i hope in the future they will Re-mine the coins lost in the black hole
Maybe if they were categorically proven to be invalid addresses. 
Topic: Sent some btc into a black hole (Read 3002 times)
How could it not?
https://en.bitcoin.it/w/images/en/9/9b/PubKeyToAddr.png
If one screws up the base58 address at all, wouldn't that mean that the 25-byte binary address is different?
https://en.bitcoin.it/w/images/en/9/9b/PubKeyToAddr.png
If one screws up the base58 address at all, wouldn't that mean that the 25-byte binary address is different?
I'm not familiar with the details, but here's a quote:
This may be an appropriate thread to mention that the the "checksum" at the end of an address does not effectively prevent single character errors or transpositions.
For instance https://blockexplorer.com/search/1ByteCoin shows that
are both valid addresses even though they only differ by one character.
Similarly, the valid addresses
only differ by one transposition.
ByteCoin
For instance https://blockexplorer.com/search/1ByteCoin shows that
Code:
1ByteCoinAddressesMatch1kpCWNXmHKW
1ByteCoinAddressesMatch1kpCxNXmHKW
Similarly, the valid addresses
Code:
1ByteCoinAddressesMatchcNN781jjwLY
1ByteCoinAddressesMatchcNN718jjwLY
ByteCoin
Bytecoin has mentioned that the checksum doesn't work as well as you would expect.
How could it not?
https://en.bitcoin.it/w/images/en/9/9b/PubKeyToAddr.png
If one screws up the base58 address at all, wouldn't that mean that the 25-byte binary address is different?
my bad, the bug was in Electrum. I just fixed it and released a new version.
(...)
Seriously unlucky if true.
Please share the correct and incorrect address.
Correct: 1AYSPTVt8WytG12Kz9guUpXjwAMFZG9CJh
Incorrect: 1AYSPTVt8WytG12Kz9guUpXjeAMFb7AX2K
After looking thorougly at both addresses, looks like I accidentally took the end of one address in my addressbook, and used it in the end of the incorrect address. Silly me.
Code:
def bc_address_to_hash_160(addr):
bytes = b58decode(addr, 25)
return bytes[1:21]
What's terrible about this is that the checking code is already implemented in DecodeBase58Check. I suspect that this was a simple oversight, since it'd take only a few minutes to fix this.
D'oh! I was running a -testnet bitcoind....
Never mind.
Never mind.
hehe, no worries you have enough on your plate.
D'oh! I was running a -testnet bitcoind....
Never mind.
Never mind.
Neither of those addresses are valid according to my bitcoind:
My client (version 0.3.15) says they're valid.
Bytecoin has mentioned that the checksum doesn't work as well as you would expect.
I want bitcoins in my brain, brb memorizing privikeys
omg 0.25BTC... you'll be kicking yourself in 2 years 
in the beginning, people did lost of stupid mistakes like that... but with 100's of coins.
i hope in the future they will Re-mine the coins lost in the black hole
in the beginning, people did lost of stupid mistakes like that... but with 100's of coins.
i hope in the future they will Re-mine the coins lost in the black hole
Someone mentioned this idea a little while back:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/recycle-lost-coins-44511
Neither of those addresses are valid according to my bitcoind:
The checksum in addresses is 4 bytes, so there is a one-in-four-billion chance that a random typo would get you a valid address.
Not sure I understand. If they aren't valid, why are they in the block explorer? Code:
$ bitcoind validateaddress 1AYSPTVt8WytG12Kz9guUpXjwAMFZG9CJh
{
"isvalid" : false
}
$ bitcoind validateaddress 1AYSPTVt8WytG12Kz9guUpXjeAMFb7AX2K
{
"isvalid" : false
}
The checksum in addresses is 4 bytes, so there is a one-in-four-billion chance that a random typo would get you a valid address.
Well if this is true, that's not good.
Neither of those addresses are valid according to my bitcoind:
The checksum in addresses is 4 bytes, so there is a one-in-four-billion chance that a random typo would get you a valid address.
Code:
$ bitcoind validateaddress 1AYSPTVt8WytG12Kz9guUpXjwAMFZG9CJh
{
"isvalid" : false
}
$ bitcoind validateaddress 1AYSPTVt8WytG12Kz9guUpXjeAMFb7AX2K
{
"isvalid" : false
}
The checksum in addresses is 4 bytes, so there is a one-in-four-billion chance that a random typo would get you a valid address.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
Im standing with my "Lucky" comment. Go buy a lotto ticket.
i.e.: turn on solo mining for a while
(...)
Seriously unlucky if true.
Please share the correct and incorrect address.
Correct: 1AYSPTVt8WytG12Kz9guUpXjwAMFZG9CJh
Incorrect: 1AYSPTVt8WytG12Kz9guUpXjeAMFb7AX2K
After looking thorougly at both addresses, looks like I accidentally took the end of one address in my addressbook, and used it in the end of the incorrect address. Silly me.
Im standing with my "Lucky" comment. Go buy a lotto ticket.
Seriously unlucky because the way the adresses are generated, means that a random error being valid is VERY, VERY, VERY unlikely.
Even if you mashup 2 adresses at a random point, this is unlikely. You have a ungodly amount of bad luck...
Even if you mashup 2 adresses at a random point, this is unlikely. You have a ungodly amount of bad luck...
LMAO ya man.. WOW, quick Spock compute the odds!
Seriously unlucky because the way the adresses are generated, means that a random error being valid is VERY, VERY, VERY unlikely.
Even if you mashup 2 adresses at a random point, this is unlikely. You have a ungodly amount of bad luck...
Really? I wasn't aware of that. Wow. Even if you mashup 2 adresses at a random point, this is unlikely. You have a ungodly amount of bad luck...
Well, I guess it was bound to happen sooner or later. I was trying to send some btc to a newly generated address so that I could memorize the private key, and then have my BTC in my brain. My clients copy paste function wasn't working correctly, so I decided to type the address in manually. I was lazy, so I didn't double check the address. at least it was only .25 BTC. Just thought I'd share my story with you guys. Moral: If you ever manually type an address, double check it.
Moral: If you ever manually type an address, double check it.lol sorry had to giggle
Jump to: