to monitor cold storage and with a nice graph shows you the distribution between Hot and Cold. Cool stuff. I would suggest to check it out, I'm sure some people will like and some won't. Do note, no SegWit. I would personally use this as a view-wallet only. Not as a spending wallet.

GreenBits

GreenBits is like the light version of GreenAddress. I tried looking for why one team would make 2 wallets but could not find a definitive answer asides from GreenBits being Android-native. And while some resources state MultiSig functionality and Tor through Orbot, I couldn't find those in this app. It does however sport SegWit and custom fees like GreenAddress. On the UI front I feel much more comfortable with this app though and I could see it being better received by average users. Looks like a good spending wallet without much extra.

Jaxx

Jaxx is a rather large wallet that supports many many many different coins with built in ShapeShift functionality. It did suffer from a hack earlier this year which is why this wallet has been discredited. I would however suggest looking into this one if you are invested in multiple different coins and regularly swap between them to get some financial edge. Lack of SegWit and fee options don't make this an ideal app for Bitcoin-only users.

Xapo

Xapo, known for its cold storage solutions was one of the apps I was eager to check out. Upon starting I however first had to verify through a text message, giving up my phone number, after which I was greeted by a 'Continue with Facebook or email' - screen. Upon choosing email, I was further asked to give up personal information. Nothing personal against these types of business models, but this is not what I am looking for in a mobile wallet. Centralization of personal information is quite in contrast with the decentralized and pseudonymous qualities of cryptocurrencies. This being the 13th wallet I've fired up tonight, I decided to give this one a pass.

Coinomi

Coinomi is very similar to Jaxx in the way that it supports a crapload of different currencies and in-app conversions between different tokens through ShapeShift and additionally Changelly. It does look quite a bit more straightforward though. A good alternative to Jaxx for those multicrypto traders among us. Unfortunately yet again not the best for straight Bitcoiners due to lack of SegWit. It has custom fees though, but much like Electrum, there's no real help here and it's just a manual input.

Mycelium

Mycelium has been my wallet app for a couple years now. Unfortunately the delay in SegWit adoption has me looking elsewhere and in succession writing this article. I really liked the recent addition of the fee scrollwheel, which is still the most detailed and succesful implementation of custom fees in any app I've seen. Having tried out many other apps at this point I can now see Mycelium, while not particulary user-unfriendly, could still very much improve its UI. It is however not a bad wallet, never crashed on me, always ran smooth through multiple updates. But let's not get sentimental here, it's a solid app, but its time for me and maybe you as well to try out something different ;-)

Conclusion

In this excruciatingly long article I've ran through a couple different wallet apps. One thing to learn is that not a single one of these is perfect and there's still room for improvement on many fronts. Which wallet holds your preference today depends largely on what you are looking for in a wallet. Do you want the cheapest transactions, then go for one of the SegWit enabled wallets. Do you like cool functionality, then check out Bither. Is anonymity of a concern to you then Samourai looks like the clear winner. More into multiple coins at once, then Coinomi or Jaxx is the way to go. And this is mobile wallets only, you have your desktop wallets, hardware wallets, cold storage solutions, paper wallets. But I'm all out of ink tonight!
I can't give you specific advise. In this world of cryptocurrencies we are in control of our own money. Being in control of your own money means being responsible for its security too. So make your own decision and due diligence.
Edit: Thanks everyone for the awesome responses. I've had some requests to further mention some important information regarding the wallets. I will write these down here as a memo to myself in the future, at which point I will review the state of mobile apps in greater detail once again. - Open Source or not - iOS version or not - Adding iOS only wallet apps
submitted by Zyntra to BitcoinBeginners [link] [comments]

Mycelium update

Hi guys. Just an update to let you know we haven't been sitting around on our asses doing noting.
Mycelium Entropy - Still no update from the manufacturer since we submitted all the work requests three weeks ago and they started working. Hopefully this means everything is going well on their side, and we'll have the finished assembled units within the next few weeks. At that point, it's just flash, package, and ship. In the mean time, we have finalized SSS split key support in the Entropy device and support for it in our Mycelium wallet, and added some minor things, like being able to generate a new wallet by pressing the button instead of removing and reinserting the device. It doesn't generate a new seed from our entropy source, but there is enough entropy in it to be useful for a few paper wallets.
Mycelium Bitcoincard - We received a whole bunch of finished circuit boards in the office a few weeks ago. Still finalizing the software and design before we get these things out to get laminated, and buttons labeled (we don't want to print button labels before we are sure which ones we should use for what). They look pretty cool so far. Goal is still to finish these some time around 2015 Q1/Q2. For those who may have missed it, these cards have changed drastically since that video we came out with 2 years ago, and although they still use a single bitcoin address (at least in the first versions), there's nothing identifiable in the radio, so, contrary to video claims, no, merchants (or others) won't be able to track you by your radio ID.
Mycelium Wallet - Tons of work has been going on with this one. We hope to get version 2.1 out by early December, and many of those have just been released in beta. These features include:
and various other minor bug fixes. If you can't wait to get all the goodies and want to get access to them now, please join our beta program here https://plus.google.com/communities/102264813364583686576 Otherwise we will hopefully get these out to you within a week or two. Besides that, we have also set up and got Tor working on our nodes as a hidden service, in preparation for moving our wallets to that. The progress to total privacy is slow, but definitely moving. One thing that is moving way slower that we had hoped is LocalTrader adoption. For those who don't know, it's basically LocalBitcoins built right into our wallet. The difference is that while LocalBitcoins holds your coins in escrow while you trade, and retains the entire log of your trades and communications, our system trades bitcoins directly wallet to wallet, and keeps all communications encrypted peer to peer, so we don't have access to anything the traders do. We only charge 0.2% per trade to use our service, and if you want to trade through some other channel after you meet, that's fine too. The problem is that the number of listed traders offering to buy or sell is still very low. So, if you wish to trade, or even if you use LocalBitcoins and don't want to lose your profile, we ask that you at least still add yourself as a trader to advertise your location. We're fine if once you get a trade, you point the buyer to your LocalBitcoins account and use that to finish your transaction.
Thanks for your support, and as always feedback, suggestions, and feature requests are always welcome.
submitted by Rassah to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Time for another *cough-semi-cough* weekly Mycelium feature demo, as well as update on what's going on behind the scenes!

Setting up a Watch-Only address in Mycelium:
First, make sure that you have enabled Expert Mode in Mycelium by going to Settings in the drop-down menu from the main screen, scrolling down to ADVANCED SETTINGS, and turning on the check box next to "Expert Mode."
This will enable key management in the section to the left of the main screen. To get to it, swipe left-to-right. You can set up a watch-only address in one of two ways.
If the address is not in your wallet yet:
After swiping to the KEYS section of the wallet, find and click the Add Key icon at the top right of the screen.
If you have a paper wallet, hit "Scan" and scan only the public key. Or if you can copy/paste the key from your phone, select Clipboard to import it. This will import only the public key, creating a watch-only address. You can tell which addresses in your wallet have private (spendable) keys and which do not by the key icon next to the address. As you can see, the key imported in this example does not have that icon, and thus no bitcoins can be spent from it.
Whether you have Aggregated View enabled or not (more on that next time), simply highlighting the address in the list selects it as the default address, allowing you to receive payments to it (note the "Send" button is now missing).
If you already have a bitcoin address in your wallet, and want to make it a Watch-Only address:
(MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A BACKUP OF THE PRIVATE KEY SOMEWHERE BEFORE PROCEEDING)
In the list of keys, find the address you wish to make Watch-Only, and highlight it. The bar at the top will change to blue, adding options such as Label and Archive. This also changes the functionality of the dropdown menu (the three vertical dots). Click the dropdown menu, and select Delete
In the menu that pops up, asking if you wish to delete the private key, turn on the checkbox for "Keep as read-only..."
Once you click Yes, and confirm, the address's private key will be deleted, and you will be left with only a watch-only address, which you can select as the default receiving address in the same way as in instructions above.
This option allows you to add addresses you wish to keep an eye on to keep track of balances, carry secure addresses to receive payments on that you don't want to get stolen, or even do things like allowing waiters and sales staff to accept payments from customers on multiple devices, without worrying about any of them having direct access to the received funds (yes, we're discussing about future POS options too).
Now, for the "Things We're Working On Now" updates:
  • The next release will include pricing sources from Bitstamp, BTC-E, Kraken, BTC China, Coinbase, and Bitpay. These have been added to the beta version, and are undergoing testing. Note, MtGox is now gone (apologies to those who will miss it). For now, we believe having it there will only confuse newbies.
  • Message signing has been added and is undergoing testing as well.
  • We've added Hebrew, French, and Korean translations.
  • Finally, exchange rates will be MUCH faster at showing up and refreshing, thanks to an upgrade to our servers on the back end.
Progress on Local Trader is also progressing nicely, with Jan and Andreas working diligently on it, and we still expect to have the beta version out some time within a week. HD
Wallets (BIP32) is another major feature that has been heavily requested (not just in Mycelium), and last week Jan and Andreas spent most of one of the Berlin Conference days discussing how to implement and standardize it with the head developers of other major wallets. So, there is definite progress on this, though the most we can promise at this point is that it will be implemented "at some time." Hopefully soon.
As usual, if you want to see any features added, or have any concerns or questions, please let us know!
submitted by Rassah to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Ledger Reviews (Every product)

  1. Ledger Starter: Very quick. Bare bones. Secure initialization of the ledger device. After trying all the products, I feel this is necessary for the super tinfoil hat people, as restoring devices in the other apps requires typing the phrase into the chrome app. Plus it was pretty cheap. Met all my expectations. 8/10
  2. Ledger Unplugged: Used it with Mycelium on Nexus 5, and boy it was cool. The only part I thought was a little awkward was the security card. I remember some smart cards with little screens to check send addresses, and Unplugged made me want those more. The process was a bit too awkward for what I have come to expect from smartphone apps in general. 6/10
  3. Ledger HW.1: I got the Copay edition. It's cool that the logo is on there haha. The only real problems I had with this one was figuring out I had to leave the adhesive on the backside and fold it over on to the adhesive... I am a habitual adhesive scraper, so I got half way through scraping it when I realized there was no mechanism to snap it shut except the adhesive. I was confused, lol. Also, I felt like I was going to break it all the time when inserting or removing it. Not sure how long it will last, but it seems to work just as fine as Nano, but for a fraction of the price. Thanks to the price point, I'll give it a 9/10. Went slightly above my expectations. (Except for the build quality of the plastic, that was slightly below)
  4. Nano: This feels like the winner. Initialization with the Starter is much more simple (if you squint your eyes at explaining how to boot a USB) than, for instance, Trezor. (Trezor is a 10/10 in my book, don't get me wrong. I own one.) However, normal initialization on the Chrome App is rather insecure. You need to be confident in your computer, which I tend not to be (to be on the safe side) I give the Nano 10/10 with the Starter, 8/10 without the Starter.
Overall, one of the biggest gripes I had was the shoddy Japanese translation and the lack of Japanese BIP39 phrase support.
If one of the hardware wallets would support a Ledger Starter (or Trezor) -like initialization which is all in Japanese and supports Japanese BIP39, they would get my recommendations to all the investors I meet here in Japan. I thought Starter + Nano was amazingly easy, and would love to recommend... but the English BIP39 phrases always give people pause... breadwallet and Copay have not had that problem when I recommend them, as they both support BIP39 Japanese wordlist.
I've been using Trezor and love it, but I can't really justify recommending it to people here, the price point and difficulty of initialization along with lack of Japanese support including phrases always made me hold back, but Starter + Nano might be my new go to recommend for more serious investors and if it ever became Starter + Nano + full Japanese from start to finish, I'd definitely recommend.
Ledger, if you need translations / Bitcoiner grade translation checks for Japanese, let me know, I'd be happy to help.
Any questions about Ledger products that you want answered from an unbiased new user, as below.
submitted by kinoshitajona to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] An in-depth overview of different mobile wallets

The following post by Zyntra is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been silently removed.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/7k3ydl
The original post's content was as follows:
Disclaimer: A lot of time went into writing this and more research than I anticipated. Errors are not just possible, they are certain. If you find any mistakes, please reach out to me and I'll edit. Furthermore I know I probably missed a couple apps, there are a lot out there. If I missed a big one, then again contact me and I'll consider adding it. If you are reading this in the future, note that these apps update regularly, anything mentioned here may have changed by the time you are reading it.

What is a mobile wallet?

A mobile Bitcoin wallet is an application for a mobile device which acts as a lightweight wallet and allows you to store, send and receive Bitcoin (or other cryptocurrencies and tokens). Mobile wallets use SPV (Simplified Payment Verification) to allow wallet functionality without having to download the whole blockchain. This is very important as barely any mobile phones have enough storage space required for the full blockchain. Mobile wallets are also considered hotwallets, meaning they have an active connection to the internet. The mere fact of being 'online' allows for a number of attack vectors and as such should never be used to store large amounts. It is however not unsafe per se. Private keys are stored locally and encrypted. Some wallets keep backups of those encrypted private keys on a server of their own, and this is something to take note of, but not to fear. So without further ado, lets get to it. I focused on Android wallets, but many of the wallets mentioned here have iOS versions.

Quick overview

Name Segwit Multisig Backup Other coins Fee Choice Privacy Options Depth/Complexity
Samourai Yes No 12 word seed + passphrase No Custom A ton Advanced
Bread No No 12 word seed No 2 Options No Beginner
GreenAddress Yes Yes 24 word seed No Custom Tor Optional Intermediate
AirBitz No No Private seed No Custom-ish No Beginner
Electrum Yes Yes 12 word seed No Custom Proxy possible Intermediate
Copay No Yes 12 word seed No Custom No Beginner
ArcBit No No 12 word seed No Fixed or Dynamic No Beginner
CoinSpace No No 12 word seed BCH/LTC/ETH 3 Options No Intermediate
Simple Bitcoin No No 12 word seed No None No Beginner
Bither No No 12 word seed BCH/BCG 4 choices No Intermediate
GreenBits Yes No 24 word seed No Custom No Beginner
Jaxx No No 12 word seed A ton 3 options No Advanced
Xapo / / / / / Public /
Coinomi No No 18 word seed A ton Custom No Advanced
Mycelium No No 12 word seed No Scrollwheel Tor Optional Intermediate

Wallet Breakdown

Samourai

Samourai focusses heavily on anonymity and obfuscation. Addresses are never used more than once. When making a transaction there is an obfuscation slider. Samourai has had SegWit enabled since October. Furthermore it offers a plethora of different features, too much to sum up here. If you are an advanced crypto-user you should definitely check out this wallet and their website which explains all of the different features. The UI takes a bit of getting used to though.

Breadwallet

Breadwallet is a very simple to use, straightforward app. The UI is slick and intuitive and in-app support to basic questions is very well incorporated. This could be a good wallet for a new person to the scene. The lack of advanced features will make this app not the go-to for more experienced users. It does however feature fingerprint authentication, which is cool, as well as BCH extraction. The lack of SegWit and complete absence of custom fee's is a problem though, especially since fees have gone up during the recent BTC spike. With only 2 fee options to choose from I simply can not recommend this wallet to people who are looking to make frequent transactions.

GreenAddress

When I first started with Greenaddress I didn't like the UI, I found it a bit clumsy. So definitely not user-friendly for a beginner. On the plus side it allows a choice of 2FA settings. Furthermore it has SegWit enabled and it has some advanced features like nLockTime transactions and it offers a service for instant transactions. This all feels very Lightning Network-y, which makes sense as GreenAddress is a part of Blockstream. Our friends in the other sub will most likely have something to say about this. I'll refrain from this and just say the following: this is an advanced wallet with promising features. If they clean up their UI a bit I could see myself using this without hesitation. The fact that they have MultiSig is a big plus as most mobile wallets do not have this functionality.

AirBitz

Unlike any other wallet I fired up at that point, this app did not prompt me with a 12- or 24-word seed. Instead it made me make an account, the regular username/password combo. After some research I found that these are not stored in a local database on their end. Which means that recovering your password in case of loss like with every other username/password login method we are so used to, is not possible. It is merely a different representation of an encryption key, allowing you access to your private keys. It features some interesting stuff though, NFC-compliant transactions and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) for example. Clearly this app is meant to be a bridge between users and merchants and has focus on making regular in-person transactions. Thus it mimics some non-crypto related payment apps that we have. Personally, I am not a fan, but I can appreciate the design philosophy and I would't be surprised if their design model worked very well in the future with the LN or with other crypto's that focus on small payments. As for the UI, it's fairly simple, yet horribly cluttered with partnered services. Good for non-techies maybe, but not for more experienced crypto-enthusiasts.

Electrum

Much like the desktop wallet I used years ago when I first started with Bitcoin, the mobile wallet is minimal. Straightforward and without fancy colors or UI. For those of us who have known the internet before Facebook, this app will feel strangely familiar. This is a classic example of a no-nonsense wallet with the features that really matter. SegWit and MultiSig enabled. A further lack of advanced options might be a turn-off for some users out there though. I did however find the option to spend coins from unconfirmed transactions. This could be very useful in case you want to cancel out a previously stuck or erroneous transaction and ensure it's never cleared. One downside to this wallet is the very primitive way of setting a custom fee. No guidelines, scrollwheel or info. Just a simple box in which to put your fee which won't help intermediate users, only experienced users.
Edit: sidenote on the SegWit implementation by Electrum http://www.crypto-economy.net/electrum-3-0-enables-bech32-segwit-addresses/?lang=en

CoPay

Of all the apps I've tried up to this point, CoPay had the best initializing phase, succinctly explaining risk and security. I can not imagine a better intro to a wallet for a first time bitcoiner. It being of a product of BitPay, of which I am personally not a fan, I have to admit though. This app looks clean, feels fast and is easy to use. It successfully demystified MultiSig functionality in its UI and partnered services are not obtrusive in the design. Downsides are lack of fee setting possibilities and SegWit. The latter I really do not understand given their main core of business. If it wasn't for those last two points, I would not see why not to recommend this wallet.

ArcBit

This app dissapointed me a bit. It starts out of the box, not mentioning any backup seeds or tutorial on the wallet itself or Bitcoin. It has no SegWit, no MultiSig, a lack of features and whilst a backup seed can still be requested from the settings, I feel it is of the utmost importance that such a security measure is not quickly overlooked. The lack of fee management tops it off. While this wallet works just fine and looks just fine, there are too many alternatives out there with better options and functionality for me to ever advise anyone to use this wallet.

CoinSpace

CoinSpace is one of those apps that could be really cool, but completely missed the boat on some other design choices. In-app ads unless you pay 1.6$ or something. Settings hidden behind a CoinSpace login screen. It features multiple tokens though with built in conversion through ShapeShift, which could have been awesome. But the excessive ads are just a big no-no. Lack of SegWit and limited fee options make this one of the least interesting wallets out there.

Simple Bitcoin Wallet

Simple Bitcoin is a very basic, barebone wallet. Feels like a one-man project. Almost no settings possible at all. There's much better out there.

Bither

I oddly liked Bither because of its design that reminded me of websites from the 2005-ish era using lots of gradients. Its one of those apps that you either like or you don't. The UI is not bad, but could be better, there's some functionality hidden in the settings, but not enough to satisfy. One very useful feature is built in BCH and BCG extraction. This is the first app I encountered with built in Bitcoin Gold access. It also has a separate tab with just market price information, which is really useful for the price ticker addicts among us. Furthermore it features Cold/Hot Storage View which allows you to monitor cold ...
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

Experiment: Earning My First Bitcoin

This is my story on how I earned my first Bitcoin, and what I learned along the way. In December of 2013 I downloaded Bitcoin-QT after hearing about the meteoric rise of Bitcoin. At the time the price was in correction from the all time high of 1163 and was at 651. I had missed the train. At this time I started to visit Bitcoin more. I didn’t understand a thing I was reading. It’s like I stumbled across another language, with so many references to concepts that were completely foreign to me. I am by no means a computer expert. My competence level is average.
The highly technical language used in this sub and in the Bitcoin spaces is a barrier of entry to non-tech savvy individuals. But it is also an attraction for people who have a thirst for knowledge. And once you understand the technical side of Bitcoin it becomes more attractive. By its very nature Bitcoin is a self sustaining unit of account that is incorruptibly honest. Reading those words is entirely different from understanding what they mean. And once you do understand what they mean, what Bitcoin means, Attraction Amplified. So after lurking for a while and learning the basics, I came to this simple conclusion. I wanted it. But I honestly couldn't justify out right buying it.
So I set myself a goal. I’ll try earning just .1 bitcoin. Looking back, this took me way too long because I sticked with the faucets and paytoclick sites for way too long. But once I got go my first .1 BTC in February of 2015 I set myself a new goal. To earn one Bitcoin. My first Bitcoin wasn’t going to be mined or bought, but Earned. And 5 months latter I achieved that goal. By doing this I learned so much about the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Chart of earnings over time. Blue is earnings per day. Red is total earnings over time.
http://i.imgur.com/Y6cgH5z.png
The first thing I learned was that faucets are a huge waste of time for earning Bitcoin. But they’re nice to begin with just to get a feel for the mechanics of transactions.
The second thing I learned was that I could earn on average around 1500bits per day using Bitcoinget to do small online tasks, like visiting sites or doing short surveys. But, I have a love hate relationship with Bitcoinget. On the one hand, I’ve earned a good amount with them. But on the other hand, their jobs suck balls. The majority of the tasks on their site are not worth the time to complete, and many don’t work properly. The key is to know which tasks are worth doing and which are not. One in ten tasks on Bitcoinget are worth doing, and that’s being generous. But by using Bitcoinget I was able secure a steady supply of Bitcoin. Shameless Referral link if anyone feels like signing up: http://www.bitcoinget.com/?r=1MienR4vFattHj6XSZjKjDiwDqgxGeq67n
Chart for how much Bitcoinget and the other earning methods contributed as a percent to the 1 BTC goal. http://i.imgur.com/4qj2S82.png
The third method I learned for earning Bitcoin was giveaways. Changetip and sign up bonuses from sites like circle were very lucrative for the time spent on singing up. Just by visiting Bitcoin regularly you can get a fair amount of Bitcoin through giveaways.
The fourth method for earning BTC, and the most profitable, was using Jobs4bitcoins. My first job I took for this method was video editing for some kind of school project/feminist propaganda. The second job I took from Jobs4bitcoins was a excel research project, finding the smart phone penetration rates throughout Africa. This last job tipped me over the edge of .95BTC to 1.25BTC. Both jobs paid quite fairly for the task involved. Protip: never submit work before receiving payment first/use an escrow service.
Jobs4Bitcoin is hands down going to grow into something more. There is huge potential for people around the world to connect with someone else with the skills they need for quick work. Bitcoin enables this seamlessly and empowers individuals to pick and choose their work for themselves. So, shameless plus #2, if you need someone who is good at excel/researching literature/synthesizing large amounts of data, I’m your guy. Video editing too!
Along the way I’ve learned the Bitcoin lingo, set up multiple wallets using Armory, Electrum and Mycelium. I discovered the wonderful world of multi-sig addresses, and the benefits they offer for security. I’ve also learned how to store the backups for these in exotic offline devices like calculators and digital cameras. I’ve even attended a Bitcoin ATM release event, Cool stuff.
Conclusion: Bitcoin is simply amazing and amazingly simple in its simplicity. Overall it’s been a fun experiment, and I’m glad I did it, but this is definitely not a method for everyone. Buying from an exchange or ATM is much faster to acquire BTC. This is why I’ve joined an exchange and plan on buying some more BTC.
My new goal is 2.1 BTC, but I don’t think I’ll be satisfied until that coveted 21 BTC mark. 1 in 10 million here I come, 1 in a million one day soon. Maybe one day when we’re all grey and weary with the years of Bitcoin reaching planet after planet past the moon, I’ll tell my great-great-great-grandchildren that I earned my first Bitcoin. And they’ll either ask me, “what’s a Bight-coin?” or stare at me in silent wonder. I don't know where Bitcoin is going. But I do know that I want it. Other people want it. And there's only ever going to be 21 million.
I had fun writing this post and I hope you enjoyed reading it. Here's to drinking the moon-aid.
submitted by Fiach_Dubh to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Story: How I Earned My First Bitcoin

Re-posting this because it's a good story :P
This is my story on how I earned my first Bitcoin, and what I learned along the way. In December of 2013 I downloaded Bitcoin-QT after hearing about the meteoric rise of Bitcoin. At the time the price was in correction from the all time high of 1163 and was at 651. I had missed the train. At this time I started to visit Bitcoin more. I didn’t understand a thing I was reading. It’s like I stumbled across another language, with so many references to concepts that were completely foreign to me. I am by no means a computer expert. My competence level is average.
The highly technical language used in this sub and in the Bitcoin spaces is a barrier of entry to non-tech savvy individuals. But it is also an attraction for people who have a thirst for knowledge. And once you understand the technical side of Bitcoin it becomes more attractive. By its very nature Bitcoin is a self sustaining unit of account that is incorruptibly honest. Reading those words is entirely different from understanding what they mean. And once you do understand what they mean, what Bitcoin means, Attraction Amplified. So after lurking for a while and learning the basics, I came to this simple conclusion. I wanted it. But I honestly couldn't justify out right buying it.
So I set myself a goal. I’ll try earning just .1 bitcoin. Looking back, this took me way too long because I sticked with the faucets and paytoclick sites for way too long. But once I got go my first .1 BTC in February of 2015 I set myself a new goal. To earn one Bitcoin. My first Bitcoin wasn’t going to be mined or bought, but Earned. And 5 months latter I achieved that goal. By doing this I learned so much about the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Chart of earnings over time. Blue is earnings per day. Red is total earnings over time.
http://i.imgur.com/Y6cgH5z.png
The first thing I learned was that faucets are a huge waste of time for earning Bitcoin. But they’re nice to begin with just to get a feel for the mechanics of transactions.
The second thing I learned was that I could earn on average around 1500bits per day using Bitcoinget to do small online tasks, like visiting sites or doing short surveys. But, I have a love hate relationship with Bitcoinget. On the one hand, I’ve earned a good amount with them. But on the other hand, their jobs suck balls. The majority of the tasks on their site are not worth the time to complete, and many don’t work properly. The key is to know which tasks are worth doing and which are not. One in ten tasks on Bitcoinget are worth doing, and that’s being generous. But by using Bitcoinget I was able secure a steady supply of Bitcoin. Shameless Referral link if anyone feels like signing up: http://www.bitcoinget.com/?r=1MienR4vFattHj6XSZjKjDiwDqgxGeq67n
Chart for how much Bitcoinget and the other earning methods contributed as a percent to the 1 BTC goal. http://i.imgur.com/4qj2S82.png
The third method I learned for earning Bitcoin was giveaways. Changetip and sign up bonuses from sites like circle were very lucrative for the time spent on singing up. Just by visiting Bitcoin regularly you can get a fair amount of Bitcoin through giveaways.
The fourth method for earning BTC, and the most profitable, was using Jobs4bitcoins. My first job I took for this method was video editing for some kind of school project/feminist propaganda. The second job I took from Jobs4bitcoins was a excel research project, finding the smart phone penetration rates throughout Africa. This last job tipped me over the edge of .95BTC to 1.25BTC. Both jobs paid quite fairly for the task involved. Protip: never submit work before receiving payment first/use an escrow service.
Jobs4Bitcoin is hands down going to grow into something more. There is huge potential for people around the world to connect with someone else with the skills they need for quick work. Bitcoin enables this seamlessly and empowers individuals to pick and choose their work for themselves. So, shameless plus #2, if you need someone who is good at excel/researching literature/synthesizing large amounts of data, I’m your guy. Video editing too!
Along the way I’ve learned the Bitcoin lingo, set up multiple wallets using Armory, Electrum and Mycelium. I discovered the wonderful world of multi-sig addresses, and the benefits they offer for security. I’ve also learned how to store the backups for these in exotic offline devices like calculators and digital cameras. I’ve even attended a Bitcoin ATM release event, Cool stuff.
Conclusion: Bitcoin is simply amazing and amazingly simple in its simplicity. Overall it’s been a fun experiment, and I’m glad I did it, but this is definitely not a method for everyone. Buying from an exchange or ATM is much faster to acquire BTC. This is why I’ve joined an exchange and plan on buying some more BTC.
My new goal is 2.1 BTC, but I don’t think I’ll be satisfied until that coveted 21 BTC mark. 1 in 10 million here I come, 1 in a million one day soon. Maybe one day when we’re all grey and weary with the years of Bitcoin reaching planet after planet past the moon, I’ll tell my great-great-great-grandchildren that I earned my first Bitcoin. And they’ll either ask me, “what’s a Bight-coin?” or stare at me in silent wonder. I don't know where Bitcoin is going. But I do know that I want it. Other people want it. And there's only ever going to be 21 million.
I had fun writing this post and I hope you enjoyed reading it. Here's to drinking the moon-aid.
Update: In the 1 and 5 million club as of today :)
submitted by Fiach_Dubh to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Was Mycelium or bitcoin ever hacked?

I had an offline wallet with its details stored in Keepass. The last time I ever touched it was in December 2014 to buy something online. I loaded the private key in mycelium's Android app and used it. Then, I deleted the app. I know I should have generated a new offline wallet and transfered the remaining funds there but I got lazy... I just casually decided to check out my bitcoin today and I have zero funds... There's a transaction on August 31, 2015 that took from a lot of different addresses (including mine) and dumped into a lot of new addresses. This was definitely NOT me. I wasn't even using bitcoin in 2015.
 
Now I know it's gone and nothing can be done. But what the hell happened? This was not supposed to be possible with bitcoin. Was the network attacked sometime between December 2014 and now or did the mycelium developer turn out to be a fraud? The only other service I used was bitaddress.org to make a QR code out of my key to scan it into the app but I could see back then in the network log that it wasn't sending any AJAX request. I'm confused how this happened and want closure. can anybody provide any input?
~0.5 bitcoin gone :(
submitted by PLATYPUS_DIARRHEA to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A couple of questions on Mycelium and wallets

So, I have a few questions. I've done some searching and reading, but haven't come across definitive answers. If these have indeed been answered before here, I apologize for the repetition.
Thanks.
submitted by throwaway_my_bits to BitcoinBeginners [link] [comments]

Great Bitcoin day in Tampa

Just had a great day in Tampa.
Signed up at LibertyX (name, address, email and cell phone number), bought a $100 PIN from a shop 5 minutes away and nabbed the trailblazer bonus. Had a great chat started by the proprietor asking, "Okayyyy, what did you just buy?" He knew about the Winklevoss ETF but didn't quite grasp BTC being a global currency. Kept asking, "Okay, but what can you buy with it?" I told him about the Airbitz app, but didn't get around to Gyft. The transfer was already getting started!
I think it clicked for him when Mycelium showed $100.01 incoming within about 6 seconds of my submitting the PIN. He asked, "So are they sending you the $100 you just paid me?" / "They are sending me $100 worth of Bitcoin based on what you just sold me. Directly to the Bitcoin wallet on my phone." / "Ohhhhhh. Wow! I had no idea you could do that here!" / "Now that you know, you can put up a 'Bitcoin sold here' sign!"
Then we located the site of tonight's Tampa Bitcoiners meeting before heading down to the Edge district for a cup of coffee on "Bitcoin Blvd" in the shadows of the stadium where the Bitcoin Bowl was played. Paying via BitPay was incredibly easy and smooth, and we had a nice little chat with the shop owner. Then we took a stroll up and down the strip, seeing a wide variety of shops with "Bitcoin Accepted Here" stickers all over the place.
Very cool to experience it all in one day. Now we're chilling out and we'll see if we make it to the Tampa Bitcoin meetup tonight after dinner. All in all, a really great day running around Tampa. Thanks to LibertyX, BitPay and Genaros for still serving us 45 minutes after closing time!
Update: 2 out of 3 ain't bad. Never found the Bitcoin Meetup gang. Didn't reply to a comment on the page or a tweet. Tried to pay for dinner with Bitcoin, and crashed the BitPay app on their tablet. It was a super cheap tablet that tried to process false touches everywhere until an error popped up. Hit the back arrow and the app crashed. Restarted and no one knew the login credentials. Got the restaurant owner on the phone and he had no idea how to login.
Definitely some rough edges there. Hitting the back arrow after an error should not shut down your cash register for the night. Someone - anyone - should know how to relogin at all times after a crash. Invest more than $20 in a tablet for a better experience. As much as I don't own any Apple devices, the iPad at the coffee shop worked perfectly earlier in the day.
So if the Bitcoin Meetup actually happened and you had to pay in fiat, sorry! They really tried to make it work, but they were just not prepared.
submitted by moronmonday526 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A Canadian's first real step into Bitcoin, not as hard as they say!

The first time I heard about Bitcoin was on the SecurityNow! podcast, episode 287. I remember Steve Gibson's thoughts on it were cautiously optimistic. The math checked out, but as with all good cryptographic technologies, only time will tell. That was in 2011. Do I regret waiting this long? Maybe. I don't know why I didn't just set up my own mining rig since at the time it was still somewhat feasible for a poor university student to get a cheap box with a couple of out-of-date graphics cards to eat up electricity (which was included in my apartment's rent at the time). I probably could have gotten a couple of 50 BTC rewards, but it just didn't seem worth the effort at the time. How wrong I was. I've been following bitcoin with a lot of interest since, although I've never actually gotten around to getting any.
Anyhow, onto this morning. I decided it was silly of me to continue paying such attention to bitcoin without even ever owning any. I never had any particular reason for keeping bits on hand, but if I were to buy any bitcoin I had better do it before the price gets much higher. I've seen lots of posts complaining about how difficult it was, so I tried to be smart about it. Here's what I did:
• Download Mycelium on my phone. Nice little wallet app.
• Sign up on Circle.com
• Bought 130 CAD worth of BTC (mostly because that's all the free cash I had budgeted until next pay day).
• Sent a small test payment from my circle account to my mycelium wallet address.
I got it all set up in less time than it took me to type out this post! I just wanted to post this and let people know that it really isn't that hard to get into Bitcoin. The price is going crazy right now, so I definitely won't be putting my life savings into Bitcoin, but I think I'll probably treat it like an extra TFSA for a while, and just put some extra money into it from each paycheque. Just wanted to share!
submitted by strips_of_serengeti to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Time for another *cough-semi-cough* weekly Mycelium feature demo, as well as update on what's going on behind the scenes!

Setting up a Watch-Only address in Mycelium:
First, make sure that you have enabled Expert Mode in Mycelium by going to Settings in the drop-down menu from the main screen, scrolling down to ADVANCED SETTINGS, and turning on the check box next to "Expert Mode."
This will enable key management in the section to the left of the main screen. To get to it, swipe left-to-right. You can set up a watch-only address in one of two ways.
If the address is not in your wallet yet:
After swiping to the KEYS section of the wallet, find and click the Add Key icon at the top right of the screen.
If you have a paper wallet, hit "Scan" and scan only the public key. Or if you can copy/paste the key from your phone, select Clipboard to import it. This will import only the public key, creating a watch-only address. You can tell which addresses in your wallet have private (spendable) keys and which do not by the key icon next to the address. As you can see, the key imported in this example does not have that icon, and thus no bitcoins can be spent from it.
Whether you have Aggregated View enabled or not (more on that next time), simply highlighting the address in the list selects it as the default address, allowing you to receive payments to it (note the "Send" button is now missing).
If you already have a bitcoin address in your wallet, and want to make it a Watch-Only address:
(MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A BACKUP OF THE PRIVATE KEY SOMEWHERE BEFORE PROCEEDING)
In the list of keys, find the address you wish to make Watch-Only, and highlight it. The bar at the top will change to blue, adding options such as Label and Archive. This also changes the functionality of the dropdown menu (the three vertical dots). Click the dropdown menu, and select Delete
In the menu that pops up, asking if you wish to delete the private key, turn on the checkbox for "Keep as read-only..."
Once you click Yes, and confirm, the address's private key will be deleted, and you will be left with only a watch-only address, which you can select as the default receiving address in the same way as in instructions above.
This option allows you to add addresses you wish to keep an eye on to keep track of balances, carry secure addresses to receive payments on that you don't want to get stolen, or even do things like allowing waiters and sales staff to accept payments from customers on multiple devices, without worrying about any of them having direct access to the received funds (yes, we're discussing about future POS options too).
Now, for the "Things We're Working On Now" updates:
  • The next release will include pricing sources from Bitstamp, BTC-E, Kraken, BTC China, Coinbase, and Bitpay. These have been added to the beta version, and are undergoing testing. Note, MtGox is now gone (apologies to those who will miss it). For now, we believe having it there will only confuse newbies.
  • Message signing has been added and is undergoing testing as well.
  • We've added Hebrew, French, and Korean translations.
  • Finally, exchange rates will be MUCH faster at showing up and refreshing, thanks to an upgrade to our servers on the back end.
Progress on Local Trader is also progressing nicely, with Jan and Andreas working diligently on it, and we still expect to have the beta version out some time within a week. HD
Wallets (BIP32) is another major feature that has been heavily requested (not just in Mycelium), and last week Jan and Andreas spent most of one of the Berlin Conference days discussing how to implement and standardize it with the head developers of other major wallets. So, there is definite progress on this, though the most we can promise at this point is that it will be implemented "at some time." Hopefully soon.
As usual, if you want to see any features added, or have any concerns or questions, please let us know!
submitted by Rassah to BitcoinWallet [link] [comments]

UK @$ (+𝟒𝟒( 𝟏𝟗𝟎𝟓 𝟓𝟕 𝟎𝟑𝟔𝟒 )KrAken helpline Number KrAken ... Chef Chahrazad شهرزاد - YouTube How we earn Btc with spinner on android mobile and laptop

Bitcoin payment processor: everyone can accept BTC payments online privately and securely with initial setup lasting mere minutes. VISIT WEBSITE. CARD. NETWORK. The most ambitious of Mycelium technologies, the Card network replaces heavily infrastructure dependent global payment networks with a light weight smart card & hub system which needs only a basic internet connection. With scale, Card ... How to set up the Mycelium Bitcoin Wallet For The First time. First of all, you need the following: An Android smartphone; Paper; Pen; Internet access on Phone. Once you have procured the above things, you are ready to set up your Mycelium Wallet. Step 1: Download Mycelium Bitcoin Wallet from Play Store and click Open and select create new. There will only ever be 21 million bitcoin in existence. As Moe Adham stated, “This, by definition, makes it a deflationary asset, as opposed to an inflationary one.” Every 10 minutes, a block ... Public and private key pair cryptography is what powers the address system in Bitcoin - the cryptocurrency equivalent to a checking account. A new address can simply be generated programatically. Whenever a new one is required, I can use my interface of choice (perhaps a Bitcoin wallet) and make one. A Bitcoin address is only a hash, so the sender can't provide a full public key in scriptPubKey. When redeeming coins that have been sent to a Bitcoin address, the recipient provides both the signature and the public key. The script verifies that the provided public key does hash to the hash in scriptPubKey, and then it also checks the signature against the public key. Checking process: Stack ...

[index] [5433] [24566] [6203] [20501] [25378] [46618] [24687] [25563] [31071] [49609]

UK @$ (+𝟒𝟒( 𝟏𝟗𝟎𝟓 𝟓𝟕 𝟎𝟑𝟔𝟒 )KrAken helpline Number KrAken ...

Kraken phone numbber 1800-260-1451 is Kraken's best toll-free number, +44 1905 57 0364 for UK 24x7. there are 3 total ways to get in touch with them. This ph... Que vous aimez cuisiner ou non, ici vous allez trouver des recettes accessibles à tous, pour tous les goûts et toutes les envies. Des recettes faciles, rapid... The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their l... Bitcoinspot.nl - Alles over bitcoin! Bienvenue sur la chaîne YouTube de Boursorama ! Le portail boursorama.com compte plus de 30 millions de visites mensuelles et plus de 290 millions de pages v...

#