Transaction

j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckMM<div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=782.msg8772#msg8772">Quote from: lachesis on August 11, 2010, 05:57:20 PM</a></div><div class="quote"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=782.msg8768#msg8768">Quote from: Ground Loop on August 11, 2010, 05:31:24 PM</a></div><div class="quote">News to me is that *all* your coins are at risk.&nbsp; I thought it was just clumps of coins (previously received transactions) involved in the transaction, not my aggregate balance.&nbsp; Yikes.<br/></div>You were right before. The reason all of his coins were lost is that he first transfered all ฿9000 to himself, merging them into a single TxIn. If he had skipped that step and gone straight to sending himself ฿1, he would have only lost the smallest payment that he had previously received that was over ฿1.<br/><br/>I think the client needs to communicate TxIns and TxOuts better to the user. I don't know how to do that without being confusing, but there are real privacy, safety, and security implications in which coins the client chooses to transfer.<br/></div><br/>Wait, I'm confused again. I thought the essence of the surprise was that Bitcoin is programmed to "empty your wallet" for EACH transaction. According to the description I read, when you send coins from address A in your wallet to address B externally, the transaction is actually done by sending ALL the coins out from address A, and the ones that aren't going to address B get sent to address C which is your own address - in other words, even if I'm only paying you a single bitcoin out of my 9000, I mail 1 bitcoin to you and 8999 to myself at a new address.<br/><br/>In other words (unless I'm confused), every transaction you make will result in your old, backed-up wallet addresses become emptied out.</div> text/html