|
Otherwise you would be making threads here and there asking why your transaction has not confirmed after 8 or even 24 hours(even more). I recommend a fee of at least(and I mean the very least) of 0.0001 bitcoins, more is better obviously to increase your transaction priority and more likely for it to get included in the next block as fast as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
If you are not lying, tell which exchange this is. If you are telling the truth, the only coins you have are on that exchange, and it's silly, their requirements.
|
|
|
|
Wow, down for 3 days is no joke for my profits.
no worries your btc is being flipped in good hands ! lol  Well, usually any post you make carry no meaning at all. But this one actually has a meaning, congratulations on that improvement. Since there is no need for primedice publishing where its bitcoins are stored (please don't tell me there is no cold storage involved into this), they could have very well sold some amount of coins at a certain price and now got fucked because it is not going down. But this is a huge speculation, obviously. I had never even thought about this till you mentioned it. |
|
|
|
Does anyone have an idea on how to solve this problem? Is it possible to display part of the private key to verify that it is in fact the correct key? I was thinking of displaying the first 5 digits of the private key and then using some comparison method, but I'm not sure on the exact capabilities of the algorithim.
I don't think this approach is workable. Let's put aside the mathematical difficulties for the moment and say that a method like the one you propose exists. I print many bitcoin certificates, and employ that method. But sometimes, instead of printing the whole private key, I only print the first five digits - the visible portion; the hidden portion of the private key, I still can duplicate or replace with "you got punked" or whatever. In the end, I think any instrument with hidden information requires trust in the issuer, that the hidden information actually encodes what it purports to encode. Even with zero-knowledge proofs and similar crypto magic, I can't see any way around it. I think I might have to agree with you, however there might be a "suffciently secure" anti-counterfeiting method that would be extremely challenging to break, something like a QR code that produces an obfusticated version of the private key that can be defusticated via a version of the bitcoin wallet client, however that's considerably more "centralized" than I think is reasonable, if anyone wants to bash brains on this I'll be on IRC tonight at some point. The only thing I can think of is to have trust in the brand. If the price over the standard btc price is low enough people will spend them on the network and if the wrong private key is in there or if there are duplicates I think people will let everyone know about that. I guess that can be more of a problem for the really expensive silver coins out there that people rarely spend. Yeah, I was trying to think of a clever, futureproof method of distributing physical bitcoins that couldn't easily be spoiled by others counterfeiting, I don't think theres an easy, non-super technical way to do this. I wonder if theres a demand to start producing near cost, plastic bitcoin "tokens" in the 10,100, 1000mbit range in my local, I think it actually works as a loophole to avoid finCEN, but I could be wrong. Why not just abandoned the idea of physical Bitcoins altogether? |
|
|
|
|
OK, even I am getting a bit paranoid here. Whatever the cause, with the amount of money Stunna has(money buys man power), he should've fixed this by now. I have ~0.04, so even if they are lost, not much of a deal, but I hope that doesn't happen.
|
|
|
|
It's pretty funny actually, it exists because people are evil. Let me explain this a bit more in-depth. All of us humans are untrustworthy, we all have this darkness inside us, if we are forced, even the most "good natured" person can steal,kill and whatnot. Why do people keep secrets? Because they did something bad. Why the need to lock our doors, keep our "data" safe? Because someone can steal it.
Bitcoin exists because encryption exists, and encryption exists because people were evil and didn't want their war plans to be discovered by the enemy. Get it so far?
Everytime I hear new encryption was discovered, I giggle a bit, because the reason they make encryption/ciphers is because one the first chance they get, humans will compromise some data.
That's a kinda dark view on humanity, isn't it?  But, well, you have a point. But, then, I guess most things can be traced back to selfish purposes if we want to? I see the world differently. What most people see as obvious, I don't. And what I see as obvious, most people don't. |
|
|
|
|
It's pretty funny actually, it exists because people are evil. Let me explain this a bit more in-depth. All of us humans are untrustworthy, we all have this darkness inside us, if we are forced, even the most "good natured" person can steal,kill and whatnot. Why do people keep secrets? Because they did something bad. Why the need to lock our doors, keep our "data" safe? Because someone can steal it.
Bitcoin exists because encryption exists, and encryption exists because people were evil and didn't want their war plans to be discovered by the enemy. Get it so far?
Everytime I hear new encryption was discovered, I giggle a bit, because the reason they make encryption/ciphers is because one the first chance they get, humans will compromise some data.
|
|
|
|
Why did it take this transaction 41 hours to get into the blockchain? How is that possible? It was received on 2013-11-18 23:31:24 and only got into block # 270639 (2013-11-20 16:02:07 +2,431 minutes)! It thus instantly jumped from 0 confirmations to 13+ confirmations now. Is this because the volume of BTC transactions has skyrocketed recently, and blocks have a transaction number limit, don't they? Because you didn't pay a fee. Or basically, you were cheap, that's why. |
|
|
|
You can try. Then rebroadcast with a higher fee? |
|
|
|
Hey guys!
After the USA senate, we can see a big fall of bitcoin. The news of the Senate were not bad. Lets reflect why bitcoin is falling so fast? I really thought that after the senate, bitcoin would rise up... But not, people are selling lots of bitcoins every hour and this is not good for bitcoin!
What you think about the value of bitcoin on the next month?
Because even before the senate, Bitcoin was in a bubble, big one and was going to crash eventually. No doubt it will one day rise to these prices, but this was too quick. |
|
|
|
who reveive the transaction fee? People who mine the bitcoins or who? Sorry for stupid question.  The fees go to the miners. |
|
|
|
yeah, lighten up, he just screwed up
I doubt your coins are gone OP, but it might take a while to clear up, hopefully someone can clarify that
Maybe, maybe not. It's luke that is filtering address re-use, and maybe other miners as well. Come on use some logic. There are 6 blocks per hour. OP reports it has been 12 hours that is 72 blocks. Lets be generous and say 20% of those are filtering that is ~60 blocks mined by miners who are not filtering. Still think it is due to filtering? Also the filtering simply limits the OP to one re-use tx from the same address per block. Does the OP have 72 re-use txs in the last 12 hours? Still think it is due to filtering? Maybe not, but luke was usually the generous miner, allowing transactions without fees, even small ones. But he filtered OP's transaction, that leaves with the rest of the players, who are probably not including due to the fee not being there. Well no the filtering merely limits it to 1 tx per block. So the OP could have had 12+ tx go through just on Luke's pool in the last 12 hours. Once again still think it is due to filtering? The answer is no unless you want to spread FUD in face of obvious logic. It's quite possible luke changed the rules on his pool. He is free to do whatever he wants without letting us know, so there you have it. |
|
|
|
yeah, lighten up, he just screwed up
I doubt your coins are gone OP, but it might take a while to clear up, hopefully someone can clarify that
Maybe, maybe not. It's luke that is filtering address re-use, and maybe other miners as well. Come on use some logic. There are 6 blocks per hour. OP reports it has been 12 hours that is 72 blocks. Lets be generous and say 20% of those are filtering that is ~60 blocks mined by miners who are not filtering. Still think it is due to filtering? Also the filtering simply limits the OP to one re-use tx from the same address per block. Does the OP have 72 re-use txs in the last 12 hours? Still think it is due to filtering? Maybe not, but luke was usually the generous miner, allowing transactions without fees, even small ones. But he filtered OP's transaction, that leaves with the rest of the players, who are probably not including due to the fee not being there. |
|
|
|
yeah, lighten up, he just screwed up
I doubt your coins are gone OP, but it might take a while to clear up, hopefully someone can clarify that
Maybe, maybe not. It's luke that is filtering address re-use, and maybe other miners as well. |
|
|
|
Am I reading it right, or OP tried to double spend according to blockchain.info. There is one unconfirmed input, and if you look at the output of it, it was already spent. Of course it is very likely that I am just not reading it right, but if I am, the transaction will never confirm as one of the inputs was already spent.
wait you mean those bitcoin are lost? I figured out your problem. Miners are not accepting your transaction due to address re-use. Read here why https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=334316.0. That or, because you didn't add a fee. |
|
|
|
|
Am I reading it right, or OP tried to double spend according to blockchain.info. There is one unconfirmed input, and if you look at the output of it, it was already spent. Of course it is very likely that I am just not reading it right, but if I am, the transaction will never confirm as one of the inputs was already spent.
|
|
|
|
|
As Bitcoin goes more and more mainstream, I am sure that the U.S Govt will probably target the larger pools, for instance to make them comply to some law, and who knows, may even make pools force users to verify via AMC/KYC. I don't have anything to back this up, however it makes sense. While a pool is composed of many users, it is the pool owner who controls what happens with the hashing power in the end. And since pools create bitcoins which is essentially like printing money, I can see how they might be dealt a blow.
|
|
|
|
|
Who is the person speaking? Is it a woman or a man?
|
|
|
|
What about rhetorical questions?
What about them. |
|
|
|
|
Interesting, even though I live in a different country, not in the UK, I also can't open Bitstamp. I don't have any money there so it's okay, but...weird.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
