LBANK INFO CRYPTOCURRENCY

From my reading I understand that: The Pi Cycle top indicator signals a top when: 111 day Moving average > 350 day Moving Average * 2 The Pi Cycle bottom indicator signals a bottom when: 150 day Exponential Moving Average <= .745 * 471 day Simple Moving Average The Pi Cycle bottom indicator then indicates the end of the bottoming zone when: 150 day Exponential Moving Average > .745 * 471 day Simple Moving Average My query is: Did I get the 3 inequalities right? I could not find a authoritative source on this, some of it is from AI and I am not sure it is precise . Can someone point me to the original or authoritative source? I hope I have not replaced < with <=, > with >= or vice versa. Thank you. from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/ZHRSqn0 via IFTTT

Prediction markets are becoming an interesting intersection of blockchain technology, real-time data, and artificial intelligence. The basic idea is simple: participants make predictions about future events, while a reliable mechanism determines the eventual outcome. The difficult part is not necessarily creating the market—it is proving that the outcome used for settlement is accurate and trustworthy. Projects exploring AI-assisted prediction markets are bringing new attention to this problem. For example, Poly Truth explores the use of AI and blockchain technology to analyze prediction-market information. An overview of the project can be found here: https://cryptopresalenews.com/poly-truth-presale-connects-web3-projects-and-investors This also raises an interesting question from a Bitcoin perspective: could Bitcoin provide the settlement layer for a prediction market while minimizing the need to trust a centralized intermediary? Bitcoin's scripting system is in...

I created a musig descriptor with Bitcoin Core: My addresses: tpubDCWbaTx1wFG3JHpT5sK7HD2yBDLdoonfz7SN5Jnk3UGXf3EAMNECcDrGQQXP6jccdgcczRnSDTBAXauK19EAbf3KvnHmRCsKk2gGdWP3Xke tpubDCis6zc7jL21KnV9Rz7zRz2AsFartHsdQx9uVdnd2kVuNpCNX5mhHaMwYrR7YvdT3GKqKVKNDRSz966Z9DjXqUvyz7gHkfh751GBJ68CYab The keys were master keys from other wallets. Here was my descriptor: tr(musig(tpubDCWbaTx1wFG3JHpT5sK7HD2yBDLdoonfz7SN5Jnk3UGXf3EAMNECcDrGQQXP6jccdgcczRnSDTBAXauK19EAbf3KvnHmRCsKk2gGdWP3Xke,tpubDCis6zc7jL21KnV9Rz7zRz2AsFartHsdQx9uVdnd2kVuNpCNX5mhHaMwYrR7YvdT3GKqKVKNDRSz966Z9DjXqUvyz7gHkfh751GBJ68CYab)/<0;1>/*) No problem with importing or deriving addresses: $ bitcoin-cli -rpcwallet=musig importdescriptors '''[{ "desc": "'$DESC_WITH_CS'", "timestamp": "now" }]''' [ { "success": true, "warnings": [ "Range not given, using default keypool range" ] } ] $ bit...

Bitcoin Knots 29.3, single descriptor wallet managed by Sparrow, four 2-of-3 multisig wallets registered in it. Three transactions from one multisig don't appear in the Knots GUI transaction list. Ten from another, created the same way a day later, display normally. All are self-transfers between two wallets in the same node wallet. Comparing gettransaction output for a working and a non-working transaction: every top-level field matches in shape — same fee value, amount: 0 , empty walletconflicts and mempoolconflicts , bip125-replaceable: no , correct confirmations. The only difference in the entire object is that details is populated on one (a send and a receive entry) and [] on the other. The fee is correct on both, which I take to mean input ownership was resolved. That's the part I don't understand — how does the wallet compute a fee and then produce no detail entries? Other checks on the non-working wallet: getaddressinfo on the destinations...

I’m trying to better understand the relationship between a hardware wallet, a BIP39 seed phrase, and the actual Bitcoin keys. Suppose a user initializes a hardware wallet, receives a 12- or 24-word recovery phrase, and later completely loses or destroys the physical device. If the recovery phrase is imported into another compatible wallet: What exactly is being reconstructed from those words? Are the same Bitcoin private keys and addresses deterministically regenerated? What additional information might still be required, such as a passphrase, derivation path, or wallet type? Are there situations where having the correct seed phrase alone would still not be enough to recover the expected Bitcoin wallet? I’m specifically interested in the Bitcoin/BIP32/BIP39/BIP44 side of this rather than device-specific recovery instructions. from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/i7GAKkm via IFTTT

I'm absolute new to this. Can someone help, how I can make my own coin or token and sell it on the crypto market? I don't mind it being a long-term project like 6 months to 1 year. Is this the right community for building this? If no, can you suggest better spaces, please. from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/B5P3h2c via IFTTT