Hey there. This is how Bitcoin works! To put it simply, an unspent output means that that balance of bitcoin is still associated as stored at that address. Of the coins you sent to address 1Gop134Nc6kx23EfqaunjTF1YBapyzHDQ6, there is still an unspent balance of 0.04420868 BTC.

In other words, that amount is still "stored" at that address as an input and can be spent further on.

The transaction you showed here was confirmed, so you've successfully completed your spend! If you're still confused, you have to explain further details behind your transaction. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure you have nothing to worry about.

And no, you can't reverse the tx (not practically now anyway).

That's actually the trade-off you have to contend with if you want to trade on the slew of new alts and tokens that enter the market daily. As the majority of them do not have the necessary funds to get listed on the majors (from my understanding recently it can cost you USD 50,000 just to get a six-month listing on the big ones) nor the documentation necessary for due diligence and verification (to get "verified" status on WAVES dex for example).

I just took a look at yobit's twitter and they still seem very active, as they have been for a long while and this is one of the exchanges that lists so-called exotic alts. The same goes for cryptopia. One is Russian, the other Kiwi. They're both notoriously slow with support on these exotics, though, with infrequent wallet updates and withdrawals.

I daresay they're actually just as competent (and I mean to say this generously) as the more recognised platforms when it comes to Bitcoin, so I would look to liquidate all coins into Bitcoin when withdrawing. This is basically the only reason I still use them. Whenever I happen to get a lot of exotics, I just sell them off on these exchanges. Bitcoin withdrawals seem fine.

All at your own risk of course!

Looks like you're right after all. They disabled advanced options on 22nd August, according to this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/6v6h91/kraken_disabling_advanced_orders_to_reduce_load/

I wasn't aware as I'm not trading on Kraken. It would seem very strange to me, since stop loss and take profit aren't really considered advanced anymore, they're just very basic trading order instructions that have been around for as long as I've used online trading platforms. Time to move to another platform? They're all pretty crap, to be honest. I'm really just waiting for a dex to really come up in a big way, with all these headaches from centralized exchanges.

Comparisons are extremely tricky so they have to acknowledge that!

Yeah, would be great if some of their R&D people actually took in true costs of transaction. There are just so many variables to take into account simply by comparing a centralised network (let's say Visa) to a decentralised one (let's say Bitcoin). If you only look at the common overheads of equipment and network infrastructure (basically, electricity and maintenance), then Bitcoin doesn't have any costs left. The banks, on the other hand, have other permanent overheads: employee salaries, costs of software (Bitcoin is free and open sourced!).

I suspect Bitcoin's cost of tx is very high, that is true. But the benefits, especially as it scales, far outweigh the costs of something like Visa, which has many points of failure. Bitcoin has also outgrown its simple use of being a digital currency and they need to take that into account.

I found and shared a link a couple of days ago: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2276184.msg23084247#msg23084247

Incidentally, the most recent Nobel Prize for economics was awarded to a guy who has been trying to tell people for 40 years that the financial markets keep getting people caught out simply because people are completely incapable of perfect rationality. Even banks during the mortgage crisis 8-10 years ago failed to act rationally, realising they were getting into worse debt by accepting bad deals. Logically, they could only head down into disaster but went down that path anyway until it was simply too big to hide.

I've seen it also in crypto: Mt Gox, other exchanges, even dogetipbot (https://gizmodo.com/reddit-users-lose-real-money-after-meme-currency-bot-di-1795125165). At the first signs of trouble, they just seem to dig deeper and deeper holes until they go completely bust.

Rational models are deeply flawed for as long as they are not applied to perfect computers =)

P.S. Bitcoin is not a fad and is no longer in danger of becoming one, I agree. I know more and more people who buy it in a fad-like frenzy but people do that with gold too, and gold's not a fad.

From your info, I'm assuming this is an active long position, and you want to limit potential losses right?

You'll want to set up a stop loss limit sell order on your open position, with the stop price at $5287.33.

If you don't have a position but want to BUY at 5300 then open a market, create a stop buy order at that price, and it will fill if that price is reached. Works the same across all platforms, just with different names.

The advice should stay the same, as the point is really the same, control your funds or risk them by trusting a service. In my case, most of my risked Bitcoins were already held at a site which committed to provide an equal amount of BCC/H. I was unlikely to have withdrawn them anyway had they not made their commitment. These were coins I'd already risked by trusting that service, since the benefits I gained required that trust.

A very small portion was left at an exchange that actually distributed BCC/H on the day of the fork. I liquidated all of it immediately and was able to take advantage of a price close to ATH. The same principle here. I'd already risked my BTC there for trades.

Now the coins I consider my savings/holdings, these are always in my own wallet.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, fork or no fork, the principle is always, trust no one but yourself with your coins. If you have to use a service, that's always going to involve you trusting them.

I'm actually unsure now if I should attribute this to blissful ignorance or refreshing honesty!

I think if we set aside the illogical title that erroneously lumps HYIP together with Bitcoin and ICOs, we can marvel at a few things here:

1. How words have evolving definitions. "high yield investment programmes". Interesting to see how online investor guides by definition equate HYIPs to ponzi scams, when they should have legitimate use, particularly when "low-yield investments" and "high-yield returns" are common labels used in banking and finance.

2. How some people (I believe, more than I'd guess actually) see Bitcoin and ICOs as HYIP - a risky gamble, promising incredible returns, where common strategies include "get in early" and "get out before everyone else does". I'm pretty sure a number of ICOs already can be classified as scams but don't fit into the ponzi structure of HYIP but perhaps one day in the future, even the term HYIP will include variations of ICO models.

In fact, the trendiest HYIPs now offer rates that seem a lot lower than what you'd find promised by some ICOs or even by services. Check out some of the cloudmining contracts, for example, whose calculators show breakeven after 7-9 months. Or check out ICOs that predict more than 3% dividends per month. I've personally seen more than 5% a month either on gambling investments or on loan interest at Poloniex. They are arguably as risky as HYIPs, on the face of it.

Lines getting blurry yet?

Hmm, have Exodus changed to dynamic fees now? The last time I used it, it had a fixed fee format, although the actual tx used a different fee from what was deducted from my balance. Don't have any coins to test but yeah, it shows me the rate as 0.0025 per 1kb now.

A fixed fee wallet like Exodus (one reason I tried it out before) would only be useful if you planned on accepting a lot of dust transactions and spending them later on... but definitely, come on over to Electrum where you can control how your spend is made and how much you pay as fees.



Yup, it does! (12 word). That is illogical... I was able to make a backup though without ever having to send coins to it, so maybe you were on a much older version! I don't remember which version I used but it had to be between September-October 2016 when I tried it out. Just checked and still have my backup (with no BTC txs ever made!).

Just sharing, that's all. I'm sure he had a lot more insight than what was distilled into that article.


Exactly! If we continue to design and plan using models that are based on rationality, then we'll always get caught out when things unravel the way they do. The only way to get expected results is with entirely automated systems or AI mechanisms that aren't beholden to human intervention but we know that cannot yet be possible. To gain mainstream recognition, at least in academic circles, that we simply cannot trust humans to be rational is the beginning. Adjust the models to account for irrationality.

Well, we all knew this applies even (or especially?) to Bitcoin in terms of its trading valuation. But the Nobel Prize for economics was awarded to University of Chicago's Prof. Richard Taler for this very idea in behavioural economics.

http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20171013-the-understated-importance-of-embracing-our-irrational-side


He proved that financial markets behave irrationally, mainly due to traders having limited rationality, and explains this for a key reason behind the recent economic disasters (and booms). Other contributions are on mental accounting: people don't make lifetime decisions, instead they focus on individual decisions.

Wow. I had both of last night's games at 1-1 but then decided to change them both to Everton and  Newcastle winning at 2-1. So I lost out on 50 points for a fickle mind. Just goes to show what happens when emotions rule at betting haha...

Even if I get a correct outcome tonight, this will be my lowest scoring week. rickbig41's the only one so far to have more than 100 points. I guess eality forgot to put his picks in again?

I guess there's a reason "research" from marketing departments of corporate companies shouldn't be taken too seriously. Then again, a lot of the ones coming from academia aren't that much more solid. There's still that desire to sensationalise Bitcoin and crypto in terms of profit, I guess. I think we'd all be surprised to find out how many companies will cough up $18 to pay for an Adguard annual license just so that evil websites don't steal their CPU to mine crypto!

I'm serious on the point of gathering clear, set-by-step chronological evidence that presents the case (single or multiple) in a logical way. I'm not knowledgeable in legal matters but I am certain this is the only way to proceed properly. Act swiftly, documenting all the steps with screenshots-email comms, support transcripts, anything.

It's not evidence that I need, obviously, but that OP needs if he wants to pursue legal action. I was simply trying to help him on his way. This forum and its users won't be able to arbitrate no matter how much evidence is posted here and nothing will happen no matter if "people are going crazy everywhere".

I wonder if it's a coincidence, since I've now seen two other services I'm using suddenly distribute BCC shares (in the form of Bitcoin, though) this week. Neither were anything I could do about, since I had chosen to put my Bitcoin with them without the possibility to take them back before the Aug hardfork, so I guess I'm pleasantly surprised.

Coins.ph makes me wonder though, especially when you consider that they've always seemed pretty clear that they're absolutely pro-BTC. Their own announcement regarding the hardfork seemed to indicate they wouldn't have anything to do with BCH. Good on them, though. I think any exchange who truly put their support behind BTC should have immediately exchanged their BCH and put the coins where their mouth is.

Perhaps a lesson was learned from all those who did nothing. They don't want a second mass exodus triggered by Oct and Nov forks?

Not sure I'm very clear on how superrational can be compared against rational. Nice read, nevertheless, here are my comments:

The main flaw of the game theory exists either way: you also have to take into account the realist, which is not necessarily rational. You see, every action, every fork, every chain can be rationalised and, therefore, super-rationalised. Your own post is an example of this.

The realist (I'm not one, by the way) already knows that he does not have to defect or remain, he can choose to stay on all sides, and then still choose later down the road once the benefits/rewards become clearer.

Also, depending on how you stand, you're either overestimating the ability of a centralised entity to change the rules of the game or overestimating the static nature of the existing rules. Because already within the rules are multiple interpretations.

Core being supporting and fork being defectors are also not hard truths. I think more people are realists who think as explained above, rather than rationalists. For me the extrapersonal proof is watching how hash power migrates between BTC and BCH.

@OP. Before you even think of pursuing legal action, I'd advise you to clarify what exactly happened (I can't understand what happened from your first post) and then strengthen your case first with evidence. Lots of it. And if you're talking about getting others to come under a single complaint, you're talking about class action lawsuits. Now I do not know the law well enough but I am aware that Poloniex recently strengthened their Terms of Use to explicitly say that any user who signs up and uses their platform waives their right to such legal action. My strong suspicion is that Bittrex is no different. By signing up and using these exchanges, you probably signed off a lot of rights, if the ToS stands.

I'm not here to argue about the ethics of such agreements, just here to warn you that you should prepare yourself with clear evidence before you can do anything. Also, I strongly urge you to remain polite and courteous in your communications with them. I've seen your posts on other threads and that's not going to help you resolve anything quicker, trust me.

Bittrex is not decentralized... so it seems you might have missed the point! Try counterparty and/or Waves decentralised exchanges (DEXs) and experience the trustless trading you're talking about. Only issue is low volume, low userbase, but if you can get yourself and your countrymen onboard, growth will be a matter of time.

Also, you can sell and buy on localbitcoins with IRR, even online bank transfer with escrow. That's kinda the whole point of localbitcoins...Am on it right now and can see dozens of traders doing that.

I don't know if I speak for a lot of people when I say that I can't afford to be a true believer. I truly believe in Bitcoin. I have a lot invested in it - not the money that's as important as the time and faith. I'm not a true believer in the sense that I haven't completely abandoned everything to bet all in on Bitcoin. I certainly hope it becomes a huge success, I don't believe it will be my saviour. As it is, I already put a lot on the line, if Bitcoin doesn't work out, I'll be taking many steps back, but not completely out in the cold. Probably have a few upset family members as well.

On the contrary, guys like him probably understand perfectly how banks work. It's a huge conglomerate of bankers and states that have been propping up the illusion of financial and economic strength based on mega-banking structures with a reach and roots so deep that the lie is too big to come clean on. They're battered now after the global crises of the 90s and 200s but not willing to go down just yet.

So when something like Bitcoin comes along, threatening to show a way out of that financial mire, when the lid just can't be kept on it anymore, this is the sort of frustration you can see - plus it helps to create good entries for them too!