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?

The ruling elites will not allow a major source of their funding (Wall Street) to be usurped without a huge fight.

MyBitcoin is a Limited Liability Company, so the owner(s) is not personally responsible for the company's debts.  This is a very good thing, because it allows entrepreneurs to start risky ventures without putting their entire lives on the line.  If we didn't have limited liability entities, there would be a whole lot less innovation, a lot less wealth, and a lot fewer jobs.

I purchased and received 2 half-ounce gold Maple Leafs from Trader Steve using Bitcoin for payment, with no escrow agent.  Everything went exactly as he promised, and I've already placed my second order for some American Eagles.

For more details, feel free to PM me.

Russia Times is available for free on my Roku box (a common Netflix streaming box).  I swear they used to carry Al Jazeera English as well, but it's not currently available.

@SomeoneWeird: Eventually, running Ubuntu as my main OS and Windows in a VM is my goal, but it creates too many headaches at once.  For example, I really like my VPN WiTopia, but it doesn't have a Linux version.  Another example: my mobile broadband card technically will work with Linux, but it involves two pages of tedious instructions.

So, I am slowly phasing Windows out and Ubuntu in.  For example, I now do all of my web surfing in Ubuntu running in a VMware VM.


@1MLyg5WVFSMifFjkrZiyGW2nw: I am running Windows 7 and I am trying to restrict any possible malware from installing and/or running itself without entering the Admin password.

To increase my overall security, I created a separate Admin Windows login and downgraded my normal day-to-day account to a Standard User.

However, in my Standard account, I seem to be able to do everything I could when it was an admin account.  Can someone tell me what I need to do to vastly restrict what a standard user can do?  And don't say "switch to Linux" - I'm working toward that goal, but there's a million steps involved.

I want to limit what malware would be capable of doing on my PC.

My US bank lets me set up a direct e-payment to anyone's bank account - all I need is the account number and routing number, both of which are on the recipient's check.  The payment usually occurs in one business day and is free.  Once it is set up, it takes 1 minute to make a payment.

Who stands to gain the most if the Fed and the US financial system are bypassed?  Answer that and you'll have a good idea whom to get involved.

Typo on your website: peices

Yeah - what he said ^^^

Try http://www.senatorschumer.com

Does anyone know of a service that can email me an alert whenever the BTC market price ventures outside of a specific range?

So what about Kevin?

It seems like it would at least put up another barrier in the chain of evidence.  Also, if the trade is done on this forum (i.e. not by meatspace friends), then identity would be pretty hard to determine.

And the swap only requires trust in one direction.  If I trust Member A on this forum but A doesn't really know me, I could simply send him my wallet first.  Once he's moved the coins into a fresh wallet, he would send me his original wallet.  From A's perspective, there's nothing to lose.

For those who understand Bitcoin better than me: does it increase the anonymity of my coins if I swap wallets with someone?

For example, let's say I have a wallet.dat "containing" 50 BTC and so does a trusted member of this forum.  If we exchange wallet files, does that improve the anonymity of my coins?

Of course, once we receive each other's wallets, it would be wise to send the coins into a fresh wallet, preferably one created on an air-gapped PC or in a LiveCD.

Spaceballs!

Ubuntu for all web browsing and Bitcoin - Windows for everything else.

If someone really wanted an escrow service, I bet one of the trusted senior members of this site would be glad to do it, informally, for a small fee.  For example, I would trust Atlas much more than some stranger.  If I wanted to buy something expensive, I would ask him to act as the escrow.  I would send him the Bitcoin payment, and once I confirm that I got the purchased item, he would release the funds, minus a fee, to the seller.

Well, increasingly desperate govts will probably be unable to confiscate them.