address – Can a single wallet generate (and use) both SegWit and non-SegWit addresses?

Is a Segwit wallet able to generate and use non-Segwit addresses?

I’m using Bitpay’s Bitcore to create wallets and generate new addresses for the users of my platform. I’m also using Bitcore-wallet-client to sign transactions.

My users have legacy wallets right now. I intend to migrate their wallets to native Segwit, but they will also need legacy addresses so that they can receive coins from anywhere. (right?)

Is it possible to have only one wallet per user, generating both types of addresses, or will I have to manage two wallets per user?

And if I have to manage two wallets per user, utxos from one wallet won’t be available to the other, obviously. What’s the best way to deal with their ‘split balance’? Should I orient users to send all their coins to the bc1 address of the new Segwit wallet? But then, whenever they receive funds in their legacy addresses, they’d have to transfer again to the bc1 address in order to make Segwit transactions. It makes no sense – or does it? What am I missing?

Modify Powershell script to to copy from multiple sources to a single destination using Robocopy

want to write a script (preferably in PowerShell) to copy (robocopy) files from multiple directories to a single destination. I am able to do this for a single source directory. But need help to modify it to copy from multiple locations. Here’s the skeletal script:

Robocopy $Root $Dest /E /XX /COPYALL

utilizing our prowess in Single currency wallet development – Cryptocurrencies Corner

Transfer money anytime and anywhere securely through our Single currency wallet development services. The benefits that we offer include instant payments, complete transparency, a user-friendly interface, 24×7 technical support, and an advanced anti-fraud mechanism. Get the best quality digital wallets by connecting with our talented developer team soon. 

permissions – Create a user with rights and privileges between root and limited (CRUD single database) user

Is it possible to create a mid-root MySQL user, who will have the ability to create other users, with scope limited to databases which mid-root user creates? This mid-root user would not have the privileges of a root user, and would not be able to perform any of the CRUD operations on any of the databases other than on those they’ve created themselves.

Hopefully, this illustration would do a better job of explaining.enter image description here

In this scenario, the user ROOT has access to everything, and can create other users, with limited privileges.

The user called mid-root is somewhat of a demigod or middle management – they can create other users as well, but can grant them only access to the databases that the mid-root user has created. Mid-root can only access the databases they themselves have created (simple db1, simple db2, etc), while being unable to access those created by the root user (db1, db2, db3, db4).

Finally, users created by the fictional mid-root user could only perform standard CRUD operations with their given databases. By standard, I mean everything other than DROP database, or ALTER table, or TRUNCATE, etc.

Is any of this possible?

Real life use scenario follows.

There is a webapplication, and a potential client or clients (one or more of hundreds, or thousands) wishes to try out a demo for a certain period of time (a month or so). When that client registers, background logic creates a MySQL user and the appropriate DB, tables, etc, and fills them with necessary data. Since the server might be shared between different types of webapps, there’s a need for a mid-root user, who can perform these tasks, and only them.

sharepoint server – Mange access requests heading to one single person for all sites

To Manage the Access requests to access the sites, I’ve to configure access request settings in SharePoint 2016 on premises ,by Going to –> Settings –>> Site Settings –>Click the “Site permissions” link under “Users and permissions” section
Now, from the ribbon, Click on “Access Request Settings” button. I’ll be prompted with the access request Settings popup window. then Click on “Allow access request” option to enable access request and enter the E-mail address of the user who will receive access requests from that site.

Up to this everything is clear to me and it is all working fine. Since I’ve hundreds of sub site and many site collections, Is there any easy way to do this procedure for all the site collection through PowerShell script or any other options in central admin ?

If anyone has a solution for this, please share it , that would be really helpful.

Thanks in Advance.

Woocommerce selling a single product with unique items in stock

I’d like to setup a Woocommerce where a single product is sold in quantities.
The issue is that each single quantity is a unique entity, so it must be distinct from other items.

For example:

  • Product Name: COUPON
  • Current in stock: 100 items
  • Each item in the inventory is unique, in this case a unique COUPON (a sequence of chars)
    will be provided to the final user once the order has been completed.

A quick and dirty solution would be creating manually 100 products, where each one represents a coupon; but in my case I need to represent only one product (the COUPON entity) and then, 100 coupons as items in stock, which are of course unique from each other.

I saw some Woocommerce doing this, by it looks like from default it is not possible to do this setup.
Is there a procedure to do this, or a specific plugin?

Is it possible to let Search engines like Google to ignore some particular content on one single page?

I have a HTML like this:

<p>This is something I want Google to crawl. </p>
<p class="nocrawl">However, I don't want Google to crawl this</p>

Is it possible to do it on one page?

windows server 2016 – Restrict RDGW sessions to single active per device by multiple devices

Starting situation:
Multiple physical Windows OS computers on production line served by system owner and co-owner, e.g. Alice and Bob work on PC1, Charlie and Dave on PC2, etc. They are all using the same local user name when logging in directly on the console: ProdUser. The computers are connected in an isolated network with no access to internet or office LANs, but with access to a server LAN.
Now, all users are working either from home or from the office and cannot be physically present by the production line. They require from the IT to have remote desktop access to the computers while still using the ProdUser account. Furthermore they require that when one employee has established an active remote desktop session, any subsequent attempt from other user(s) is blocked, ideally with the notification which user is holding the current active session, i.e. when Alice works on PC1, Bob should not kick her off using the same ProdUser account and receive a notification that Alice is occupying the session.
Already achieved:
RDGW server 2016 is already installed in the server LAN, and configured with RD CAP and RD RAP rules for each group, e.g. Alice and Bob but no ProdUser are CAP enabled, further A & B have access only to PC1 in a RAP rule. Also the .RDP profiles on the clients are preconfigured to authenticate with the real user account against the RDGW (gatewaycredentialssource:i:2), but with ProdUser against the target PC (username:s:ProdUser). This “two steps” authentication is tested successfully and working.
Not working:
When Alice is connected to PC1 and Bob tries to connect to the same, Alice gets kicked off. I cannot use the restrict sessions number option on the server, because it is for all RDGW sessions. Also, even if I go programmatically monitoring the current active sessions and trigger Set-RDSessionHost -NewConnectionAllowed No (aka drain mode) it once again affects the global RDGW behavior and is not restricted only to the PC1 host. Same goes for a programmatical notification per group of people and device/resource.
Is there a way to fine grain the block/notify settings per device / resource?
Am I using the correct technology here, or what can be other technologies which support the described scenario natively.

java – Single DB – Multitenancy with microservices

We are migrating from a monolith to microservice.

Note : We store the tenant details in master tenant db which is seperate from the application database


  1. The app serves multiple tenants and has around 10 sub modules which are tightly bound.

  2. We are splitting the 10 sub modules into 10 different services and planning to use single database for all the sub modules.

  3. There are around 20 tables in a single database without references.

Plans to:

  1. Keep the connection establishment , model , DTO , response classes (all common classes for all modules are placed in a base class)
  2. Add the base class as a dependency module for all the other 10 sub-modules.

I have the following question for which I couldn’t get any proper responses while surfing the internet.

1) Is the above `Plan to` a valid approach ?
2) Will each sub-module try to make its own connection ? 
3) How to address the issue of base class becoming huge and is duplicated in all sub-modules ?
4) Will this cause any deadlocks since each service will connect to same db at any given time ? 

Thanks in advance.