Yes you're correct
Topic: Two Recipients - Each Are Walletless Addresses (Read 639 times)
I'm a little nervous about doing a certain kind of transaction, so I'd like to have someone confirm that I'm doing this right.
I have a wallet loaded inside Bitcoin-qt - let's say with 10 BTC. This wallet only has one Bitcoin address, which had received the 10 BTC in the past.
I have created two new wallet-less Bitcoin addresses using bitaddress.org. So for each of these addresses, I have the private key, but they do not reside in a wallet.
Using Bitcoin-qt, I set up a transaction with two recipients, with each bitaddress.org address receiving 5 BTC.
There will be no change (i.e. getting coins back) to worry about, because 10-5-5=0. In other words, 5 BTC goes to one wallet and 5 to the other.
Since I'm not a Bitcoin expert, I have a fear that I'm doing something wrong, and that the qt client might do these transactions serially instead of parallel, and that 5 BTC of change will be sent off into cybernothingness.
Am I correct that there will be no change in the transaction that I've described?
I have a wallet loaded inside Bitcoin-qt - let's say with 10 BTC. This wallet only has one Bitcoin address, which had received the 10 BTC in the past.
I have created two new wallet-less Bitcoin addresses using bitaddress.org. So for each of these addresses, I have the private key, but they do not reside in a wallet.
Using Bitcoin-qt, I set up a transaction with two recipients, with each bitaddress.org address receiving 5 BTC.
There will be no change (i.e. getting coins back) to worry about, because 10-5-5=0. In other words, 5 BTC goes to one wallet and 5 to the other.
Since I'm not a Bitcoin expert, I have a fear that I'm doing something wrong, and that the qt client might do these transactions serially instead of parallel, and that 5 BTC of change will be sent off into cybernothingness.
Am I correct that there will be no change in the transaction that I've described?
Jump to: