its saying that all 4 of mine are not in the chain... I have moved a few coins to and from them last night. o well!

I'm pretty sure the transaction has to go to the network, otherwise there wouldn't be confirmations and the transaction wouldn't really have happened.  That having been said, I had coins go from one wallet to another and the address wasn't showing on firstbits.com several days later (this was a few months ago).  I think it is way behind.  Is the firstbits info on blockchain.info calculated the same way and accurate?

Account to Account Transfers in the bitcoind (or bitcoin-qt?) application:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Accounts_explained#Account_-.3E_Account_Transfers


This is the functionality to which I refer. The documentation is not clear whether the bitcoin-qt GUI application uses true Bitcoin transactions or will fall back on this move behavior when requesting to send bitcoin value to another address within your wallet.

In my opinion, the Account concept (read the full wiki page above) is a very useful feature, but has no place in the defacto/reference software from bitcoin.org. They should provide a reference implementation that does not have such features and release the more feature-full edition separately. Anyway, that's getting rather off topic.

Can anyone clarify the behavior of bitcoin-qt when sending values intra-wallet?

Accounts aren't addresses.   Accounts are groups of addresses.  It was designed to be an accounting system for wallets but honestly it is next to worthless (for a variety of reasons).

If you want to send 1 BTC from address A to address B the only way possible to create a tx and submit it to the network.  It doesn't matter if address A & B are in the same wallet or on other sides of the globe.  There are no exceptions.  

If you think about it obviously this has to always be the case.  If you could move funds between addresses without making a tx how would the network verify their balances?

Theoretically,  does it matter if I start and stop vanitygen when trying to find a regular expression vanity match?

Am I better to "pause" it after it's been running for a few days (which I really can't do)

The reason I ask is because I need to reboot but I've been trying to find a match for a couple of days and if I start and stop, do I basically have to start brute force at the beginning, or is it like mining where stopping and starting theoretically doesnt matter.

thanks for any advice,

-gBIT

so this means that I can seach for an expression, then quit vgen, start it again later and it will not repeat the work it has already done?

same

The huge wordlist is working just fine. For those who aren't adept at shell scripts or are (like me) stuck using somebody else's windoze machine, you can make it work using Morten's Dictionary Maker and specifying an output file.

Unfortunately, when I feed that program a word beginning with 1 it creates a list of words with and without the 1, and it has no option to exclude words with specific characters. So it creates a lot of unnecessary words, but they can be removed with the following command:


Replace "wordlist.txt" with whatever file you specified for DictMaker to output, and "parsedwordlist.txt" with whatever you want to name your usable list. Also, because it might not be clear, the first find command finds and keeps lines with the number one, and the rest find and remove lines with lowercase L, uppercase i, and uppercase o. I don't worry about zero because I'm not including it in any of my words.

My current wordlist has over 3.5 million strings, and aside from taking a while to start, vanitygen seems to be handling it just fine.

On another note, how come vanitygen seems to top out at 27 characters for an address? When I tried to specify a 28-character address, it said it was too long. But aren't addresses usually around 33 characters? Is this a purposeful limitation in vanitygen to reduce memory usage or some other overhead? Or is it a limitation in addresses that I just don't understand? Or, maybe, is it a bug that can be fixed, please?

And yes, before everybody jumps on me, I know just how astronomical are the odds against finding a 27 or 28 character string, even case insensitively, but if I'm going to be generating and checking billions of addresses anyway I might as well check them for every string I think is interesting, even the really unlikely long ones.

Maybe I'll get lucky.

-Mo

You can truncate your 28 character phrase to 12 characters, and it still won't be found for years. The processing power and time to find a Bitcoin address that long is essentially equivalent to breaking Bitcoin cryptography - something like the age of the universe if the entire earth was GPU cores.

OpenCL vanitygen on even a meager GPU will be 50 times faster, but the word list will overflow around 20000 to 50000 words depending on the lengths. You can do a case-insensitive search for your words, and for the ones where you wanted a single case, just ignore the undesireable results; for a six-letter phrase, you will get about 64 "bad" results for every result with the correct case.