How to import private keys - BitcoinWiki

Is it safe to import a private key on bitcoin core

Is there any way someone could get access to my wallet if I do this or is it safe?
submitted by NiceAccount74 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I am searching for an Android Bitcoin Cash Wallet that can import (or sweep) a private key (WIF) from a Bitcoin Core cold storage paper wallet.

SOLVED. The app "Coinomi" did the trick (not import, but sweep, which is ok for the low network fees...)
(btw, also works for BTG)
Any recommendations / tips?
Actually "import" would be preferred over "sweep", but since Tx Fees are so low with BCH, also "sweep" is acceptable for my use-case.
What I mean is entering (or sweeping) my own single private key* (legacy WIF format as we know it from paper wallets**), and NOT entering my own determinsistic 12-word-mnemonic seed.
For the following Bitcoin Core wallets I am aware that they support it - but I am looking for a Bitcoin Cash Wallet that can do the same:
The following Bitcoin Cash wallets cannot do it:
Oh - and I'd like to enter the private key manually via text, not via QR code scan, if possible (because I only have the private key ("5.....") in text form and don't want to convert it to one of those QR code generator online websites, for obvious reasons). (removed, because bitaddress.org used offline serves this purpose to convert priv key (text) to QR code)
PS: If anybody also knows about BTG for the same question, I'd be interested, too, obviously.
submitted by Amichateur to btc [link] [comments]

Is it safe to import electrum private key to bitcoin core? /r/BitcoinBeginners

Is it safe to import electrum private key to bitcoin core? /BitcoinBeginners submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

I am searching for an Android Bitcoin Cash Wallet that can import (or sweep) a private key (WIF) from a Bitcoin Core cold storage paper wallet. /r/btc

I am searching for an Android Bitcoin Cash Wallet that can import (or sweep) a private key (WIF) from a Bitcoin Core cold storage paper wallet. /btc submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Is there a way to import private keys on bitcoin core?

submitted by Gatsby95 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Sweeping private Key vs. Importing private key from bitcoin core to electrum

So i made a post a few weeks ago, about how my start up disk is full and i cant finish downloading the block chain from bitcoin core onto my computer, and as a result i cant access the BTC that I had already sent to the wallet. So i was told how to transfer the private key from bitcoin core to electrum, but i just want to make sure im choosing the correct option of doing it. I can either make a non seeded wallet with electrum and then import the private key, or i can create a seeded wallet and then "sweep" the contents of my bitcoin core wallet by using the private key... I really dont want to lose this money, and i basically will never be able to use bitcoin core and need to delete the file as soon as possible so i just want to make sure the BTC gets directly transferred to electrum, with out it getting deleted some how. thanks!
submitted by HerbalBalance to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Trezor BIP49 private keys not importing into Bitcoin Core

I used the Mnemonic Code Generator to generate my private keys from the website https://iancoleman.github.io/bip39/. I of course used an offline computer. All my public addresses matched my Trezor addresses. However the private keys do not import into Bitcoin Core using the importprivkey command with the private key at the console. I'm using the new segwit wallet addresses in the Trezor.
What am I doing wrong? Is the website tool faulty?
Please advise. Thank you,
submitted by jcope11 to TREZOR [link] [comments]

Is there a way to import private keys on bitcoin core? /r/Bitcoin

Is there a way to import private keys on bitcoin core? /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Imported private key from Bitcoin Core - only 1/10th the amount?

I'm new to BCH, so bear with me. I imported my BTC private key to a BCH wallet (in this case, it was 1 BTC) to 'sweep', but my BCH wallet only shows .1021 instead of 1 - is that right?
submitted by crookedview to Bitcoincash [link] [comments]

Sweeping private Key vs. Importing private key from bitcoin core to electrum /r/Bitcoin

Sweeping private Key vs. Importing private key from bitcoin core to electrum /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

[Help] Importing a segwit private key into bitcon core. /r/Bitcoin

[Help] Importing a segwit private key into bitcon core. /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Imported private key from Bitcoin Core - only 1/10th the amount? /r/Bitcoincash

Imported private key from Bitcoin Core - only 1/10th the amount? /Bitcoincash submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

What's the point of wallet backups?

What's the point of saving a backup file of your wallet? As long as you know the seed you can always back it up, no? After all bitcoins "move" only apparently, they are always there immovable, only the access to them changes. What am I missing?
submitted by luc1232 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Lost electrum seed key.

So basically i got this problem and im new to BTC. I downloaded electrum and bitcoin core yesterday. Created electrum vallet that is imported, watching only and a friend of mine sent money to my address. Now i searched around and found out that i can't send btc to others if its watching only. Then i found out i needed seed that i didnt write down when created this acc. Anyone can help me with making it from imported watching only to standart vallet without seed? I got the password and the vallet opened on my pc but i don't know how to fix the problem.
submitted by Snizaars to Electrum [link] [comments]

Help!! Accidentally sent Bitcoin Core to my Bitcoin Cash Wallet!

Hey, so I just sent some BItcoin (BTC)to my BItcoin Cash (BCH) wallet and unsurprisingly it’s not in the wallet. I have gone on explorer.bitcoin.com and typed in the BCH address. It takes me to the ‘BTC tab’ of the address page and unlike the wallet on my phone, I can see the Balance/transaction IDs etc. and the correct amount is there. If I try to click the ‘BCH tab’ it allows me onto the page but a box pops up and says ‘There is a balance in this address on the BitCoin Core (BTC) blockchain. Redirecting in 5 seconds’. I’m hoping there is a way of moving it to the correct wallet or is it gone? Being very new to this, I a bit stumped...Thanks!
submitted by Doormach294 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Hold my hand , please.

If I transfer bitcoin to a hard wallet where is the transaction actually stored? Say I had a Trezor, If I were to lose the Trezor I would have to get another Trezor to connect to my Bitcoin again, is Trezor storing it? Thanks for your patience.
submitted by fiduciaryatlarge to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Windows / Linux Guide to using Trezor with Bitcoin Core (HWI)

This is a guide to using your Trezor with Bitcoin Core. It may seem like more trouble than it's worth but many applications use Bitcoin Core as a wallet such as LND, EPS, and JoinMarket. Learning how to integrate your Trezor into a Bitcoin Core install is rather useful in many unexpected ways. I did this all through the QT interfaces, but it's simple to script. There is a much simpler guide available from the HWI github, and the smallest Linux TLDR is here
Unfortunately, I don't have access to a Coldcard or Ledger. I'm not sure how the setpin or -stdinpass parameters are handled on that HW.

( A ) Install TrezorCTL, HWI, and build GUI

You only need to set the wallet up once, but may repeat to upgrade

( A.I ) Download extract and install HWI

  1. Download and isntall Python
  2. Download https://github.com/bitcoin-core/HWI/archive/1.1.2.zip
  3. Extract it to a working folder (assumes C:\User\Reddit\src\HWI)
  4. Change Directory (cd) to working folder cd "C:\User\Reddit\src\HWI"
  5. Setup venv python -m venv .venv
  6. Enter venv .venv\Scripts\activate.bat 1
  7. Install dependencies python -m pip install -U setuptools pip wheel
  8. Install TrezorCTL python -m pip install trezor[hidapi]
  9. Install HWI python -m pip install hwi pyside2
  10. Download github.com/libusb/libusb/releases/download/v1.0.23/libusb-1.0.23.7z
  11. Extract MS64\dll\libusb-1.0.dll from the archive
  12. Copy to pywin copy libusb-1.0.dll .venv\Lib\site-packages\pywin32_system32\

( A.II ) Build the QT UI files

  1. Download and install MSYS2
  2. Launch a mingw64.exe shell
  3. CD to working folder cd "C:\User\Reddit\src\HWI"
  4. Enter venv source .venv/Scripts/activate 1
  5. Run UI build bash contrib/generate-ui.sh

( B ) Create a Trezor wallet in Bitcoin Core (testnet)

You only need to set the wallet up once, no private key data is stored, only xpub data

( B.I ) Retrieve keypool from HWI-QT

  1. Launch hwi-qt.exe --testnet (assuming testnet)
  2. Click Set passphrase (if needed) to cache your passphrase then click Refresh
  3. Select you trezor from the list then click Set Pin (if needed)
  4. Ensure your Trezor in the dropdown has a fingerprint
  5. Select Change keypool options and choose P2WPKH
  6. Copy all the text from the Keypool textbox

( B.II ) Create the wallet in Bitcoin QT

  1. Launch Bitcoin Core (testnet) (non-pruned) 2
  2. Select Console from the Window menu
  3. Create a wallet createwallet "hwi" true
  4. Ensure that hwi is selected in the console wallet dropdown
  5. Verify walletname using the getwalletinfo command
  6. Import keypool importmulti '' (note ' caging)
  7. Rescan if TXNs are missing rescanblockchain 3

( C.I ) Grab Tesnet coins

  1. Select the Receive tab in Bitcoin Core (testnet)
  2. Ensure that the Wallet dropdown has hwi selected
  3. Select Create new receiving address and copy address
  4. Google "bitcoin testnet faucet" and visit a few sites
  5. Answer captcha and input your addressed copied from C.I.3

( D ) Spending funds with HWI

This is how you can spend funds in your Trezor using Bitcoin Core (testnet)

( D.I ) Create an unsigned PSBT

  1. Select the Send tab in Bitcoin Core (testnet)
  2. Ensure that the Wallet dropdown has hwi selected
  3. Verify your balance in Watch-only balance
  4. Rescan if balance is wrong (see B.II.7) 3
  5. Craft your TXN as usual, then click Create Unsigned
  6. Copy the PSBT to your clipboard when prompted

( D.II ) Sign your PSBT

  1. In HWI-QT click Sign PSBT
  2. Paste what you copied in D.I.6 in PSBT to Sign field
  3. Click Sign PSBT
  4. Copy the text for PSBT Result

( D.III ) Broadcast your TXN

  1. Select the Console window in Bitcoin Core (testnet)
  2. Ensure that the Wallet dropdown has hwi selected
  3. Finalize PSBT: finalizepsbt
  4. Copy the signed TXN hex from the hex field returned
  5. Broadcast TXN: sendrawtransaction

Final Thoughts

I did this all through the GUI interfaces for the benefit of the Windows users. Windows console is fine, but the quote escaping in windows console is nightmarish. Powershell would be good, but that throws this on a whole another level for most Windows folks.
There is also the need to use HWI-QT due to a bug in blank passphrases on the commandline. You can work around it by toggling passphrase off or on, but again, it's more than I wanted to spell out.
Footnotes:
  • 1. - Later version of python put the activate script under 'bin' instead of 'Script'
  • 2. - You can run pruned, but you need to have a fresh wallet
  • 3. - Rescan is automatic on 'importmulti' but I was pruned so it was wierd
submitted by brianddk to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Proposal: The Sia Foundation

Vision Statement

A common sentiment is brewing online; a shared desire for the internet that might have been. After decades of corporate encroachment, you don't need to be a power user to realize that something has gone very wrong.
In the early days of the internet, the future was bright. In that future, when you sent an instant message, it traveled directly to the recipient. When you needed to pay a friend, you announced a transfer of value to their public key. When an app was missing a feature you wanted, you opened up the source code and implemented it. When you took a picture on your phone, it was immediately encrypted and backed up to storage that you controlled. In that future, people would laugh at the idea of having to authenticate themselves to some corporation before doing these things.
What did we get instead? Rather than a network of human-sized communities, we have a handful of enormous commons, each controlled by a faceless corporate entity. Hey user, want to send a message? You can, but we'll store a copy of it indefinitely, unencrypted, for our preference-learning algorithms to pore over; how else could we slap targeted ads on every piece of content you see? Want to pay a friend? You can—in our Monopoly money. Want a new feature? Submit a request to our Support Center and we'll totally maybe think about it. Want to backup a photo? You can—inside our walled garden, which only we (and the NSA, of course) can access. Just be careful what you share, because merely locking you out of your account and deleting all your data is far from the worst thing we could do.
You rationalize this: "MEGACORP would never do such a thing; it would be bad for business." But we all know, at some level, that this state of affairs, this inversion of power, is not merely "unfortunate" or "suboptimal" – No. It is degrading. Even if MEGACORP were purely benevolent, it is degrading that we must ask its permission to talk to our friends; that we must rely on it to safeguard our treasured memories; that our digital lives are completely beholden to those who seek only to extract value from us.
At the root of this issue is the centralization of data. MEGACORP can surveil you—because your emails and video chats flow through their servers. And MEGACORP can control you—because they hold your data hostage. But centralization is a solution to a technical problem: How can we make the user's data accessible from anywhere in the world, on any device? For a long time, no alternative solution to this problem was forthcoming.
Today, thanks to a confluence of established techniques and recent innovations, we have solved the accessibility problem without resorting to centralization. Hashing, encryption, and erasure encoding got us most of the way, but one barrier remained: incentives. How do you incentivize an anonymous stranger to store your data? Earlier protocols like BitTorrent worked around this limitation by relying on altruism, tit-for-tat requirements, or "points" – in other words, nothing you could pay your electric bill with. Finally, in 2009, a solution appeared: Bitcoin. Not long after, Sia was born.
Cryptography has unleashed the latent power of the internet by enabling interactions between mutually-distrustful parties. Sia harnesses this power to turn the cloud storage market into a proper marketplace, where buyers and sellers can transact directly, with no intermediaries, anywhere in the world. No more silos or walled gardens: your data is encrypted, so it can't be spied on, and it's stored on many servers, so no single entity can hold it hostage. Thanks to projects like Sia, the internet is being re-decentralized.
Sia began its life as a startup, which means it has always been subjected to two competing forces: the ideals of its founders, and the profit motive inherent to all businesses. Its founders have taken great pains to never compromise on the former, but this often threatened the company's financial viability. With the establishment of the Sia Foundation, this tension is resolved. The Foundation, freed of the obligation to generate profit, is a pure embodiment of the ideals from which Sia originally sprung.
The goals and responsibilities of the Foundation are numerous: to maintain core Sia protocols and consensus code; to support developers building on top of Sia and its protocols; to promote Sia and facilitate partnerships in other spheres and communities; to ensure that users can easily acquire and safely store siacoins; to develop network scalability solutions; to implement hardforks and lead the community through them; and much more. In a broader sense, its mission is to commoditize data storage, making it cheap, ubiquitous, and accessible to all, without compromising privacy or performance.
Sia is a perfect example of how we can achieve better living through cryptography. We now begin a new chapter in Sia's history. May our stewardship lead it into a bright future.
 

Overview

Today, we are proposing the creation of the Sia Foundation: a new non-profit entity that builds and supports distributed cloud storage infrastructure, with a specific focus on the Sia storage platform. What follows is an informal overview of the Sia Foundation, covering two major topics: how the Foundation will be funded, and what its funds will be used for.

Organizational Structure

The Sia Foundation will be structured as a non-profit entity incorporated in the United States, likely a 501(c)(3) organization or similar. The actions of the Foundation will be constrained by its charter, which formalizes the specific obligations and overall mission outlined in this document. The charter will be updated on an annual basis to reflect the current goals of the Sia community.
The organization will be operated by a board of directors, initially comprising Luke Champine as President and Eddie Wang as Chairman. Luke Champine will be leaving his position at Nebulous to work at the Foundation full-time, and will seek to divest his shares of Nebulous stock along with other potential conflicts of interest. Neither Luke nor Eddie personally own any siafunds or significant quantities of siacoin.

Funding

The primary source of funding for the Foundation will come from a new block subsidy. Following a hardfork, 30 KS per block will be allocated to the "Foundation Fund," continuing in perpetuity. The existing 30 KS per block miner reward is not affected. Additionally, one year's worth of block subsidies (approximately 1.57 GS) will be allocated to the Fund immediately upon activation of the hardfork.
As detailed below, the Foundation will provably burn any coins that it cannot meaningfully spend. As such, the 30 KS subsidy should be viewed as a maximum. This allows the Foundation to grow alongside Sia without requiring additional hardforks.
The Foundation will not be funded to any degree by the possession or sale of siafunds. Siafunds were originally introduced as a means of incentivizing growth, and we still believe in their effectiveness: a siafund holder wants to increase the amount of storage on Sia as much as possible. While the Foundation obviously wants Sia to succeed, its driving force should be its charter. Deriving significant revenue from siafunds would jeopardize the Foundation's impartiality and focus. Ultimately, we want the Foundation to act in the best interests of Sia, not in growing its own budget.

Responsibilities

The Foundation inherits a great number of responsibilities from Nebulous. Each quarter, the Foundation will publish the progress it has made over the past quarter, and list the responsibilities it intends to prioritize over the coming quarter. This will be accompanied by a financial report, detailing each area of expenditure over the past quarter, and forecasting expenditures for the coming quarter. Below, we summarize some of the myriad responsibilities towards which the Foundation is expected to allocate its resources.

Maintain and enhance core Sia software

Arguably, this is the most important responsibility of the Foundation. At the heart of Sia is its consensus algorithm: regardless of other differences, all Sia software must agree upon the content and rules of the blockchain. It is therefore crucial that the algorithm be stewarded by an entity that is accountable to the community, transparent in its decision-making, and has no profit motive or other conflicts of interest.
Accordingly, Sia’s consensus functionality will no longer be directly maintained by Nebulous. Instead, the Foundation will release and maintain an implementation of a "minimal Sia full node," comprising the Sia consensus algorithm and P2P networking code. The source code will be available in a public repository, and signed binaries will be published for each release.
Other parties may use this code to provide alternative full node software. For example, Nebulous may extend the minimal full node with wallet, renter, and host functionality. The source code of any such implementation may be submitted to the Foundation for review. If the code passes review, the Foundation will provide "endorsement signatures" for the commit hash used and for binaries compiled internally by the Foundation. Specifically, these signatures assert that the Foundation believes the software contains no consensus-breaking changes or other modifications to imported Foundation code. Endorsement signatures and Foundation-compiled binaries may be displayed and distributed by the receiving party, along with an appropriate disclaimer.
A minimal full node is not terribly useful on its own; the wallet, renter, host, and other extensions are what make Sia a proper developer platform. Currently, the only implementations of these extensions are maintained by Nebulous. The Foundation will contract Nebulous to ensure that these extensions continue to receive updates and enhancements. Later on, the Foundation intends to develop its own implementations of these extensions and others. As with the minimal node software, these extensions will be open source and available in public repositories for use by any Sia node software.
With the consensus code now managed by the Foundation, the task of implementing and orchestrating hardforks becomes its responsibility as well. When the Foundation determines that a hardfork is necessary (whether through internal discussion or via community petition), a formal proposal will be drafted and submitted for public review, during which arguments for and against the proposal may be submitted to a public repository. During this time, the hardfork code will be implemented, either by Foundation employees or by external contributors working closely with the Foundation. Once the implementation is finished, final arguments will be heard. The Foundation board will then vote whether to accept or reject the proposal, and announce their decision along with appropriate justification. Assuming the proposal was accepted, the Foundation will announce the block height at which the hardfork will activate, and will subsequently release source code and signed binaries that incorporate the hardfork code.
Regardless of the Foundation's decision, it is the community that ultimately determines whether a fork is accepted or rejected – nothing can change that. Foundation node software will never automatically update, so all forks must be explicitly adopted by users. Furthermore, the Foundation will provide replay and wipeout protection for its hard forks, protecting other chains from unintended or malicious reorgs. Similarly, the Foundation will ensure that any file contracts formed prior to a fork activation will continue to be honored on both chains until they expire.
Finally, the Foundation also intends to pursue scalability solutions for the Sia blockchain. In particular, work has already begun on an implementation of Utreexo, which will greatly reduce the space requirements of fully-validating nodes (allowing a full node to be run on a smartphone) while increasing throughput and decreasing initial sync time. A hardfork implementing Utreexo will be submitted to the community as per the process detailed above.
As this is the most important responsibility of the Foundation, it will receive a significant portion of the Foundation’s budget, primarily in the form of developer salaries and contracting agreements.

Support community services

We intend to allocate 25% of the Foundation Fund towards the community. This allocation will be held and disbursed in the form of siacoins, and will pay for grants, bounties, hackathons, and other community-driven endeavours.
Any community-run service, such as a Skynet portal, explorer or web wallet, may apply to have its costs covered by the Foundation. Upon approval, the Foundation will reimburse expenses incurred by the service, subject to the exact terms agreed to. The intent of these grants is not to provide a source of income, but rather to make such services "break even" for their operators, so that members of the community can enrich the Sia ecosystem without worrying about the impact on their own finances.

Ensure easy acquisition and storage of siacoins

Most users will acquire their siacoins via an exchange. The Foundation will provide support to Sia-compatible exchanges, and pursue relevant integrations at its discretion, such as Coinbase's new Rosetta standard. The Foundation may also release DEX software that enables trading cryptocurrencies without the need for a third party. (The Foundation itself will never operate as a money transmitter.)
Increasingly, users are storing their cryptocurrency on hardware wallets. The Foundation will maintain the existing Ledger Nano S integration, and pursue further integrations at its discretion.
Of course, all hardware wallets must be paired with software running on a computer or smartphone, so the Foundation will also develop and/or maintain client-side wallet software, including both full-node wallets and "lite" wallets. Community-operated wallet services, i.e. web wallets, may be funded via grants.
Like core software maintenance, this responsibility will be funded in the form of developer salaries and contracting agreements.

Protect the ecosystem

When it comes to cryptocurrency security, patching software vulnerabilities is table stakes; there are significant legal and social threats that we must be mindful of as well. As such, the Foundation will earmark a portion of its fund to defend the community from legal action. The Foundation will also safeguard the network from 51% attacks and other threats to network security by implementing softforks and/or hardforks where necessary.
The Foundation also intends to assist in the development of a new FOSS software license, and to solicit legal memos on various Sia-related matters, such as hosting in the United States and the EU.
In a broader sense, the establishment of the Foundation makes the ecosystem more robust by transferring core development to a more neutral entity. Thanks to its funding structure, the Foundation will be immune to various forms of pressure that for-profit companies are susceptible to.

Drive adoption of Sia

Although the overriding goal of the Foundation is to make Sia the best platform it can be, all that work will be in vain if no one uses the platform. There are a number of ways the Foundation can promote Sia and get it into the hands of potential users and developers.
In-person conferences are understandably far less popular now, but the Foundation can sponsor and/or participate in virtual conferences. (In-person conferences may be held in the future, permitting circumstances.) Similarly, the Foundation will provide prizes for hackathons, which may be organized by community members, Nebulous, or the Foundation itself. Lastly, partnerships with other companies in the cryptocurrency space—or the cloud storage space—are a great way to increase awareness of Sia. To handle these responsibilities, one of the early priorities of the Foundation will be to hire a marketing director.

Fund Management

The Foundation Fund will be controlled by a multisig address. Each member of the Foundation's board will control one of the signing keys, with the signature threshold to be determined once the final composition of the board is known. (This threshold may also be increased or decreased if the number of board members changes.) Additionally, one timelocked signing key will be controlled by David Vorick. This key will act as a “dead man’s switch,” to be used in the event of an emergency that prevents Foundation board members from reaching the signature threshold. The timelock ensures that this key cannot be used unless the Foundation fails to sign a transaction for several months.
On the 1st of each month, the Foundation will use its keys to transfer all siacoins in the Fund to two new addresses. The first address will be controlled by a high-security hot wallet, and will receive approximately one month's worth of Foundation expenditures. The second address, receiving the remaining siacoins, will be a modified version of the source address: specifically, it will increase the timelock on David Vorick's signing key by one month. Any other changes to the set of signing keys, such as the arrival or departure of board members, will be incorporated into this address as well.
The Foundation Fund is allocated in SC, but many of the Foundation's expenditures must be paid in USD or other fiat currency. Accordingly, the Foundation will convert, at its discretion, a portion of its monthly withdrawals to fiat currency. We expect this conversion to be primarily facilitated by private "OTC" sales to accredited investors. The Foundation currently has no plans to speculate in cryptocurrency or other assets.
Finally, it is important that the Foundation adds value to the Sia platform well in excess of the inflation introduced by the block subsidy. For this reason, the Foundation intends to provably burn, on a quarterly basis, any coins that it cannot allocate towards any justifiable expense. In other words, coins will be burned whenever doing so provides greater value to the platform than any other use. Furthermore, the Foundation will cap its SC treasury at 5% of the total supply, and will cap its USD treasury at 4 years’ worth of predicted expenses.
 
Addendum: Hardfork Timeline
We would like to see this proposal finalized and accepted by the community no later than September 30th. A new version of siad, implementing the hardfork, will be released no later than October 15th. The hardfork will activate at block 293220, which is expected to occur around 12pm EST on January 1st, 2021.
 
Addendum: Inflation specifics
The total supply of siacoins as of January 1st, 2021 will be approximately 45.243 GS. The initial subsidy of 1.57 GS thus increases the supply by 3.47%, and the total annual inflation in 2021 will be at most 10.4% (if zero coins are burned). In 2022, total annual inflation will be at most 6.28%, and will steadily decrease in subsequent years.
 

Conclusion

We see the establishment of the Foundation as an important step in the maturation of the Sia project. It provides the ecosystem with a sustainable source of funding that can be exclusively directed towards achieving Sia's ambitious goals. Compared to other projects with far deeper pockets, Sia has always punched above its weight; once we're on equal footing, there's no telling what we'll be able to achieve.
Nevertheless, we do not propose this change lightly, and have taken pains to ensure that the Foundation will act in accordance with the ideals that this community shares. It will operate transparently, keep inflation to a minimum, and respect the user's fundamental role in decentralized systems. We hope that everyone in the community will consider this proposal carefully, and look forward to a productive discussion.
submitted by lukechampine to siacoin [link] [comments]

Comparison between Avalanche, Cosmos and Polkadot

Comparison between Avalanche, Cosmos and Polkadot
Reposting after was mistakenly removed by mods (since resolved - Thanks)
A frequent question I see being asked is how Cosmos, Polkadot and Avalanche compare? Whilst there are similarities there are also a lot of differences. This article is not intended to be an extensive in-depth list, but rather an overview based on some of the criteria that I feel are most important.
For better formatting see https://medium.com/ava-hub/comparison-between-avalanche-cosmos-and-polkadot-a2a98f46c03b
https://preview.redd.it/e8s7dj3ivpq51.png?width=428&format=png&auto=webp&s=5d0463462702637118c7527ebf96e91f4a80b290

Overview

Cosmos

Cosmos is a heterogeneous network of many independent parallel blockchains, each powered by classical BFT consensus algorithms like Tendermint. Developers can easily build custom application specific blockchains, called Zones, through the Cosmos SDK framework. These Zones connect to Hubs, which are specifically designed to connect zones together.
The vision of Cosmos is to have thousands of Zones and Hubs that are Interoperable through the Inter-Blockchain Communication Protocol (IBC). Cosmos can also connect to other systems through peg zones, which are specifically designed zones that each are custom made to interact with another ecosystem such as Ethereum and Bitcoin. Cosmos does not use Sharding with each Zone and Hub being sovereign with their own validator set.
For a more in-depth look at Cosmos and provide more reference to points made in this article, please see my three part series — Part One, Part Two, Part Three
(There's a youtube video with a quick video overview of Cosmos on the medium article - https://medium.com/ava-hub/comparison-between-avalanche-cosmos-and-polkadot-a2a98f46c03b)

Polkadot

Polkadot is a heterogeneous blockchain protocol that connects multiple specialised blockchains into one unified network. It achieves scalability through a sharding infrastructure with multiple blockchains running in parallel, called parachains, that connect to a central chain called the Relay Chain. Developers can easily build custom application specific parachains through the Substrate development framework.
The relay chain validates the state transition of connected parachains, providing shared state across the entire ecosystem. If the Relay Chain must revert for any reason, then all of the parachains would also revert. This is to ensure that the validity of the entire system can persist, and no individual part is corruptible. The shared state makes it so that the trust assumptions when using parachains are only those of the Relay Chain validator set, and no other. Interoperability is enabled between parachains through Cross-Chain Message Passing (XCMP) protocol and is also possible to connect to other systems through bridges, which are specifically designed parachains or parathreads that each are custom made to interact with another ecosystem such as Ethereum and Bitcoin. The hope is to have 100 parachains connect to the relay chain.
For a more in-depth look at Polkadot and provide more reference to points made in this article, please see my three part series — Part One, Part Two, Part Three
(There's a youtube video with a quick video overview of Polkadot on the medium article - https://medium.com/ava-hub/comparison-between-avalanche-cosmos-and-polkadot-a2a98f46c03b)

Avalanche

Avalanche is a platform of platforms, ultimately consisting of thousands of subnets to form a heterogeneous interoperable network of many blockchains, that takes advantage of the revolutionary Avalanche Consensus protocols to provide a secure, globally distributed, interoperable and trustless framework offering unprecedented decentralisation whilst being able to comply with regulatory requirements.
Avalanche allows anyone to create their own tailor-made application specific blockchains, supporting multiple custom virtual machines such as EVM and WASM and written in popular languages like Go (with others coming in the future) rather than lightly used, poorly-understood languages like Solidity. This virtual machine can then be deployed on a custom blockchain network, called a subnet, which consist of a dynamic set of validators working together to achieve consensus on the state of a set of many blockchains where complex rulesets can be configured to meet regulatory compliance.
Avalanche was built with serving financial markets in mind. It has native support for easily creating and trading digital smart assets with complex custom rule sets that define how the asset is handled and traded to ensure regulatory compliance can be met. Interoperability is enabled between blockchains within a subnet as well as between subnets. Like Cosmos and Polkadot, Avalanche is also able to connect to other systems through bridges, through custom virtual machines made to interact with another ecosystem such as Ethereum and Bitcoin.
For a more in-depth look at Avalanche and provide more reference to points made in this article, please see here and here
(There's a youtube video with a quick video overview of Avalanche on the medium article - https://medium.com/ava-hub/comparison-between-avalanche-cosmos-and-polkadot-a2a98f46c03b)

Comparison between Cosmos, Polkadot and Avalanche

A frequent question I see being asked is how Cosmos, Polkadot and Avalanche compare? Whilst there are similarities there are also a lot of differences. This article is not intended to be an extensive in-depth list, but rather an overview based on some of the criteria that I feel are most important. For a more in-depth view I recommend reading the articles for each of the projects linked above and coming to your own conclusions. I want to stress that it’s not a case of one platform being the killer of all other platforms, far from it. There won’t be one platform to rule them all, and too often the tribalism has plagued this space. Blockchains are going to completely revolutionise most industries and have a profound effect on the world we know today. It’s still very early in this space with most adoption limited to speculation and trading mainly due to the limitations of Blockchain and current iteration of Ethereum, which all three of these platforms hope to address. For those who just want a quick summary see the image at the bottom of the article. With that said let’s have a look

Scalability

Cosmos

Each Zone and Hub in Cosmos is capable of up to around 1000 transactions per second with bandwidth being the bottleneck in consensus. Cosmos aims to have thousands of Zones and Hubs all connected through IBC. There is no limit on the number of Zones / Hubs that can be created

Polkadot

Parachains in Polkadot are also capable of up to around 1500 transactions per second. A portion of the parachain slots on the Relay Chain will be designated as part of the parathread pool, the performance of a parachain is split between many parathreads offering lower performance and compete amongst themselves in a per-block auction to have their transactions included in the next relay chain block. The number of parachains is limited by the number of validators on the relay chain, they hope to be able to achieve 100 parachains.

Avalanche

Avalanche is capable of around 4500 transactions per second per subnet, this is based on modest hardware requirements to ensure maximum decentralisation of just 2 CPU cores and 4 GB of Memory and with a validator size of over 2,000 nodes. Performance is CPU-bound and if higher performance is required then more specialised subnets can be created with higher minimum requirements to be able to achieve 10,000 tps+ in a subnet. Avalanche aims to have thousands of subnets (each with multiple virtual machines / blockchains) all interoperable with each other. There is no limit on the number of Subnets that can be created.

Results

All three platforms offer vastly superior performance to the likes of Bitcoin and Ethereum 1.0. Avalanche with its higher transactions per second, no limit on the number of subnets / blockchains that can be created and the consensus can scale to potentially millions of validators all participating in consensus scores ✅✅✅. Polkadot claims to offer more tps than cosmos, but is limited to the number of parachains (around 100) whereas with Cosmos there is no limit on the number of hubs / zones that can be created. Cosmos is limited to a fairly small validator size of around 200 before performance degrades whereas Polkadot hopes to be able to reach 1000 validators in the relay chain (albeit only a small number of validators are assigned to each parachain). Thus Cosmos and Polkadot scores ✅✅
https://preview.redd.it/2o0brllyvpq51.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=8f62bb696ecaafcf6184da005d5fe0129d504518

Decentralisation

Cosmos

Tendermint consensus is limited to around 200 validators before performance starts to degrade. Whilst there is the Cosmos Hub it is one of many hubs in the network and there is no central hub or limit on the number of zones / hubs that can be created.

Polkadot

Polkadot has 1000 validators in the relay chain and these are split up into a small number that validate each parachain (minimum of 14). The relay chain is a central point of failure as all parachains connect to it and the number of parachains is limited depending on the number of validators (they hope to achieve 100 parachains). Due to the limited number of parachain slots available, significant sums of DOT will need to be purchased to win an auction to lease the slot for up to 24 months at a time. Thus likely to lead to only those with enough funds to secure a parachain slot. Parathreads are however an alternative for those that require less and more varied performance for those that can’t secure a parachain slot.

Avalanche

Avalanche consensus scan scale to tens of thousands of validators, even potentially millions of validators all participating in consensus through repeated sub-sampling. The more validators, the faster the network becomes as the load is split between them. There are modest hardware requirements so anyone can run a node and there is no limit on the number of subnets / virtual machines that can be created.

Results

Avalanche offers unparalleled decentralisation using its revolutionary consensus protocols that can scale to millions of validators all participating in consensus at the same time. There is no limit to the number of subnets and virtual machines that can be created, and they can be created by anyone for a small fee, it scores ✅✅✅. Cosmos is limited to 200 validators but no limit on the number of zones / hubs that can be created, which anyone can create and scores ✅✅. Polkadot hopes to accommodate 1000 validators in the relay chain (albeit these are split amongst each of the parachains). The number of parachains is limited and maybe cost prohibitive for many and the relay chain is a ultimately a single point of failure. Whilst definitely not saying it’s centralised and it is more decentralised than many others, just in comparison between the three, it scores ✅
https://preview.redd.it/ckfamee0wpq51.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=c4355f145d821fabf7785e238dbc96a5f5ce2846

Latency

Cosmos

Tendermint consensus used in Cosmos reaches finality within 6 seconds. Cosmos consists of many Zones and Hubs that connect to each other. Communication between 2 zones could pass through many hubs along the way, thus also can contribute to latency times depending on the path taken as explained in part two of the articles on Cosmos. It doesn’t need to wait for an extended period of time with risk of rollbacks.

Polkadot

Polkadot provides a Hybrid consensus protocol consisting of Block producing protocol, BABE, and then a finality gadget called GRANDPA that works to agree on a chain, out of many possible forks, by following some simpler fork choice rule. Rather than voting on every block, instead it reaches agreements on chains. As soon as more than 2/3 of validators attest to a chain containing a certain block, all blocks leading up to that one are finalized at once.
If an invalid block is detected after it has been finalised then the relay chain would need to be reverted along with every parachain. This is particularly important when connecting to external blockchains as those don’t share the state of the relay chain and thus can’t be rolled back. The longer the time period, the more secure the network is, as there is more time for additional checks to be performed and reported but at the expense of finality. Finality is reached within 60 seconds between parachains but for external ecosystems like Ethereum their state obviously can’t be rolled back like a parachain and so finality will need to be much longer (60 minutes was suggested in the whitepaper) and discussed in more detail in part three

Avalanche

Avalanche consensus achieves finality within 3 seconds, with most happening sub 1 second, immutable and completely irreversible. Any subnet can connect directly to another without having to go through multiple hops and any VM can talk to another VM within the same subnet as well as external subnets. It doesn’t need to wait for an extended period of time with risk of rollbacks.

Results

With regards to performance far too much emphasis is just put on tps as a metric, the other equally important metric, if not more important with regards to finance is latency. Throughput measures the amount of data at any given time that it can handle whereas latency is the amount of time it takes to perform an action. It’s pointless saying you can process more transactions per second than VISA when it takes 60 seconds for a transaction to complete. Low latency also greatly increases general usability and customer satisfaction, nowadays everyone expects card payments, online payments to happen instantly. Avalanche achieves the best results scoring ✅✅✅, Cosmos with comes in second with 6 second finality ✅✅ and Polkadot with 60 second finality (which may be 60 minutes for external blockchains) scores ✅
https://preview.redd.it/kzup5x42wpq51.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=320eb4c25dc4fc0f443a7a2f7ff09567871648cd

Shared Security

Cosmos

Every Zone and Hub in Cosmos has their own validator set and different trust assumptions. Cosmos are researching a shared security model where a Hub can validate the state of connected zones for a fee but not released yet. Once available this will make shared security optional rather than mandatory.

Polkadot

Shared Security is mandatory with Polkadot which uses a Shared State infrastructure between the Relay Chain and all of the connected parachains. If the Relay Chain must revert for any reason, then all of the parachains would also revert. Every parachain makes the same trust assumptions, and as such the relay chain validates state transition and enables seamless interoperability between them. In return for this benefit, they have to purchase DOT and win an auction for one of the available parachain slots.
However, parachains can’t just rely on the relay chain for their security, they will also need to implement censorship resistance measures and utilise proof of work / proof of stake for each parachain as well as discussed in part three, thus parachains can’t just rely on the security of the relay chain, they need to ensure sybil resistance mechanisms using POW and POS are implemented on the parachain as well.

Avalanche

A subnet in Avalanche consists of a dynamic set of validators working together to achieve consensus on the state of a set of many blockchains where complex rulesets can be configured to meet regulatory compliance. So unlike in Cosmos where each zone / hub has their own validators, A subnet can validate a single or many virtual machines / blockchains with a single validator set. Shared security is optional

Results

Shared security is mandatory in polkadot and a key design decision in its infrastructure. The relay chain validates the state transition of all connected parachains and thus scores ✅✅✅. Subnets in Avalanche can validate state of either a single or many virtual machines. Each subnet can have their own token and shares a validator set, where complex rulesets can be configured to meet regulatory compliance. It scores ✅ ✅. Every Zone and Hub in cosmos has their own validator set / token but research is underway to have the hub validate the state transition of connected zones, but as this is still early in the research phase scores ✅ for now.
https://preview.redd.it/pbgyk3o3wpq51.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=61c18e12932a250f5633c40633810d0f64520575

Current Adoption

Cosmos

The Cosmos project started in 2016 with an ICO held in April 2017. There are currently around 50 projects building on the Cosmos SDK with a full list can be seen here and filtering for Cosmos SDK . Not all of the projects will necessarily connect using native cosmos sdk and IBC and some have forked parts of the Cosmos SDK and utilise the tendermint consensus such as Binance Chain but have said they will connect in the future.

Polkadot

The Polkadot project started in 2016 with an ICO held in October 2017. There are currently around 70 projects building on Substrate and a full list can be seen here and filtering for Substrate Based. Like with Cosmos not all projects built using substrate will necessarily connect to Polkadot and parachains or parathreads aren’t currently implemented in either the Live or Test network (Kusama) as of the time of this writing.

Avalanche

Avalanche in comparison started much later with Ava Labs being founded in 2018. Avalanche held it’s ICO in July 2020. Due to lot shorter time it has been in development, the number of projects confirmed are smaller with around 14 projects currently building on Avalanche. Due to the customisability of the platform though, many virtual machines can be used within a subnet making the process incredibly easy to port projects over. As an example, it will launch with the Ethereum Virtual Machine which enables byte for byte compatibility and all the tooling like Metamask, Truffle etc. will work, so projects can easily move over to benefit from the performance, decentralisation and low gas fees offered. In the future Cosmos and Substrate virtual machines could be implemented on Avalanche.

Results

Whilst it’s still early for all 3 projects (and the entire blockchain space as a whole), there is currently more projects confirmed to be building on Cosmos and Polkadot, mostly due to their longer time in development. Whilst Cosmos has fewer projects, zones are implemented compared to Polkadot which doesn’t currently have parachains. IBC to connect zones and hubs together is due to launch Q2 2021, thus both score ✅✅✅. Avalanche has been in development for a lot shorter time period, but is launching with an impressive feature set right from the start with ability to create subnets, VMs, assets, NFTs, permissioned and permissionless blockchains, cross chain atomic swaps within a subnet, smart contracts, bridge to Ethereum etc. Applications can easily port over from other platforms and use all the existing tooling such as Metamask / Truffle etc but benefit from the performance, decentralisation and low gas fees offered. Currently though just based on the number of projects in comparison it scores ✅.
https://preview.redd.it/4zpi6s85wpq51.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=e91ade1a86a5d50f4976f3b23a46e9287b08e373

Enterprise Adoption

Cosmos

Cosmos enables permissioned and permissionless zones which can connect to each other with the ability to have full control over who validates the blockchain. For permissionless zones each zone / hub can have their own token and they are in control who validates.

Polkadot

With polkadot the state transition is performed by a small randomly selected assigned group of validators from the relay chain plus with the possibility that state is rolled back if an invalid transaction of any of the other parachains is found. This may pose a problem for enterprises that need complete control over who performs validation for regulatory reasons. In addition due to the limited number of parachain slots available Enterprises would have to acquire and lock up large amounts of a highly volatile asset (DOT) and have the possibility that they are outbid in future auctions and find they no longer can have their parachain validated and parathreads don’t provide the guaranteed performance requirements for the application to function.

Avalanche

Avalanche enables permissioned and permissionless subnets and complex rulesets can be configured to meet regulatory compliance. For example a subnet can be created where its mandatory that all validators are from a certain legal jurisdiction, or they hold a specific license and regulated by the SEC etc. Subnets are also able to scale to tens of thousands of validators, and even potentially millions of nodes, all participating in consensus so every enterprise can run their own node rather than only a small amount. Enterprises don’t have to hold large amounts of a highly volatile asset, but instead pay a fee in AVAX for the creation of the subnets and blockchains which is burnt.

Results

Avalanche provides the customisability to run private permissioned blockchains as well as permissionless where the enterprise is in control over who validates the blockchain, with the ability to use complex rulesets to meet regulatory compliance, thus scores ✅✅✅. Cosmos is also able to run permissioned and permissionless zones / hubs so enterprises have full control over who validates a blockchain and scores ✅✅. Polkadot requires locking up large amounts of a highly volatile asset with the possibility of being outbid by competitors and being unable to run the application if the guaranteed performance is required and having to migrate away. The relay chain validates the state transition and can roll back the parachain should an invalid block be detected on another parachain, thus scores ✅.
https://preview.redd.it/li5jy6u6wpq51.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=e2a95f1f88e5efbcf9e23c789ae0f002c8eb73fc

Interoperability

Cosmos

Cosmos will connect Hubs and Zones together through its IBC protocol (due to release in Q1 2020). Connecting to blockchains outside of the Cosmos ecosystem would either require the connected blockchain to fork their code to implement IBC or more likely a custom “Peg Zone” will be created specific to work with a particular blockchain it’s trying to bridge to such as Ethereum etc. Each Zone and Hub has different trust levels and connectivity between 2 zones can have different trust depending on which path it takes (this is discussed more in this article). Finality time is low at 6 seconds, but depending on the number of hops, this can increase significantly.

Polkadot

Polkadot’s shared state means each parachain that connects shares the same trust assumptions, of the relay chain validators and that if one blockchain needs to be reverted, all of them will need to be reverted. Interoperability is enabled between parachains through Cross-Chain Message Passing (XCMP) protocol and is also possible to connect to other systems through bridges, which are specifically designed parachains or parathreads that each are custom made to interact with another ecosystem such as Ethereum and Bitcoin. Finality time between parachains is around 60 seconds, but longer will be needed (initial figures of 60 minutes in the whitepaper) for connecting to external blockchains. Thus limiting the appeal of connecting two external ecosystems together through Polkadot. Polkadot is also limited in the number of Parachain slots available, thus limiting the amount of blockchains that can be bridged. Parathreads could be used for lower performance bridges, but the speed of future blockchains is only going to increase.

Avalanche

A subnet can validate multiple virtual machines / blockchains and all blockchains within a subnet share the same trust assumptions / validator set, enabling cross chain interoperability. Interoperability is also possible between any other subnet, with the hope Avalanche will consist of thousands of subnets. Each subnet may have a different trust level, but as the primary network consists of all validators then this can be used as a source of trust if required. As Avalanche supports many virtual machines, bridges to other ecosystems are created by running the connected virtual machine. There will be an Ethereum bridge using the EVM shortly after mainnet. Finality time is much faster at sub 3 seconds (with most happening under 1 second) with no chance of rolling back so more appealing when connecting to external blockchains.

Results

All 3 systems are able to perform interoperability within their ecosystem and transfer assets as well as data, as well as use bridges to connect to external blockchains. Cosmos has different trust levels between its zones and hubs and can create issues depending on which path it takes and additional latency added. Polkadot provides the same trust assumptions for all connected parachains but has long finality and limited number of parachain slots available. Avalanche provides the same trust assumptions for all blockchains within a subnet, and different trust levels between subnets. However due to the primary network consisting of all validators it can be used for trust. Avalanche also has a much faster finality time with no limitation on the number of blockchains / subnets / bridges that can be created. Overall all three blockchains excel with interoperability within their ecosystem and each score ✅✅.
https://preview.redd.it/ai0bkbq8wpq51.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=3e85ee6a3c4670f388ccea00b0c906c3fb51e415

Tokenomics

Cosmos

The ATOM token is the native token for the Cosmos Hub. It is commonly mistaken by people that think it’s the token used throughout the cosmos ecosystem, whereas it’s just used for one of many hubs in Cosmos, each with their own token. Currently ATOM has little utility as IBC isn’t released and has no connections to other zones / hubs. Once IBC is released zones may prefer to connect to a different hub instead and so ATOM is not used. ATOM isn’t a fixed capped supply token and supply will continuously increase with a yearly inflation of around 10% depending on the % staked. The current market cap for ATOM as of the time of this writing is $1 Billion with 203 million circulating supply. Rewards can be earnt through staking to offset the dilution caused by inflation. Delegators can also get slashed and lose a portion of their ATOM should the validator misbehave.

Polkadot

Polkadot’s native token is DOT and it’s used to secure the Relay Chain. Each parachain needs to acquire sufficient DOT to win an auction on an available parachain lease period of up to 24 months at a time. Parathreads have a fixed fee for registration that would realistically be much lower than the cost of acquiring a parachain slot and compete with other parathreads in a per-block auction to have their transactions included in the next relay chain block. DOT isn’t a fixed capped supply token and supply will continuously increase with a yearly inflation of around 10% depending on the % staked. The current market cap for DOT as of the time of this writing is $4.4 Billion with 852 million circulating supply. Delegators can also get slashed and lose their DOT (potentially 100% of their DOT for serious attacks) should the validator misbehave.

Avalanche

AVAX is the native token for the primary network in Avalanche. Every validator of any subnet also has to validate the primary network and stake a minimum of 2000 AVAX. There is no limit to the number of validators like other consensus methods then this can cater for tens of thousands even potentially millions of validators. As every validator validates the primary network, this can be a source of trust for interoperability between subnets as well as connecting to other ecosystems, thus increasing amount of transaction fees of AVAX. There is no slashing in Avalanche, so there is no risk to lose your AVAX when selecting a validator, instead rewards earnt for staking can be slashed should the validator misbehave. Because Avalanche doesn’t have direct slashing, it is technically possible for someone to both stake AND deliver tokens for something like a flash loan, under the invariant that all tokens that are staked are returned, thus being able to make profit with staked tokens outside of staking itself.
There will also be a separate subnet for Athereum which is a ‘spoon,’ or friendly fork, of Ethereum, which benefits from the Avalanche consensus protocol and applications in the Ethereum ecosystem. It’s native token ATH will be airdropped to ETH holders as well as potentially AVAX holders as well. This can be done for other blockchains as well.
Transaction fees on the primary network for all 3 of the blockchains as well as subscription fees for creating a subnet and blockchain are paid in AVAX and are burnt, creating deflationary pressure. AVAX is a fixed capped supply of 720 million tokens, creating scarcity rather than an unlimited supply which continuously increase of tokens at a compounded rate each year like others. Initially there will be 360 tokens minted at Mainnet with vesting periods between 1 and 10 years, with tokens gradually unlocking each quarter. The Circulating supply is 24.5 million AVAX with tokens gradually released each quater. The current market cap of AVAX is around $100 million.

Results

Avalanche’s AVAX with its fixed capped supply, deflationary pressure, very strong utility, potential to receive air drops and low market cap, means it scores ✅✅✅. Polkadot’s DOT also has very strong utility with the need for auctions to acquire parachain slots, but has no deflationary mechanisms, no fixed capped supply and already valued at $3.8 billion, therefore scores ✅✅. Cosmos’s ATOM token is only for the Cosmos Hub, of which there will be many hubs in the ecosystem and has very little utility currently. (this may improve once IBC is released and if Cosmos hub actually becomes the hub that people want to connect to and not something like Binance instead. There is no fixed capped supply and currently valued at $1.1 Billion, so scores ✅.
https://preview.redd.it/mels7myawpq51.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=df9782e2c0a4c26b61e462746256bdf83b1fb906
All three are excellent projects and have similarities as well as many differences. Just to reiterate this article is not intended to be an extensive in-depth list, but rather an overview based on some of the criteria that I feel are most important. For a more in-depth view I recommend reading the articles for each of the projects linked above and coming to your own conclusions, you may have different criteria which is important to you, and score them differently. There won’t be one platform to rule them all however, with some uses cases better suited to one platform over another, and it’s not a zero-sum game. Blockchain is going to completely revolutionize industries and the Internet itself. The more projects researching and delivering breakthrough technology the better, each learning from each other and pushing each other to reach that goal earlier. The current market is a tiny speck of what’s in store in terms of value and adoption and it’s going to be exciting to watch it unfold.
https://preview.redd.it/dbb99egcwpq51.png?width=1388&format=png&auto=webp&s=aeb03127dc0dc74d0507328e899db1c7d7fc2879
For more information see the articles below (each with additional sources at the bottom of their articles)
Avalanche, a Revolutionary Consensus Engine and Platform. A Game Changer for Blockchain
Avalanche Consensus, The Biggest Breakthrough since Nakamoto
Cosmos — An Early In-Depth Analysis — Part One
Cosmos — An Early In-Depth Analysis — Part Two
Cosmos Hub ATOM Token and the commonly misunderstood staking tokens — Part Three
Polkadot — An Early In-Depth Analysis — Part One — Overview and Benefits
Polkadot — An Early In-Depth Analysis — Part Two — How Consensus Works
Polkadot — An Early In-Depth Analysis — Part Three — Limitations and Issues
submitted by xSeq22x to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Why do WIF-compressed private keys exist?

I am reading Andreas' Mastering Bitcoin (great book btw) and got to the section where compressed and uncompressed public keys are explained (pages71-74). I have a question that I don't find an answer for, maybe someone here can help - might be a little too technical though.
If I understood correctly, the public keys are just (x,y) coordinates of the elliptic curve generated from the private key. Now there's two versions, the original version where the entire x and y coordinates are shown (04... public keys) and the newer version where the y is calculated from y² mod p=(x³+7) and are either 02... or 03... depending on whether it represents the positive or negative y.
All good. However, in order for wallets to know if they should search for the addresses generated from hashing the compressed or the uncompressed versions of the public key when importing a private key, the book says two types of private key formats were developed to represent what type of public key should be obtained from it. This way, if the private key imported looks like 5... the wallet knows it should create 04... public keys (uncompressed) and if the private key looks like K... it knows it should look for adresses derived from 02... or 03... public keys.
My question is - why do we need to show whether the addresses used came from a compressed or uncompressed public keys, IN the private key? I mean, can't we use a single standard private key format and have the wallet just create both versions of public keys to check in which one there's any funds? It would take what, a couple more minutes to check the balance?
Hope the question makes sense haha thanks!!
submitted by Jack1602 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Gridcoin 5.0.0.0-Mandatory "Fern" Release

https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/releases/tag/5.0.0.0
Finally! After over ten months of development and testing, "Fern" has arrived! This is a whopper. 240 pull requests merged. Essentially a complete rewrite that was started with the scraper (the "neural net" rewrite) in "Denise" has now been completed. Practically the ENTIRE Gridcoin specific codebase resting on top of the vanilla Bitcoin/Peercoin/Blackcoin vanilla PoS code has been rewritten. This removes the team requirement at last (see below), although there are many other important improvements besides that.
Fern was a monumental undertaking. We had to encode all of the old rules active for the v10 block protocol in new code and ensure that the new code was 100% compatible. This had to be done in such a way as to clear out all of the old spaghetti and ring-fence it with tightly controlled class implementations. We then wrote an entirely new, simplified ruleset for research rewards and reengineered contracts (which includes beacon management, polls, and voting) using properly classed code. The fundamentals of Gridcoin with this release are now on a very sound and maintainable footing, and the developers believe the codebase as updated here will serve as the fundamental basis for Gridcoin's future roadmap.
We have been testing this for MONTHS on testnet in various stages. The v10 (legacy) compatibility code has been running on testnet continuously as it was developed to ensure compatibility with existing nodes. During the last few months, we have done two private testnet forks and then the full public testnet testing for v11 code (the new protocol which is what Fern implements). The developers have also been running non-staking "sentinel" nodes on mainnet with this code to verify that the consensus rules are problem-free for the legacy compatibility code on the broader mainnet. We believe this amount of testing is going to result in a smooth rollout.
Given the amount of changes in Fern, I am presenting TWO changelogs below. One is high level, which summarizes the most significant changes in the protocol. The second changelog is the detailed one in the usual format, and gives you an inkling of the size of this release.

Highlights

Protocol

Note that the protocol changes will not become active until we cross the hard-fork transition height to v11, which has been set at 2053000. Given current average block spacing, this should happen around October 4, about one month from now.
Note that to get all of the beacons in the network on the new protocol, we are requiring ALL beacons to be validated. A two week (14 day) grace period is provided by the code, starting at the time of the transition height, for people currently holding a beacon to validate the beacon and prevent it from expiring. That means that EVERY CRUNCHER must advertise and validate their beacon AFTER the v11 transition (around Oct 4th) and BEFORE October 18th (or more precisely, 14 days from the actual date of the v11 transition). If you do not advertise and validate your beacon by this time, your beacon will expire and you will stop earning research rewards until you advertise and validate a new beacon. This process has been made much easier by a brand new beacon "wizard" that helps manage beacon advertisements and renewals. Once a beacon has been validated and is a v11 protocol beacon, the normal 180 day expiration rules apply. Note, however, that the 180 day expiration on research rewards has been removed with the Fern update. This means that while your beacon might expire after 180 days, your earned research rewards will be retained and can be claimed by advertising a beacon with the same CPID and going through the validation process again. In other words, you do not lose any earned research rewards if you do not stake a block within 180 days and keep your beacon up-to-date.
The transition height is also when the team requirement will be relaxed for the network.

GUI

Besides the beacon wizard, there are a number of improvements to the GUI, including new UI transaction types (and icons) for staking the superblock, sidestake sends, beacon advertisement, voting, poll creation, and transactions with a message. The main screen has been revamped with a better summary section, and better status icons. Several changes under the hood have improved GUI performance. And finally, the diagnostics have been revamped.

Blockchain

The wallet sync speed has been DRASTICALLY improved. A decent machine with a good network connection should be able to sync the entire mainnet blockchain in less than 4 hours. A fast machine with a really fast network connection and a good SSD can do it in about 2.5 hours. One of our goals was to reduce or eliminate the reliance on snapshots for mainnet, and I think we have accomplished that goal with the new sync speed. We have also streamlined the in-memory structures for the blockchain which shaves some memory use.
There are so many goodies here it is hard to summarize them all.
I would like to thank all of the contributors to this release, but especially thank @cyrossignol, whose incredible contributions formed the backbone of this release. I would also like to pay special thanks to @barton2526, @caraka, and @Quezacoatl1, who tirelessly helped during the testing and polishing phase on testnet with testing and repeated builds for all architectures.
The developers are proud to present this release to the community and we believe this represents the starting point for a true renaissance for Gridcoin!

Summary Changelog

Accrual

Changed

Most significantly, nodes calculate research rewards directly from the magnitudes in EACH superblock between stakes instead of using a two- or three- point average based on a CPID's current magnitude and the magnitude for the CPID when it last staked. For those long-timers in the community, this has been referred to as "Superblock Windows," and was first done in proof-of-concept form by @denravonska.

Removed

Beacons

Added

Changed

Removed

Unaltered

As a reminder:

Superblocks

Added

Changed

Removed

Voting

Added

Changed

Removed

Detailed Changelog

[5.0.0.0] 2020-09-03, mandatory, "Fern"

Added

Changed

Removed

Fixed

submitted by jamescowens to gridcoin [link] [comments]

Windows Guide to using Trezor with Bitcoin Core (HWI)

This is a guide to using your Trezor with Bitcoin Core. It may seem like more trouble than it's worth but many applications use Bitcoin Core as a wallet such as LND, EPS, and JoinMarket. Learning how to integrate your Trezor into a Bitcoin Core install is rather useful in many unexpected ways. I did this all through the QT interfaces, but it's simple to script. There is a much simpler guide available from the HWI github, and the smallest TLDR is here

( A ) Install TrezorCTL, HWI, and build GUI

You only need to set the wallet up once, but may repeat to upgrade

( A.I ) Download extract and install HWI

  1. Download and isntall Python
  2. Download https://github.com/bitcoin-core/HWI/archive/1.1.2.zip
  3. Extract it to a working folder (assumes C:\User\Reddit\src\HWI)
  4. Change Directory (cd) to working folder cd "C:\User\Reddit\src\HWI"
  5. Setup venv python -m venv .venv
  6. Enter venv .venv\Scripts\activate.bat 1
  7. Install dependencies python -m pip install -U setuptools pip wheel
  8. Install TrezorCTL python -m pip install trezor[hidapi]
  9. Install HWI python -m pip install hwi pyside2
  10. Download github.com/libusb/libusb/releases/download/v1.0.23/libusb-1.0.23.7z
  11. Extract MS64\dll\libusb-1.0.dll from the archive
  12. Copy to pywin copy libusb-1.0.dll .venv\Lib\site-packages\pywin32_system32\

( A.II ) Build the QT UI files

  1. Download and install MSYS2
  2. Launch a mingw64.exe
  3. CD to working folder cd "C:\User\Reddit\src\HWI"
  4. Enter venv source .venv/Scripts/activate 1
  5. Run UI build bash contrib/generate-ui.sh

( B ) Create a Trezor wallet in Bitcoin Core (testnet)

You only need to set the wallet up once, no private key data is stored, only xpub data

( B.I ) Retrieve keypool from HWI-QT

  1. Launch hwi-qt.exe --testnet (assuming testnet)
  2. Click Set passphrase (if needed) to cache your passphrase then click Refresh
  3. Select you trezor from the list then click Set Pin (if needed)
  4. Ensure your Trezor in the dropdown has a fingerprint
  5. Select Change keypool options and choose P2WPKH
  6. Copy all the text from the Keypool textbox

( B.II ) Create the wallet in Bitcoin QT

  1. Launch Bitcoin Core (testnet) (non-pruned) 2
  2. Select Console from the Window menu
  3. Create a wallet createwallet "hwi" true
  4. Ensure that hwi is selected in the console wallet dropdown
  5. Verify walletname using the getwalletinfo command
  6. Import keypool importmulti '' (note ' caging)
  7. Rescan if TXNs are missing rescanblockchain 3

( C.I ) Grab Tesnet coins

  1. Select the Receive tab in Bitcoin Core (testnet)
  2. Ensure that the Wallet dropdown has hwi selected
  3. Select Create new receiving address and copy address
  4. Google "bitcoin testnet faucet" and visit a few sites
  5. Answer captcha and input your addressed copied from C.I.3

( D ) Spending funds with HWI

This is how you can spend funds in your Trezor using Bitcoin Core (testnet)

( D.I ) Create an unsigned PSBT

  1. Select the Send tab in Bitcoin Core (testnet)
  2. Ensure that the Wallet dropdown has hwi selected
  3. Verify your balance in Watch-only balance
  4. Rescan if balance is wrong (see B.II.7) 3
  5. Craft your TXN as usual, then click Create Unsigned
  6. Copy the PSBT to your clipboard when prompted

( D.II ) Sign your PSBT

  1. In HWI-QT click Sign PSBT
  2. Paste what you copied in D.I.6 in PSBT to Sign field
  3. Click Sign PSBT
  4. Copy the text for PSBT Result

( D.III ) Broadcast your TXN

  1. Select the Console window in Bitcoin Core (testnet)
  2. Ensure that the Wallet dropdown has hwi selected
  3. Finalize PSBT: finalizepsbt
  4. Copy the signed TXN hex from the hex field returned
  5. Broadcast TXN: sendrawtransaction

Final Thoughts

I did this all through the GUI interfaces for the benefit of the Windows users. Windows console is fine, but the quote escaping in windows console is nightmarish. Powershell would be good, but that throws this on a whole another level for most Windows folks.
There is also the need to use HWI-QT due to a bug in blank passphrases on the commandline. You can work around it by toggling passphrase off or on, but again, it's more than I wanted to spell out.
Footnotes:
  • 1. - Later version of python put the activate script under 'bin' instead of 'Script'
  • 2. - You can run pruned, but you need to have a fresh wallet
  • 3. - Rescan is automatic on 'importmulti' but I was pruned so it was wierd
submitted by brianddk to TREZOR [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Hack Private key on PC 2020 05 Exporting & Importing Private Keys Getting your Private Keys from the Bitcoin Core wallet ... How to Get Private Key of Bitcoin Wallet  How To Find Bitcoin Private Key How to import Private Key Bitcoin Address into Blockchain Wallet New 2017

For those of you looking to import your Vanity address, hacked key or paper wallet into your Bitcoin QT client, here are the instructions:. Backup Your Wallet.. Although this process is well tested and used you should always take another backup of your wallet.dat file before starting. Export: The process of creating a file containing a wallet’s private key data. Exported keys can be imported to a new/different wallet to give access to the Bitcoins (Bitcoin Core, BTC) associated with the exported private key(s). Import: The process of gaining control of BTCs via an exported backup. Wallets can import private keys via text ... This page contains sample addresses and/or private keys. Do not send bitcoins to or import any sample keys; you will lose your money. Before reading this page, users should note that messing with ECDSA private keys is very dangerous and can result in losing bitcoins, even long after the import. Importing private key text to your Bitcoin.com wallet This is how to import using the copy-to-clipboard method. If you receive an email on your device with your exported wallet, or choose "Copy to clipboard", on most devices you can press the screen and wait for a “Paste” button to appear, then paste the backup code in to the field. Import a private key from a BIP38 encrypted Bitcoin paper wallet to a Bitcoin Core (Bitcoin-QT) client wallet. This article outlines how to import a BIP38 encrypted private key (for example, a Bitcoin paper wallet) to a Bitcoin Core wallet. This process allows the Bitcoin Core client to access and control the funds associated with the paper wallet Bitcoin address.

[index] [22971] [29426] [30052] [32822] [17472] [4512] [5333] [4439] [798] [29855]

Bitcoin Hack Private key on PC 2020

தமிழ் செய்திகள், உலகச்செய்திகள், சினிமா விமர்சனம், சினிமா ... Getting your Private Keys from the Bitcoin Core wallet - Duration: 5:11. ... How to import Private Key Bitcoin Address into Blockchain Wallet brainwallet - Duration: 5:01. In this tutorial we are going to get our private keys from the bitcoin core wallet. This only works when you created the bitcoin address in the same wallet. ... import private key bitcoin core, cracking bitcoin private key, bitcoin core private key, bitcoin private key database with balance 2018, bitcoin private key database download, If you need to import a private key, you also do this from the console area. You’ll need to unlock the wallet like we did previously, then type importprivkey, space, then the private key. If the...

#