How to Send Bitcoin From Coinbase [Easy 3-Step Process 2020]

Ravencoin Open Developer Meeting - 1/4/2019

[14:04] Hi everyone! [14:04] :dabbitwave: [14:04] Hey Everybody! [14:04] Hello 😃 [14:04] Sorry we're getting started a bit late. [14:04] Topics: SLC Meetup (March 15th) [14:04] 👋 [14:04] Roadmap breakdown - posted to github [14:05] IPFS (integration) [14:05] greetings 👋 [14:05] So, SLC Meetup on the 15th! [14:05] Great! [14:05] Hi! [14:06] Hi all — a special thanks to the developers and congratulations on an amazing first year!!! # [14:06] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> Hello Everyone! [14:07] We have a tentative agenda with @Tron , @corby speaking. [14:08] We would like to have nice walkthrough of the Raven DevKit for the meetup. [14:08] We are planning on hosting a meetup in SLC at the Overstock building on March 15th from 6:00pm-9:00pm. It is free admission, but there is a page on meetup.com where people can rsvp so that we have a somewhat accurate headcount for food. [14:08] sup guys [14:08] hey russ [14:09] We are planning on having a few speakers and have allotted a bit of time at the end for people to meet and greet each other. [14:09] can you guys link us to the page somewhere when thats available? 😄 [14:10] free food?! [14:10] todays topic? [14:10] yeah can we indicate pepperoni pizza [14:10] Sounds good to me @Jeroz Nothing ordered yet though. 😃 [14:10] only pepperoni pizza is served at true blockchain meetings right [14:10] :blobhide: [14:10] Absolutely. The itinerary just needs to be finalized and then I'll make a broad post about the rest of the details. [14:11] https://www.meetup.com/Salt-Lake-City-salt-lake-city-Meetup/ [14:11] 😭 so far away [14:11] West Coast! [14:11] @MTarget But there's pizza, so worth the travel time. [14:11] lol [14:12] I'll be watching the stream if its available since i'm from montreal/canada 😛 [14:12] Ah yes, I love $300 pizza 😉 [14:12] as long as I get to see your smiling faces @Tron @RavencoinDev then it's worth the time [14:12] We'll be there. [14:12] We'll be messaging additional details as they get finalized. [14:12] Greeting and salutations! [14:12] sup [14:13] Hey, $300 is considerably cheaper than 2 $3,700,000 pizzas. [14:14] Ok, switching topics... [14:14] yeah its a way to fly, [14:14] question is whether those piza's will be paid for in RVN coin or not :ThinkBlack: [14:14] Roadmap [14:14] It hasn't changed, just added some detail. [14:14] https://github.com/RavenProject/Ravencoin/tree/masteroadmap [14:15] nice [14:15] This now links to a breakdown for messaging, voting, anti-spam, and rewards (dividends) [14:15] will there be any additional RPC functionality coming in the future, thinking in terms of some functions that are only available in ravencore-lib [14:15] apologies if now is not time to ask questions, i can wait for later [14:15] "Phase 7 - Compatibility Mode" - that's new 😮 [14:15] The protocol for messaging is pretty well established, but the rest isn't in stone (code) yet. [14:16] can you give us details on compatibility mode? [14:16] In broad brush strokes. [14:17] The idea is to allow ravend to act as a daemon that looks like a single coin. [14:17] so ravend that only works with the bitcoin asset? [14:18] interesting [14:19] So you start it with an option to only work with a single asset/token account or something? [14:19] hmm compelling what is the reason for this? some kind of scale or performance? [14:19] ^ [14:19] Example: Configure ravend to listen for transfer RPC call for senttoaddress or sendfrom, but for a specific asset. This would allow easy integration into existing system for assets. [14:20] Only the daemon or the whole wallet UI? [14:20] yeah thats great, rpc functions dont allow us to do this yet, if i recall [14:20] or at least we depend more on ravencore lib [14:20] so like asset zmq [14:20] that's smart [14:20] @Tron it also sounds like it makes our life easier working with RPC, instead of core all the time for some functionality [14:21] if i understand correctly anyways [14:21] So you could run numerous instances of ravend each on their own network and RPC port, each configured for a different asset. You would need some balance of RVN in each one to cover transaction fees, then. [14:21] id be curious to know what all the advantages are of this [14:21] one more question, how would i decentralize the gateway between bitcoin mainnet/ravencoin mainnet? in the current RSK implementation they use a federated gateway, how would we avoid this? [14:21] it sounds neato [14:21] Just the daemon. The alternative is to get exchanges to adapt to our RPC calls for assets. It is easier if it just looks like Bitcoin, Litecoin or RVN to them, but it is really transferring FREE_HUGS [14:22] That makes sense. Should further increased exchange adoption for each asset. [14:22] hmm yeah its just easier for wallet integration because its basically the same as rvn and bitcoin but for a specific asset [14:22] so this is in specific mind of exchange listings for assets i guess [14:23] if i understand rightly [14:23] @traysi Gut feel is to allow ravend to handle a few different assets on different threads. [14:23] Are you going to call it kawmeleon mode? [14:23] Lol [14:23] I read that as kaw-melon mode. [14:24] same lol [14:24] so in one single swoop it possible to create a specific wallet and server daemon for specific assets. great. this makes it easier for exchanges, and has some added advantages with processing data too right? [14:24] Still keeping a RVN balance in the wallet, as well, Tron. How will that work is sendtoaddress sends the token instead of the RVN? A receive-RVN/send tokens-only wallet? [14:25] @traysi Yes [14:25] sendtoaddress on the other port (non RVN port) would send the asset. [14:25] This will be a hugely useful feature. [14:25] ^ [14:26] @Tron currently rpc function not support getaddresses senttowallet and this has to be done in ravencore lib, will this change you propose improve this situation [14:26] Config might look like {"port":2222, "asset":"FREE_HUGS", "rpcuser":"hugger", "rpcpass":"gi3afja33"} [14:26] how will this work cross-chain? [14:28] @push We'd have to go through the rpc calls and work out which ones are supported in compatibility mode. Obviously the mining ones don't apply. And some are generic like getinfo. [14:28] ok cool 👍 cheers [14:29] for now we continue using ravencore lib for our plans to keep track i just wondering if better way [14:29] as we had some issue after realising no rpc function for getting addresses of people who had sent rvn [14:29] @push | ravenland.org all of the node explorer and ravencore-lib functionality is based on RPC (including the addressindex-related calls). Nothing you can't do with RPC, although I'm not sure of the use cases you're referring to.. [14:29] interesting, so ravencore lib is using getrawtransaction somehow [14:29] i thought this may be the case [14:29] that is very useful thankyou for sharing this [14:30] look into addressindex flag and related RPC calls for functions that operate on addresses outside your wallet [14:30] thank you that is very useful, tbh i am not very skilled programmer so just decoding the hex at the raven-cli commandline was a challenge, i shall look more into this, valued information thanks as this was a big ? for us [14:31] Ok, things have gone quiet. New topic. [14:31] IPFS (integration) [14:31] GO [14:33] ... [14:33] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> So, we have been adding ipfs integration into the wallet for messaging. This will allow the wallets to do some pretty sweet stuff. For instance, you will be able to create your ipfs data file for issuing an asset. Push it to ipfs from the wallet, and add the hash right into the issuance data. This is going to allow for a much more seamless flow into the app. [14:34] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> This ofcourse, will also allow for users to create messages, and post them on ipfs and be able to easily and quickly format and send messages out on the network with ipfs data. [14:34] It will also allow optional meta-data with each transaction that goes in IPFS. [14:34] will i be able to view ipfs images natively in the wallet? [14:34] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> Images no [14:34] We discussed the option to disable all IPFS integration also. [14:35] @russ (kb: russkidooski) Probably not. There's some risk to being an image viewer for ANY data. [14:35] No option in wallet to opt into image viewing? [14:35] cool so drag and drop ipfs , if someone wanted to attach an object like an image or a file they could drag drop into ui and it create hash and attach string to transaction command parameters automatically [14:35] We could probably provide a link -- with a warning. [14:35] nomore going to globalupload.io [14:35] :ThinkBlack: [14:35] I understand that the wallet will rely on globalupload.io. (phase 1). Is it not dangerous to rely on an external network? Or am I missing something? [14:36] hmm [14:36] interesting, i suppose you could hash at two different endpoints and compare them [14:36] if you were that worried [14:36] and only submit one to the chain [14:36] You will be able to configure a URL that will be used as an IPFS browser. [14:36] Oh ic [14:36] you wont flood ipfs because only one hash per unique file [14:36] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> There are multiple options for ipfs integration. We are building it so you can run your own ipfs node locally. [14:36] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> or, point it to whatever service you would like. e.g. cloudflare [14:36] this is very cool developments, great to see this [14:37] Just like the external block explorer link currently in preferences. [14:37] @[Dev] Blondfrogs what about a native ipfs swarm for ravencoin only? [14:37] We have discussed that as an option. [14:37] @push | ravenland.org Considering having a fallback of upload through globalupload.io and download through cloudflare. [14:37] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> @russ (kb: russkidooski) We talked about that, but no decisions have been made yet. [14:37] yeah, i would just use two endpoints and strcompare the hash [14:37] as long as they agree good [14:37] submit tran [14:38] else 'potentially mysterious activity' [14:38] ? [14:38] if you submitted the file to ipfs api endpoints [14:38] Will the metadata just be a form with text only fields? [14:39] and then you would get 2 hashes, from 2 independent services [14:39] that way you would not be relying on a central hash service [14:39] and have some means of checking if a returned hash value was intercepted or transformed [14:39] i was answering jeroz' question [14:40] about relying on a single api endpoint for upload ipfs object [14:40] We have also kicked around the idea of hosting our own JSON only IPFS upload/browse service. [14:41] I have a service like this that is simple using php [14:41] we only use it for images right now [14:41] but fairly easy to do [14:41] Yup [14:42] Further questions about IPFS? [14:43] contract handling? file attach handling? or just text fields to generate json? [14:44] trying to get an idea of what the wallet will offer for attaching data [14:44] Probably just text fields that meet the meta-data spec. [14:44] ok noted [14:44] What do you mean by contract handling @sull [14:45] We won't prevent other hashes from being added. [14:45] asset contract (pdf etc) hash etc [14:45] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> also, being able to load from a file [14:45] got it, thanks [14:47] Let's do some general Q&A [14:48] Maybe just a heads up or something to look for in the future but as of right now, it takes roughly 12 hours to sync up the Qt-wallet from scratch. Did a clean installation on my linux PC last night. [14:48] Any plans or discussions related to lack of privacy of asset transfers and the ability to front run when sending to an exchange? [14:48] ^ [14:48] Is there a way to apply to help moderate for example the Telegram / Discord, i spend alot of time on both places, sometimes i pm mods if needed. [14:49] Any developed plans for Asset TX fee adjustment? [14:49] also this^ [14:49] @mxL86 We just created a card on the public board to look into that. [14:49] General remark: https://raven.wiki/wiki/Development#Phase_7_-_Compatible_Mode = updated reflecting Tron's explanation. [14:49] @mxL86 That's a great question. We need to do some profiling and speed it up. I do know that the fix we added from Bitcoin (that saved our bacon) slowed things down. [14:50] Adding to @mxL86 the sync times substantially increased coinciding with the asset layer activation. Please run some internal benchmarks and see where the daemon is wasting all its cycles on each block. We should be able to handle dozens per second but it takes a couple seconds per block. [14:50] @BW__ no plans currently for zk proofs or anything if that's what you're asking [14:50] You are doing a great job. Is there a plan that all this things (IPFS) could be some day implemented in mobile wallet? Or just in QT? [14:50] i notice also that asset transactions had some effect on sync time as we were making a few. Some spikes i not analysed the io and cpu activity properly but will if there is interest [14:51] we are testing some stuff so run into things i am happy to share [14:51] @BW__ Might look at Grin and Beam to see if we can integrate Mimble Wimble -- down the road. [14:51] yeees [14:51] @J. | ravenland.org work with the telegram mods. Not something the developers handle. [14:51] i love you [14:51] @J. | ravenland.org That would be best brought up with the operators/mods of teh telegram channel. [14:51] @corby @Tron thnx [14:51] @S1LVA | GetRavencoin.org we're planning on bumping fees to... something higher! [14:51] no catastrophic failures, just some transaction too smals, and mempool issues so far, still learning [14:52] @corby i thought that this may happen :ThinkBlack: [14:52] @corby x10? 100x? 1000x? Ballpark? [14:52] Definitely ballpark. [14:52] 😃 [14:52] 😂 [14:52] Is a ballpark like a googolplex? [14:53] @push | ravenland.org asset transactions are definitely more expensive to sync [14:53] yes yes they are [14:53] they are also more expensive to make i believe [14:53] 10,000x! [14:53] as some sync process seems to occur before they are done [14:53] @traysi ★★★★★ thanks for the suggestions we are going to be looking at optimizations [14:53] But, it is way slower than we like. Going to look into it. [14:53] i do not understand fully its operation [14:53] 1000x at minimum in my opinion [14:53] its too easy to spam the network [14:54] yes there has been some reports of ahem spam lately [14:54] :blobhide: [14:54] 😉 [14:54] cough cough ravenland [14:54] @russ (kb: russkidooski) we're in agreement -- it's too low [14:54] default fee 0.001 [14:54] ^ something around here [14:54] @corby yep we all are i think [14:55] waaay too low [14:55] meaningful transactions start with meaningful capital expense [14:55] though there is another scenario , there are some larger volume, more objective rich use cases of the chain that would suffer considerably from that [14:55] just worth mentioning, as i have beeen thinking about this a lot [14:55] there are some way around, like i could add 1000 ipfs hashes to a single unique entity, i tested this and it does work [14:56] @russ (kb: russkidooski) What would you suggest. [14:57] I had a PR for fee increase and push back. [14:57] Ignore the push back. 0.001 RVN is not even a micro-farthing in fiat terms [14:57] definitely around 1000x [14:57] Vocal minority for sure [14:57] ^ yep [14:57] @russ (kb: russkidooski) That sounds reasonable. [14:57] Couple hundred Fentons [14:58] right now an asset transaction is 0.01 of a penny essentially [14:58] 1 RVN would work now, but not when RVN is over $1. [14:58] yes exactly [14:58] Hi. Late to the party. [14:58] We are also talking about a min fee. The system will auto-adapt if blocks fill up. [14:58] im thinking tron, some heavy transaction use cases would fall out of utility use if that happened [14:58] so whats the thinking there [14:59] is there a way around the problem, bulked ipfs hash transactions? [14:59] 1000x would put us around btc levels [14:59] maybe a minimum 500x? [14:59] @russ (kb: russkidooski) Agreed. [14:59] <[Dev] Blondfrogs> It is time to wrap it up here. Everyone. Thank you all for your questions and thoughts. We will be back in 2 weeks. 😃 [14:59] Small increase and review. [14:59] Thanks all! [14:59] Cheers. [15:00] yeah sorry for 1 million questions guys hope i didnt take up too much time [15:00] cheers all 👍 [15:00] Thanks everyone [15:00] Thanks everyone for participating!!! [15:00] That is what we are here for [15:00] 100x-500x increase, 1000x maximum [15:00] 🍺

submitted by Chatturga to Ravencoin [link] [comments]

How much of an idiot am I?

First up - I have very little idea what I'm doing. Mined a bunch of BTC back in the day, sold most of them years ago, I'm just now having a play with the remainder.
I tried to send some BTC into an exchange just now, and I'm rather confused by what I'm seeing. I've no doubt that I'm an idiot and did something wrong, I'd just like to understand what I did! Here's the output from bitcoin-cli:
$ bitcoin-cli getinfo { "version": 140200, "protocolversion": 70015, "walletversion": 10500, "balance": 1.34880220, "blocks": 502207, "timeoffset": 0, "connections": 8, "proxy": "", "difficulty": 1931136454487.716, "testnet": false, "keypoololdest": 1293896718, "keypoolsize": 100, "paytxfee": 0.00005000, "relayfee": 0.00001000, "errors": "" } $ bitcoin-cli sendtoaddress 1FtRC6jnSPRxDXZ9dQFknkEvHvTNKmFDV6 0.02 b4b2dcd0e76518dee186a24c61ce9d76d9441cf48728e850d9049da5e0b0badf $ bitcoin-cli getinfo { "version": 140200, "protocolversion": 70015, "walletversion": 10500, "balance": 1.19619004, "blocks": 502207, "timeoffset": 0, "connections": 8, "proxy": "", "difficulty": 1931136454487.716, "testnet": false, "keypoololdest": 1293896718, "keypoolsize": 100, "paytxfee": 0.00005000, "relayfee": 0.00001000, "errors": "" } 
"Holy crap", thought I, "the transaction fees must have been ridiculous". But the transaction info is:
{ "account": "", "address": "1FtRC6jnSPRxDXZ9dQFknkEvHvTNKmFDV6", "category": "send", "amount": -0.02000000, "vout": 1, "fee": -0.00001290, "confirmations": 0, "trusted": false, "txid": "b4b2dcd0e76518dee186a24c61ce9d76d9441cf48728e850d9049da5e0b0badf", "walletconflicts": [ ], "time": 1514898128, "timereceived": 1514898128, "bip125-replaceable": "unknown", "abandoned": false } 
My calculations say 1.34880220 - 0.02 - 0.00001290 = 1.3287893. I have no other transactions listed, so why is my balance now showing 1.19619004BTC?! I look forward to face-palming very hard...
submitted by techWARlrus to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A guide to sign a super bitcoin (SBTC) transaction offline with patched Electrum for paranoid. Supports any wallets supported by Electrum (including segwit-p2sh and bech32 and all BIP39 seeds). Later BCD will be added.

This is quite advanced. This guide assumes you have some basic experience with the command line, can run Linux and you understand the basics of keys/signing/broadcasting transactions. And that you can compile and run Bitcoin Core and run Electrum. Also, some JSON experience is also nice.
Move you bitcoins to safe addresses first. It is best to use a new seed. Although the procedure in this guide is safe even for hot addresses (containing bitcoins), there is always a risk of a critical mistake. So play it safe.
Why such a guide? I followed these steps because I did not want to expose the keys to any online machine at all. Even if the keys do not have any bitcoins, you can some day have bitcoins sent to these addresses or you have a fork that you have not claimed. All can be stolen if you exposed your key.
This procedure should work with everything that Electrum supports (except maybe F2A that may be not supported on the SBTC chain), so Electrum seed legacy or segwit, LedgeTrezor with legacy or segiwt-p2sh (m/'49) derivation. Similarly, any BIP39 seeds or a single key. are also fine.
  1. Download Electrum. git clone https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum
  2. Apply my patch patch -P0 also this article. The guide assumes that you use patched Electrum from now on.
  3. Run the patched Electrum and catch up with your wallets you want to claim (the wallets can and rather should be watch only, or on ledgetrezor, otherwise your keys are exposed). Now go offline or set localhost as your server that Electrum connects to so no connection is performed. It's required so Electrum will not update the wallet after you edit it.
  4. You can manually create a transaction from the command line but you can use Electrum GUI. You need to locate the wallet file and remove all the transactions from the wallet file except for the one that funds the address you want to claim (the wallet obviously must not be encrypted but for watch-only this is OK). This is tricky. You need to make sure, you gave a proper JSON file, so all the final commas must be dropped. So "addr_history":, "transactions": , "tx_fees":, "txi", "txo", and "verified_tx3": should only contain the funding transaction(s), i.e. the one that you want to spend from.
  5. Run Electrum and check if the wallet is OK. Electrum will show an error if not. You will probably make a few errors so go back to editing the wallet.
  6. Download SBTC bitcoin core clone. git clone https://github.com/superbitcoin/SuperBitcoin
  7. Compile it and let it sync the blockchain (it will take a long time). Run it it with as large -dbcache= as you can. If you have a Bitcoin blockchain you can copy the blocks up to the fork date and issue sbtcd with -reindex. It will just reindex them and it will be faster.
  8. Generate a sbtc address with sbtc-cli getnewaddress. You can skip this step and send directly to an exchange but this intermediate step is safer.
  9. Create a transaction in Electrum to this address. Select all the bitcoins and use as small fee as possible (SBTC blocks are empty so any fee above 1 SBTCsat/byte should be OK).
  10. Save the transaction to a pendrive
  11. Download and install Kubuntu 16.04 (Kubuntu has all the QT libraries for Electrum) on a pen drive.
  12. Copy patched Electrum and the save the transaction to a pen drive (separate from Kubuntu will be more convenient).
  13. Run Kubuntu from the USB without any network access. Run Electrum from the pendrive. Create a wallet from the seed or private keys. The wallets are stored in RAM so after you reboot the computer, they will be gone. Load the transaction, sign it and save it to the pen drive.
  14. Go back to the SBTC Core on the online machine. Display the raw transaction (starts with the hex=). Check in the SBTC Core if it is correct sbtc-cli decoderawtransaction hex
  15. If it looks fine (and your blockchain got synced), broadcast it sbtc-cli sendrawtransaction hex
If there is no error, congratulations, you sent the transaction to the specified address. If it is to your SBTC Core wallet, wait until it confirms and send it further with sbtc-cli setfee feeperkb sbtc-cli sendtoaddress "addr" value "" "" true true
I'm going to update this guide when I figure out the BCD transactions intrinsics. You can download and run the BitcoinDiamond Core clone in the meantime.
SBTC tips: 1KjuY8CTrwMhdLt3uF3hCcSgfkHMyo1ELf
submitted by PVmining to BitcoinAirdrops [link] [comments]

Qtum Quantum Chain Design Document -- Add RPC Calls (Seven)

Qtum original design document summary (7) -- Qtum added RPC call
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/JdJLxEIBjD255qey6ITO_g
Qtum's core program, qtumd, runs all core logic including validation and creation of blocks. However, to achieve interaction with qtumd, you need to rely on RPC (Remote Procedure Call). Through RPC, you can interact with qtumd from the outside to implement basic functions such as sending and receiving QTUM and obtaining blockchain information.
The initial version of the Qtum RPC call is compatible with Bitcoin. On this basis, because the Qtum blockchain is different from Bitcoin, and Qtum supports the smart contract function that Bitcoin does not have, it is necessary to add a new RPC or improve the existing RPC to achieve Qtum. Full interaction of nodes.
The following section captures the relevant original design documents (with Chinese translation) for the Qtum RPC call from the early Qtum development team (ps: QTUM<#> or QTUMCORE<#> in the document is the internal design document number):
 
QTUM-35: Add RPC call for off-chain contract execution
Description: In Ethereum there are some contract's that can be executed without needing to be on the blockchain. This is useful especially for retrieving the status and results from a contract, and will make no changes to the on-chain storage or state. We should Add an RPC call to cover this functionality
 
Callcontract [address] [data]
Returns/prints hex encoded return data
 
Task: Add an RPC (Remote Procedure Call) call to run under the chain Description: It is useful to have some contracts in Ethereum that are not working on the blockchain, especially when retrieving the status and results of contracts, and not changing the storage and status of the chain. We should add an RPC call to implement this functionality. Callcontract [address] [data] Return / print hexadecimal encoded return data
 
QTUMCORE-14: Add "callcontract" RPC call for off-chain computations
Description: There should be an RPC call that executes a contract without requiring interaction with the blockchain network, and thus without gas or other fees. Callcontract contract-address data (sender) This should execute the contract locally, and if the contract function returns data, it should be returned/printed by the RPC call. Sender is optional and does not require an owned vout (it can be any valid address)
Task: Add a "callcontract" RPC call for the calculation of the chain Description: There should be an RPC call that does not require interaction with the blockchain network to run the contract, so it does not require gas or other fees. The format is as follows: Callcontract contract-address data (sender) It can run the contract locally, and if the contract function returns data, the RPC call can return/print the data. The sender is optional and does not need to have vout (it can be any valid address).
The above two tasks add a callcontract RPC call interface to implement a local chain call contract, which is convenient for viewing contract status or obtaining contract results without changing any information on the chain.
 
QTUMCORE-7: Add "createcontract" RPC call
 
Description: A new RPC call should be added call "deploycontract" "createcontract". This RPC call will be used to deploy a new smart contract to the Qtum blockchain.
Syntax:
Deploycontract createcontract gas-price gas-limit bytecode [sender-address] [txfee] [broadcast]
If no address is specified, then it should be picked randomly from the wallet. If no outputs exist to spend using that sender-address, then an error should be shown and no transaction created.
Tsfee is optional and if not specified should use the same auto txfee as the rest of the wallet (for example sendtoaddress uses an auto txfee)
Broadcast should default to true. If broadcast is false, then the transaction is created and signed, and then printed to the screen in hex rather than broadcast to the network.
If the sender-address does have an output, but it is not enough to cover the gas costs and tx fees, then any UTXO owned by the wallet should be used by the transaction to cover those fees. (not all funds must come from sender -address, but the sender-address must be vin[0])
After execution, if broadcast is true, it should print the txid and the new contract address.
Task: Add "createcontract" RPC call
Description: Add a "createcontract" RPC call that will be used to deploy a new smart contract on the Qtum blockchain.
grammar:
Createcontract gas-price gas-limit bytecode [sender-address] [txfee] [broadcast]
Among them, sender-address (sender address) is optional. If no address is specified, an address will be randomly selected from the wallet. If there is no output available in the sender-address, an error will be displayed and the transaction will not be created.
Txfee (transaction fee) is optional. If not specified, it should use the same automatic txfee as the rest of the wallet (for example, the automatic txfee used by sendtoaddress)
Broadcast should be true by default. If broadcast is false, the transaction is created and signed, and will be printed to the screen in hexadecimal format instead of being broadcast to the network.
If the sender-address does have an output, but it does not cover the gas charges and transaction fees, then any UTXO owned by the wallet can be used by the transaction to pay for these charges. (Not all funds must come from sender-address, but sender-address must be vin[0])
After running, if broadcast is true, the transaction id and the new contract address are printed.
The above task adds the RPC call createcontract for creating and deploying new smart contracts, and describes the specific meaning of the parameters and their corresponding behavior.
 
QTUMCORE-13: Add "sendtocontract" RPC call
Description: An rpc call should be adding for sending data and (optionally) money to a contract that has been deployed on the blockchain.
The format should be:
Sendtocontract contract-address data (value gaslimit gasprice sender broadcast)
This should create a contract call transaction using OP_CALL.
Value defaults to 0.
If no address is specified, then it should be picked randomly from the wallet. If no outputs exist to spend using that sender-address, then an error should be shown and no transaction created.
Broadcast should default to true. If broadcast is false, then the transaction is created and signed, and then printed to the screen in hex rather than broadcast to the network.
If the sender-address does have an output, but it is not enough to cover the gas costs, tx fees, and value, then any UTXO owned by the wallet should be used by the transaction to cover the remainder. (not all funds must Come from sender-address, but the sender-address must be vin[0])
After execution, if broadcast is true, it should print the txid and the new contract address.
Task: Add "sendtocontract" RPC call
Description: In order to send data or funds to a contract already deployed on the blockchain, an RPC call should be added.
The format should be:
Sendtocontract contract-address data (value gaslimit gasprice sender broadcast)
You can use OP_CALL to create a contract call transaction.
Value defaults to 0.
The sender-address is optional. If no address is specified, an address will be randomly selected from the wallet. If there are no outputs available in the sender-address, an error will be displayed and no transaction will be created.
Broadcast is default to true. If broadcast is false, then the transaction is created and signed and then printed to the screen in hexadecimal format instead of being broadcast to the network.
If the sender-address does have an output, but the output is not sufficient to cover the gas fee, transaction cost, and value, then any UTXO owned by the wallet can be traded to pay the remaining fee. (Not all funds must come from sender-address, but sender-address must be vin[0])
After running, if broadcast is true, the transaction id and the new contract address should be printed.
In order to implement the contract on the chain, the above task adds a sendtocontract RPC call. Its functionality is similar to callcontract and can be used to run contracts. The biggest difference is that sendtocontract implements the chain call, which requires the cost of the Gas, and the running result needs to be verified by the entire network node, and will change the storage state on the contract chain.
 
QTUMCORE-81:create getTransactionReceipt rpc call
Description: We need to create getTransactionReceipt rpc call that returns the same values ​​as here:
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JavaScript-API#web3ethgettransactionreceipt
Most important part is the logs. they can either be stored into a separate db or use one of the existing tx or eth related db.
Task: Create getTransactionReceipt RPC call
Description: We need to create a getTransactionReceipt RPC call that returns the same value as in the following link:
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JavaScript-API#web3ethgettransactionreceipt
The most important part is the log. They can be stored in a separate database, or they can use existing transactions or Ethereum-related databases.
The above task adds a gettransactionreceipt RPC call to the smart contract log to get the contract transaction related logs, which is very useful for understanding the status of smart contracts.
 
QTUMCORE-90: add searchlogs rpc call
Description: we need to add an rpc call to allow us to search the eth event logs, we need to support similar parameters as eth:
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JavaScript-API#web3ethfilter
So it would be: searchlogs(fromBlock, toBlock, address, topics)
fromBlock, toBlock should support latest keyword
Adderss: optional should be an array of one or more addresses
Topics: optional (check the link above)
Unlike eth where you have to call watch, this method should just output the filtered logs
Task: Add searchlogs RPC call
Description: We need to add a PRC call that allows searching for smart contract event logs, and we need to support parameters similar to Ethereum:
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JavaScript-API#web3ethfilter
So its form is as follows: searchlogs(fromBlock, toBlock, address, topics)
fromBlock: toBlock should support the latest keywords
Address: an optional array of one or more addresses
Topics: optional (refer to the link above)
Unlike the Ethereum, which needs to call watch, this method only outputs the filtered log.
The above task adds an RPC for retrieving the smart contract event log to facilitate screening of event logs that satisfy the condition. Users can quickly get the contract status they care about.
 
QTUMCORE-92: add getcode and getstorageat rpc calls
Description: We need to implement Qtum equivalent of these 2 rpc calls:
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JavaScript-API#web3ethgetcode
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JavaScript-API#web3ethgetstorageat
No need to implement callback function for now.
For the default block, we can use block number, or keyword "latest" (default)
Task: Add getcode and getstorageat RPC calls
Description: We need to implement the QTP version of the RPC call equivalent to the following two RPCs:
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JavaScript-API#web3ethgetcode
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JavaScript-API#web3ethgetstorageat
There is currently no need to implement a callback function.
For the default block, we can use the block number, or the keyword "latest" (default)
The above task implements an equivalent RPC similar to Ethereum for obtaining contract code and storing information.
 
QTUMCORE-97: Change validation of contract rpc calls inputs
Description: Change validation of contract rpc calls inputs to accept only hex
Task: Modify the verification of the input value of the contract RPC call
Description: Modify the validation of the input value of the contract RPC call to accept only hexadecimal.
The above task stipulates that the RPC of the verification contract only accepts the hexadecimal data parameters, so that the rpc interface is as consistent as possible.
 
QTUMCORE-123: Add "excepted": to gettransactionreceipt
Description: We need to add the "excepted": field to gettransactionreceipt rpc call which lists "None" if no exception occured, or lists the actual exception that happened.
The same lessons is in callcontract call.
We need the change to be backward compatible, which means it should not break the current logs db, but people who want to see exceptions would have to recreate/reindex the logs db
Task: Add "excepted": field in gettransactionreceipt
Description: We need to add the "excepted": field to the gettransactionreceipt RPC call. If no exception occurs, it will display "None", otherwise it will list the actual exception.
The same is true for Callcontract calls.
We need to modify it to be forward compatible, which means it can't break the current log database, but if you want to see these exceptions, you must rebuild/reindex the log database.
The above tasks enable a number of RPCs associated with smart contracts to throw exceptions that are convenient for the user to understand the wrong running state of the contract and also help developers debug the code.
 
QTUMCORE-124:Add "changeToSender" to sendtoaddress and make sure the "Don't use change address" option also affects sendtoaddress
Description: We need to add "changeToSender" parameter to sendtoaddress rpc call, same as we did for sendtocontract.
Also we need to make sure the "Don't use change address" also affects sendtoaddress
Task: Add "changeToSender" to sendtoaddress and make sure the "Don't use change address" option is also valid for sendtoaddress
Description: We need to add the "changeToSender" parameter to the sendtoaddress RPC call, which is also added to the sendtocontract.
We also need to make sure that the "Don't use change address" option is also valid for sendtoaddress.
Due to the UTXO model, the change of the contract call is easy to confuse the user. Therefore, the above task adds the option of "do not use the change address" for the sendtoaddressRPC, from which the user can choose to return to the original address.
 
QTUMCORE-125: Add callcontract support to "createrawtransaction" rpc call
Description: As requested by some exchanges, which use "createrawtransaction" to create raw transactions before signing on a cold wallet, we need to add
1- raw contract data support to "createrawtransaction" rpc call.
Currently "createrawtransaction" supports two types of outputs in the outputs arguments:
First is "address": x.xxx which created a standard P2PKH output
The second is "data": "hex" which creates an OP_RETURN output
We need to add:
1- "callcontract":
{contractAddress:"address", data:"data", amount:"amount", gasLimit:"gaslimit", gasPrice:"gasPrice"}
Where:
contractAddress: a valid contract address (valid hash160 hex data)
Data: the hex data to add in the OP_CALL output (should validate it's hex data, you can check the validation done in sendtocontract)
Amount (optional): the value of the output (value in QTUM to send with the call), should be a valid amount, default 0
gasLimit (optional): the gas limit for the transaction (same as in sendtocontract), defaults to the default/DGP value
GasPrice (optional): the gas price for the transaction (same as in sendtocontract), defaults to the default/DGP value
After parsing and validation all the values ​​an OP_CALL output should be constructed
Similar to this:
CScript scriptPubKey = CScript() << CScriptNum(VersionVM::GetEVMDefault().toRaw()) << CScriptNum(nGasLimit) << CScriptNum(nGasPrice) << ParseHex(datahex) << ParseHex(contractaddress) << OP_CALL;
Task: Make the "createrawtransaction" RPC call support callcontract
Description: Before some transactions are signed on the cold wallet, use "createrawtransaction" to create the original transaction. At the request of these exchanges, we should add:
1 -- original contract data support for "createrawtransaction" RPC calls
Currently, for the outputs parameter, "createrawtransaction" supports two types of outputs:
The first type is "address": x.xxx, which creates a standard P2PKH output
The second type is "data": "hexadecimal", creating an OP_RETURN output
We need to add:
1 -- "callcontract":
{contractAddress:"address", data:"data", amount:"amount", gasLimit:"gaslimit", gasPrice:"gasPrice"}
among them,
contractAddress: a valid contract address (valid hash 160 hex data)
Data: hexadecimal data added in OP_CALL output (should be verified as hexadecimal data, you can check if it is verified in sendtocontract)
Amount (optional): The value of output (the value in QTUM, sent with this call), should be a valid value, the default is 0
gasLimit (optional): the gas limit of the transaction (same as sendtocontract), the default is the default/DGP value
gasPrice (optional): the gas price of the transaction (same as sendtocontract), defaults to the default/DGP value
After parsing and verifying all the values, you should build an OP_CALL output.
The build method is similar to the following:
CScript scriptPubKey = CScript() << CScriptNum(VersionVM::GetEVMDefault().toRaw()) << CScriptNum(nGasLimit) << CScriptNum(nGasPrice) << ParseHex(datahex) << ParseHex(contractaddress) << OP_CALL;
Prior to the above task, the createrawtransaction RPC call was consistent with Bitcoin and could only be used to send standard transactions. Qtum extends it to compatible contract transactions. From then on, the RPC can be used to create original contract transactions for developers or exchanges.
Summary
The RPC call is the most important way to interact with the qtumd core program. It provides a call interface for getting all kinds of information on the blockchain and local. It is the basis for many applications such as wallets, browsers, and exchanges. A good RPC interface design enables developers to get more accurate information and develop more feature-rich applications. Qtum provides developers with sophisticated RPC calls, making it possible for many third-party applications, such as predicting market projects, Bodhi.
submitted by thisthingismud to Qtum [link] [comments]

Mt Gox UPDATE

https://www.mtgox.com/press_release_20140210.html
Original message from their website:
Dear MtGox Customers and Bitcoiners,
As you are aware, the MtGox team has been working hard to address an issue with the way that bitcoin withdrawals are processed. By "bitcoin withdrawal" we are referring to transactions from a MtGox bitcoin wallet to an external bitcoin address. Bitcoin transactions to any MtGox bitcoin address, and currency withdrawals (Yen, Euro, etc) are not affected by this issue.
The problem we have identified is not limited to MtGox, and affects all transactions where Bitcoins are being sent to a third party. We believe that the changes required for addressing this issue will be positive over the long term for the whole community. As a result we took the necessary action of suspending bitcoin withdrawals until this technical issue has been resolved.
Addressing Transaction Malleability MtGox has detected unusual activity on its Bitcoin wallets and performed investigations during the past weeks. This confirmed the presence of transactions which need to be examined more closely.
Non-technical Explanation: A bug in the bitcoin software makes it possible for someone to use the Bitcoin network to alter transaction details to make it seem like a sending of bitcoins to a bitcoin wallet did not occur when in fact it did occur. Since the transaction appears as if it has not proceeded correctly, the bitcoins may be resent. MtGox is working with the Bitcoin core development team and others to mitigate this issue.
Technical Explanation: Bitcoin transactions are subject to a design issue that has been largely ignored, while known to at least a part of the Bitcoin core developers and mentioned on the BitcoinTalk forums. This defect, known as "transaction malleability" makes it possible for a third party to alter the hash of any freshly issued transaction without invalidating the signature, hence resulting in a similar transaction under a different hash. Of course only one of the two transactions can be validated. However, if the party who altered the transaction is fast enough, for example with a direct connection to different mining pools, or has even a small amount of mining power, it can easily cause the transaction hash alteration to be committed to the blockchain.
The bitcoin api "sendtoaddress" broadly used to send bitcoins to a given bitcoin address will return a transaction hash as a way to track the transaction's insertion in the blockchain. Most wallet and exchange services will keep a record of this said hash in order to be able to respond to users should they inquire about their transaction. It is likely that these services will assume the transaction was not sent if it doesn't appear in the blockchain with the original hash and have currently no means to recognize the alternative transactions as theirs in an efficient way.
This means that an individual could request bitcoins from an exchange or wallet service, alter the resulting transaction's hash before inclusion in the blockchain, then contact the issuing service while claiming the transaction did not proceed. If the alteration fails, the user can simply send the bitcoins back and try again until successful.
We believe this can be addressed by using a different hash for transaction tracking purposes. While the network will continue to use the current hash for the purpose of inclusion in each block's Merkle Tree, the new hash's purpose will be to track a given transaction and can be computed and indexed by hashing the exact signed string via SHA256 (in the same way transactions are currently hashed).
This new transaction hash will allow signing parties to keep track of any transaction they have signed and can easily be computed, even for past transactions.
We have discussed this solution with the Bitcoin core developers and will allow Bitcoin withdrawals again once it has been approved and standardized.
In the meantime, exchanges and wallet services - and any service sending coins directly to third parties - should be extremely careful with anyone claiming their transaction did not go through.
Note that this will also affect any other crypto-currency using the same transaction scheme as Bitcoin.
Conclusion To put things in perspective, it's important to remember that Bitcoin is a very new technology and still very much in its early stages. What MtGox and the Bitcoin community have experienced in the past year has been an incredible and exciting challenge, and there is still much to do to further improve.
MtGox will resume bitcoin withdrawals to outside wallets once the issue outlined above has been properly addressed in a manner that will best serve our customers.
More information on the status of this issue will be released as soon as possible.
We thank you for taking the time to read this, and especially for your patience.
Best Regards, MtGox Team
submitted by Chilltyperiod to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The MMGen wallet now supports BCC ("Bitcoin Cash", "Bitcoin ABC"). After August 1st, MMGen will work on both chains!

See the commit notes on Github for detailed usage instructions.
The instructions are also applicable for users of the Bitcoin Core wallet.
For those planning to exchange their BCH for BTC using a service such as ShapeShift, the two-blockchain approach described in the commit notes is the safest and most practical way to do it.
If you're a Bitcoin Core wallet user, you can skip the MMGen parts and just use the sendtoaddress RPC call on the respective chains to send your coins. Of course, this gives you no control over your inputs as MMGen does, but it will get the job done.
For those that have concerns about the replay protection, a short explanation: Bitcoin transactions aren't signed, their hashes are signed. After the August 1 HF, Bitcoin ABC will compute its transaction hashes in a completely different way than Core will, using a modified version of the BIP143 algorithm that Core will use for Segwit addresses after Segwit activates. But ABC is using this algorithm for ordinary, non-Segwit P2PKH addresses in a way that's incompatible with the existing Bitcoin protocol. The transaction hashes are different, so the signatures are different: one chain's signature cannot be used for the other chain's transaction, so replay is impossible.
submitted by mmgen-py to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Feb. 10: Mt. Gox Statement concerning BTC withdrawals

https://www.mtgox.com/press_release_20140210.html
Dear MtGox Customers and Bitcoiners,
As you are aware, the MtGox team has been working hard to address an issue with the way that bitcoin withdrawals are processed. By "bitcoin withdrawal" we are referring to transactions from a MtGox bitcoin wallet to an external bitcoin address. Bitcoin transactions to any MtGox bitcoin address, and currency withdrawals (Yen, Euro, etc) are not affected by this issue.
The problem we have identified is not limited to MtGox, and affects all transactions where Bitcoins are being sent to a third party. We believe that the changes required for addressing this issue will be positive over the long term for the whole community. As a result we took the necessary action of suspending bitcoin withdrawals until this technical issue has been resolved.
Addressing Transaction Malleability MtGox has detected unusual activity on its Bitcoin wallets and performed investigations during the past weeks. This confirmed the presence of transactions which need to be examined more closely.
Non-technical Explanation: A bug in the bitcoin software makes it possible for someone to use the Bitcoin network to alter transaction details to make it seem like a sending of bitcoins to a bitcoin wallet did not occur when in fact it did occur. Since the transaction appears as if it has not proceeded correctly, the bitcoins may be resent. MtGox is working with the Bitcoin core development team and others to mitigate this issue.
Technical Explanation: Bitcoin transactions are subject to a design issue that has been largely ignored, while known to at least a part of the Bitcoin core developers and mentioned on the BitcoinTalk forums. This defect, known as "transaction malleability" makes it possible for a third party to alter the hash of any freshly issued transaction without invalidating the signature, hence resulting in a similar transaction under a different hash. Of course only one of the two transactions can be validated. However, if the party who altered the transaction is fast enough, for example with a direct connection to different mining pools, or has even a small amount of mining power, it can easily cause the transaction hash alteration to be committed to the blockchain.
The bitcoin api "sendtoaddress" broadly used to send bitcoins to a given bitcoin address will return a transaction hash as a way to track the transaction's insertion in the blockchain. Most wallet and exchange services will keep a record of this said hash in order to be able to respond to users should they inquire about their transaction. It is likely that these services will assume the transaction was not sent if it doesn't appear in the blockchain with the original hash and have currently no means to recognize the alternative transactions as theirs in an efficient way.
This means that an individual could request bitcoins from an exchange or wallet service, alter the resulting transaction's hash before inclusion in the blockchain, then contact the issuing service while claiming the transaction did not proceed. If the alteration fails, the user can simply send the bitcoins back and try again until successful.
We believe this can be addressed by using a different hash for transaction tracking purposes. While the network will continue to use the current hash for the purpose of inclusion in each block's Merkle Tree, the new hash's purpose will be to track a given transaction and can be computed and indexed by hashing the exact signed string via SHA256 (in the same way transactions are currently hashed).
This new transaction hash will allow signing parties to keep track of any transaction they have signed and can easily be computed, even for past transactions.
We have discussed this solution with the Bitcoin core developers and will allow Bitcoin withdrawals again once it has been approved and standardized.
In the meantime, exchanges and wallet services - and any service sending coins directly to third parties - should be extremely careful with anyone claiming their transaction did not go through.
Note that this will also affect any other crypto-currency using the same transaction scheme as Bitcoin.
Conclusion To put things in perspective, it's important to remember that Bitcoin is a very new technology and still very much in its early stages. What MtGox and the Bitcoin community have experienced in the past year has been an incredible and exciting challenge, and there is still much to do to further improve.
MtGox will resume bitcoin withdrawals to outside wallets once the issue outlined above has been properly addressed in a manner that will best serve our customers.
More information on the status of this issue will be released as soon as possible.
We thank you for taking the time to read this, and especially for your patience.
Best Regards, MtGox Team
ok, so where do we go from now?
submitted by waitdowhat to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Major Bug Found in Bitcoin Network By Largest & Oldest Bitcoin Exchange MtGox - Bitcoin Foundation Trying To Cover Up

The Bitcoin Foundation is trying to cover up the major bug that was found in Bitcoin's network by the oldest and largest Bitcoin exchange, MtGox. The Bitcoin Foundation claims that there is no such thing, but the fact that MtGox is experiencing major problems linked to this bug, reveals the lies spread by the Bitcoin Foundation.
Negative confirmed news:
MtGox:
ear MtGox Customers and Bitcoiners,
As you are aware, the MtGox team has been working hard to address an issue with the way that bitcoin withdrawals are processed. By "bitcoin withdrawal" we are referring to transactions from a MtGox bitcoin wallet to an external bitcoin address. Bitcoin transactions to any MtGox bitcoin address, and currency withdrawals (Yen, Euro, etc) are not affected by this issue.
The problem we have identified is not limited to MtGox, and affects all transactions where Bitcoins are being sent to a third party. We believe that the changes required for addressing this issue will be positive over the long term for the whole community. As a result we took the necessary action of suspending bitcoin withdrawals until this technical issue has been resolved.
Addressing Transaction Malleability MtGox has detected unusual activity on its Bitcoin wallets and performed investigations during the past weeks. This confirmed the presence of transactions which need to be examined more closely.
Non-technical Explanation: A bug in the bitcoin software makes it possible for someone to use the Bitcoin network to alter transaction details to make it seem like a sending of bitcoins to a bitcoin wallet did not occur when in fact it did occur. Since the transaction appears as if it has not proceeded correctly, the bitcoins may be resent. MtGox is working with the Bitcoin core development team and others to mitigate this issue.
Technical Explanation: Bitcoin transactions are subject to a design issue that has been largely ignored, while known to at least a part of the Bitcoin core developers and mentioned on the BitcoinTalk forums. This defect, known as "transaction malleability" makes it possible for a third party to alter the hash of any freshly issued transaction without invalidating the signature, hence resulting in a similar transaction under a different hash. Of course only one of the two transactions can be validated. However, if the party who altered the transaction is fast enough, for example with a direct connection to different mining pools, or has even a small amount of mining power, it can easily cause the transaction hash alteration to be committed to the blockchain.
The bitcoin api "sendtoaddress" broadly used to send bitcoins to a given bitcoin address will return a transaction hash as a way to track the transaction's insertion in the blockchain. Most wallet and exchange services will keep a record of this said hash in order to be able to respond to users should they inquire about their transaction. It is likely that these services will assume the transaction was not sent if it doesn't appear in the blockchain with the original hash and have currently no means to recognize the alternative transactions as theirs in an efficient way.
This means that an individual could request bitcoins from an exchange or wallet service, alter the resulting transaction's hash before inclusion in the blockchain, then contact the issuing service while claiming the transaction did not proceed. If the alteration fails, the user can simply send the bitcoins back and try again until successful.
We believe this can be addressed by using a different hash for transaction tracking purposes. While the network will continue to use the current hash for the purpose of inclusion in each block's Merkle Tree, the new hash's purpose will be to track a given transaction and can be computed and indexed by hashing the exact signed string via SHA256 (in the same way transactions are currently hashed).
This new transaction hash will allow signing parties to keep track of any transaction they have signed and can easily be computed, even for past transactions.
We have discussed this solution with the Bitcoin core developers and will allow Bitcoin withdrawals again once it has been approved and standardized.
In the meantime, exchanges and wallet services - and any service sending coins directly to third parties - should be extremely careful with anyone claiming their transaction did not go through.
Note that this will also affect any other crypto-currency using the same transaction scheme as Bitcoin.
Conclusion To put things in perspective, it's important to remember that Bitcoin is a very new technology and still very much in its early stages. What MtGox and the Bitcoin community have experienced in the past year has been an incredible and exciting challenge, and there is still much to do to further improve.
MtGox will resume bitcoin withdrawals to outside wallets once the issue outlined above has been properly addressed in a manner that will best serve our customers.
More information on the status of this issue will be released as soon as possible.
We thank you for taking the time to read this, and especially for your patience.
Best Regards, MtGox Team
Source:
https://www.mtgox.com/press_release_20140210.html
submitted by iPOOPEDonMyBunny to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

HOW TO BUY BITCOINS? THE BEST EXCHANGE & MARKETPLACE. How to buy bitcoin and cryptocurrency using exchange?';;';;';'.;.;.'.'/?/ How to buy bitcoin and cryptocurrency using exchange?';;';';';'.;.;/'?'? How to send BTC from Bitbuy wallet to an exchange Buy & Exchange Bitcoins BTC Instant  Skrill to Bitcoins Instantly 2019 Without Verifications

Ex: install the Bitcoin app to send Bitcoin. Enter transaction details. Click the Send button on the left panel or at the top of an account page. Type or use the drop-down list to select the Account to debit. Enter the Recipient address. For optimal security, make sure always to double-check addresses that you copy and paste. Click on Continue. This extremely easy to follow 3-step process is more or less the same for any cryptocurrency other than Bitcoin and for any exchange, wallet, or software. Simply seek out your receiving wallet address, copy it, and paste it into your Coinbase account to shift your funds from one wallet to another. Bitcoin Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for Bitcoin crypto-currency enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up. Sign up to join this community. Anybody can ask a question -fallbackfee option in sendtoaddress. Ask Question Asked 8 months ago. Active 8 months ago. Getting Started¶. The site aims to provide the information you need to understand Bitcoin and start building Bitcoin-based applications. To make the best use of this documentation, make sure you’re running a node. For technical support, we recommend Bitcoin Stack Exchange.For errors or suggestions related to this documentation, please open an issue on GitHub. Provide this address to the cryptocurrency exchange or person sending you Bitcoin. Or, if you’re in person, the sender can simply scan your wallet QR code with their device. Sending Bitcoin. Open your Bitcoin.com wallet app and select Send. Copy and paste the recipient’s wallet address into your own wallet app.

[index] [23661] [14633] [23170] [324] [1221] [1242] [15245] [23385] [28476] [20687]

HOW TO BUY BITCOINS? THE BEST EXCHANGE & MARKETPLACE.

24/7 Live Bitcoin Algo Trading on Deribit Exchange (DeriBot) Bitcoin Trading Robots 251 watching Live now I Tried Creating A $100,000 Shopify Dropshipping Business In 7 Days *LIVE* - Duration: 40:17. 24/7 Live Bitcoin Algo Trading on Deribit Exchange (DeriBot) Bitcoin Trading Robots 154 watching Live now Don't use Coinbase, use GDAX instead to ELIMINATE FEES! 🔴 BITCOIN LIVE 🔴 Enjin Coin (ENJ) Pump, XLM Still UP - Ep.1056 - Crypto Technical Analysis Mitch Ray 349 watching Live now BNB COIN 2020 Project Update, BINANCE news Binance Live 69,477 watching Just follow this simple step by step video to guide you through the process of exchange your Dagcoin to Bitcoins within 5mins. Exchanging your Dagcoin is now more easy and effortless. 1. Register ... If you’re wanting to get started buying and selling cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Ether, Dash, or Stellar, but are wondering which exchange to use, So you must use exchanges CEX.io . What is ...

Flag Counter