Digital currency migration and destruction
digital currency is a new technology that can be used to improve transaction efficiency, but now it has been targeted by some lawless elements and carried out marketing and fraud in its name, using ordinary people's ignorance of digital currency to deceive investment and investors
Generally speaking, we investors or cheated people should prepare the following evidence:1. The chat records between relevant chat records and analysts or agents or order calling personnel are the most basic evidence, because such evidence can fully reflect the whole process of our cheated people being cheated and the illegal places of relevant business personnel in the chat process, Can be fully reflected in the chat record
2. The evidence of relevant deposit and withdrawal records is the deposit and withdrawal of the bank account of the investor or the cheated person, which can reflect the investment and withdrawal of the cheated person, and the difference between the two is basically the total capital loss of the investor. This kind of evidence can be preserved by the cheated basically, just go to the bank and print the bank account
the above evidence is the basic evidence that investors or cheaters should have, but not all the evidence. In the process of power only, if there is no or incomplete basic evidence, then the difficulty of power only will increase, but the light of justice is still willing to take up the weapon of law to help you safeguard your vital interests! Willing to give the most professional legal aid! Promise only right is not successful, do not charge the slightest fee
when transferring money, the receiver only needs to send the address of the wallet to the other party, and the other party can transfer the digital currency to the address. When trading in the exchange, the user should also enter the digital currency into the address designated by the exchange, that is, the wallet, to complete the transaction. At the time of withdrawal, the exchange will also enter the digital currency into the user's wallet address accordingly. This is how the money should be transferred to the wallet.
coinbase transaction is a special transaction that generates bitcoin "out of thin air". Only miners can write this kind of transaction, and the number of generated bitcoin is limited by rules (new currency reced by half for every 210000 blocks + transaction fee for this block)
however, the rules do not stipulate that the miner must take away all the rewards that can be taken, and can choose not to take them
therefore, a mine pool connected with the RSK side chain has made a bug before, forgetting to take away the reward and occupying a pit in a block for nothing, which is equivalent to destroying the corresponding amount of bitcoin, making the total amount of bitcoin decrease a little bit permanently
in addition, to spend a bitcoin, you only need to specify the transaction ID and output serial number
as like as two peas in multiple blocks repeatedly write identical coinbase transactions, the transaction ID is also repeated.
therefore, this kind of situation also occupies the pit of a block in vain, and permanently destroys the corresponding amount of bitcoin
it seems to me that this is still a security vulnerability, so the new version of bitcoin software later banned the writing of repeated coinbase transactions. But until now, there has been no ban on miners not getting their e rewards
generally speaking, a coin is controlled by a private key. If a coin is transferred to an address where no one knows the private key, it will be destroyed
if the owner does a good job in security, and the private key is not disclosed and cannot be guessed, but he accidentally loses the private key, it is equivalent to destroying all the coins he owns
there are only some special circumstances that require intentional destruction of coins
one is irreversibly converted into another kind of currency, such as the contract currency XCP attached to bitcoin and wormhole cash WHC attached to BCH
the second is to save certificates and data on the chain, such as the time stamp: panbiao.com/2013/08 /
and the crowd funding of the original Ethereum founding team: zhuanlan.hu.com/p/29
the private key is essentially a big number. Whoever knows this number can control the currency on the corresponding address. So the private key must be generated with reliable random number, otherwise it may be guessed and stolen
compared with the token, the address is the hash of the public key. There is no way to judge whether an address has a corresponding public key and private key (even if the public key is known, the corresponding private key cannot be known). Therefore, even if it is explicitly the address of "burned" token, the system does not prohibit the transfer in
strictly speaking, what locks the currency is a small program (script). This program takes the input as the public key and digital signature. First, check whether the public key hash is consistent, and then check whether the digital signature is valid. If it is valid, it will be verified and transfer is allowed; Otherwise, it will be judged that the transaction is illegal and refuse to package into the chain
it is the whole node software that explains and executes this program. It can be said that the software code of the whole node specifically defines a coin
however, the current situation is very embarrassing. Most miners do not run the whole node, only a few mines are running. The vast majority of users do not run the whole node, even if they run the whole node, they can only perform verification, no computing power, no block
coinbase transaction is a special transaction that generates bitcoin "out of thin air". Only miners can write this kind of transaction, and the number of generated bitcoin is limited by rules (new currency reced by half for every 210000 blocks + transaction fee for this block)
however, the rules do not stipulate that the miner must take away all the rewards that can be taken, and can choose not to take them
therefore, a mine pool connected with the RSK side chain has made a bug before, forgetting to take away the reward and occupying a pit in a block for nothing, which is equivalent to destroying the corresponding amount of bitcoin, making the total amount of bitcoin decrease a little bit permanently
in addition, to spend a bitcoin, you only need to specify the transaction ID and output serial number
as like as two peas in multiple blocks repeatedly write identical coinbase transactions, the transaction ID is also repeated.
therefore, this kind of situation also occupies the pit of a block in vain, and permanently destroys the corresponding amount of bitcoin
it seems to me that this is still a security vulnerability, so the new version of bitcoin software later banned the writing of repeated coinbase transactions. But until now, there has been no ban on miners not getting their e rewards
generally speaking, a coin is controlled by a private key. If a coin is transferred to an address where no one knows the private key, it will be destroyed
if the owner does a good job in security, and the private key is not disclosed and cannot be guessed, but he accidentally loses the private key, it is equivalent to destroying all the coins he owns
there are only some special circumstances that require intentional destruction of coins
one is irreversibly converted into another kind of currency, such as the contract currency XCP attached to bitcoin and wormhole cash WHC attached to BCH
the second is to save certificates and data on the chain, such as the time stamp: panbiao.com/2013/08 /
and the crowd funding of the original Ethereum founding team: zhuanlan.hu.com/p/29
the private key is essentially a big number. Whoever knows this number can control the currency on the corresponding address. So the private key must be generated with reliable random number, otherwise it may be guessed and stolen
compared with the token, the address is the hash of the public key. There is no way to judge whether an address has a corresponding public key and private key (even if the public key is known, the corresponding private key cannot be known). Therefore, even if it is explicitly the address of "burned" token, the system does not prohibit the transfer in
strictly speaking, what locks the currency is a small program (script). This program takes the input as the public key and digital signature. First, check whether the public key hash is consistent, and then check whether the digital signature is valid. If it is valid, it will be verified and transfer is allowed; Otherwise, it will be judged that the transaction is illegal and refuse to package into the chain
it is the whole node software that explains and executes this program. It can be said that the software code of the whole node specifically defines a coin
however, the current situation is very embarrassing. Most miners do not run the whole node, only a few mines are running. The vast majority of users do not run the whole node, even if they run the whole node, they can only perform verification, no computing power, no block.
Bharath Rao, an American entrepreneur, is looking for the best place to trade his cryptocurrency derivatives in order to raise funds, but this address list does not include the United States. Instead, he chose Seychelles, the island of East Africa, to sell the platform's tokens
since the beginning of this year, there are 34 digital currency start-ups registered in the United States, the number of which is ahead of other countries. However, this only reflects the role of Silicon Valley as a global technology center in the United States and the degree of in-depth development of the U.S. financial market, which does not mean that the regulatory level welcomes digital money“ According to the data provided by "Smith + crown", there are 21 digital currency companies registered in Singapore this year, compared with only one last year; The second is Switzerland, with 19 digital currency registered enterprises this year, compared with only three in Switzerland last year; The number of registered companies in Central Europe this year is 14, compared with only one in 2016; There are 10 companies registered in the Caribbean this year, compared with only two last year“ These data confirm our feeling that Switzerland and Singapore are still the first choice, but the US is still likely to raise a lot of money for those companies, "said Matt chwierut, research director at Smith + crown