Thanks for the suggestion. I overwrote the data folder with a backup from 10 days ago, and now it synced properly. So it must have been a corrupted file blocking the sync from going forward.

What do you mean by "read out the S.M.A.R.T. values"? The drive has passed the S.M.A.R.T. test in both Drive Pulse (Drive Genius 5) and SoftRAID XT. So I assume that is correct. Also, since the drive is APFS, and DiskWarrior does not support APFS, I can easily think the error was reported due to a 'glitch'. Also the SSD is a brand new 2TB Crucial MX500, so I doubt there is actually anything wrong with it.

So I think my Bitcoin Core problem is due to somethings else. But I could be wrong, obviously.

I'm running Bitcoin Core 0.20.0 on MacOS 10.14.6. Yesterday when I started it, it synced for a while but then got stuck on block 634126. Then I got an error saying "Error reading database, shutting down". I also got a message from "DiskWarrior Hardware Test Notice" that there were bad blocks on the external SSD I use to store the Bitcoin core data. After rebooting, now Bitcoin Core is still stuck on block 634126. For about 20-30 min it said "Connecting to Peers". The "Syncing Headers" for another 10-15 min with 0 active peers. Then I had 4 active peers but still no syncing. And now 2 active connections and still stuck. I usually always have 8 active connections and syncing is fast. Any idea what's going on?

I'm not totally convinced that there is something wrong with the SSD. It seems to work fine accessing all kinds of other files. And it has happened to me a few times in the past that I have gotten reports of errors on external disks when they were in fact OK. Particular with Drive Genius and Drive Pulse. However, this is the first time I have gotten a "DiskWarrior Hardware Test Notice" message. SoftRAID XT says the disk is OK. I have 6 external drives attached via Thunderbolt 3.

It's sad how many people completely misunderstand Roger Ver. Few people have done more than him to contribute to Bitcoins initial success. And we should all be grateful for that. I understand that many people don't like what Roger is doing with Bitcoin.com, and that's OK. But it obviously has nothing to do with BCH itself. And while I don't agree with him promoting BCH as the real Bitcoin, I do understand where he's coming from and why he's so passionate about Bitcoin. Consider this, for the past seven years, he has put his heart and soul into promoting Bitcoin full time. And since he was one of the first people to really 'get it', and to promote and invest in Bitcoin in a big way, he probably thinks of Bitcoin as his little baby. So what happens to Bitcoin, and the name itself, is obviously very personal to him. And since BCH works in the same way as Bitcoin did before 2016, and BTC does not, while I don't agree with him, I understand where he's coming from.

There's no denying that the main purpose and attractiveness of Bitcoin, and what made it successful in the first place, is the fact that we could send almost instant peer-to-peer transactions basically for free. But when fees and confirmation times went up during 2016-17, Bitcoin stopped working as it used to and was no longer useful as electronic cash. And that's why BCH was created (and btw, to OP, Roger Ver did not create it, nor was there any pre-mine). The increased block size will make sure that no fee spikes or delays occur in the future as usage grows, because unpredictable fees and confirmation times is a death sentence for merchant adoption, as we have seen with BTC over the past year. And for those of us who believe that merchant adoption is the key to Bitcoin's success (and future value), doing this is absolutely crucial (and gives us time to develop those 2nd layer solutions while Bitcoin is still working and growing). As a long-time Bitcoin fan, it's just sad to see these things happening on BCH instead of BTC. And I'm sure Roger feels exactly the same.

I would appreciate if you could explain how you would do that.

Do you suggest to let Bitcoin core start with an empty directory for each new wallet, so it will recreate all new files for each wallet? If so, since I don't want to download the blockchain data again, can I just move the "blocks" folder manually between the different wallet directories, or should I move other files as well, like the "chain state" and "databas" folders?

I'm wondering the same thing.

Thanks for the link. And yes, the Ledger Nano is great. I have a Trezor (supports SegWit) myself. However, I also need a hot wallet for my iPhone so I always have some Bitcoin with me. I'm currently using the Bitcoin.com wallet, which I like, but it doesn't support SegWit.

Which is the best (secure, great UI, set your own fee) BTC wallet for iOS that supports SegWit?

I know that it's midnight to midnight. The question is which time zone different exchanges or data providers use for their charts. TradingView, for example, uses UTC time as their default time zone, so I assume that a new daily candle forms at midnight UTC (London, UK). But could different exchanges perhaps use different time zones for their daily candles, or do they all use UTC? If not, then daily charts would look different on different platforms.

EDIT: I now checked both GDAX and TradingView, and they both produced a new candle at midnight UTC (4 PM PST). So hopefully this means that everyone is doing the same thing. Which, of course, would make sense.

Since cryptos are trading 24/7, at what time of day does a new daily candle form on Coinbase and other platforms with candlestick charts?

What is the preferable way to receive multiple bitcoin payments in order to minimize fees when eventually sending the bitcoin to someone else?

Scenario 1:
I received 10 different payments of 0.01 BTC to the same bitcoin address.

Scenario 2:
I received 10 different payments of 0.01 BTC to 10 different bitcoin addresses.

Now I have 0.1 BTC in my wallet that I want to send to someone. Which of the above scenarios will result in lower fees when sending that 0.1 BTC to someone else?

Any additional clarification of this issue would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks guys for your replies and suggestions. I ended up opening an account with Gatehub, and managed to import my old Ripple wallet there. 

Heres the other exchanges I looked at.
Bitstamp - Takes 2+ weeks to verify account before any trading is possible.
Binance - Closed to new applicants.
HitBTC - Seem shady.
Bittrex - Closed to new applicants.
Bitfinex - Closed to new applicants.

I would appreciate if someone could let me know, in general, how long it usually takes, and what the potential pitfalls are, when transferring BTC or USD between GDAX, Gemini and your bank.

For example, if I wanted to move Bitcoin at GDAX or Gemini to a hardware wallet, and then later move it back to the exchange, how long would those transfers usually take. And after initiating a transfer, could the Bitcoin be temporarily unavailable during some type of security review etc by the exchange? Before doing a transfer, I want to make sure that I don't lose temporary access to my Bitcoin in case I want to sell.

Another case is if I want to move Bitcoin between GDAX and Gemini. And another one is if I want to withdraw USD from either GDAX and Gemini.

I would greatly appreciate you sharing your experiences with transferring Bitcoin and USD between these exchanges and your bank.

I have some XRP I want to convert to BTC. So I opened an account at Bitstamp. Unfortunately you need to verify the account before you can send your XPR there. And they are currently very much behind with verifications, looking at 2 weeks+ or so. I then went to Binance, but they don't accept new customers at the moment. Any ideas which other exchange I could choose? Preferably one where I don't have to go through a lengthy verification process.

From GDAX website:

"All GDAX users with a BTC balance at the time of the snapshot will be credited an equal amount of B2X. Users do not need to take any action and will automatically be credited with B2X into a new B2X balance in GDAX at the time of the fork."

I assume it's the same for Coinbase. The fork supposedly happened today at block 501451.

https://support.gdax.com/customer/portal/articles/2893011-bitcoin-segwit2x-fork-faq