On one of my computers, armory only loads up to block 101,000. It will scan the blockchain and eventually say that Armory is "online," however it won't load past block 101,000. As such, it states that all of my wallet balances are zero when they clearly aren't zero as indicated by my other computer which is also running armory with watch-only copies (the other computer is intended to be an offline computer, however I'm getting used to armory so I'm making 100% sure that I'm familiar with it and that everything checks out before I dump everything into cold storage).
Has anyone else had a problem getting Armory to recognize the entire blockchain?
That means that Armory is not finding the entire blockchain. My guess is that the first blkfile (128 MB) stores 101,000 blocks. Armory believes that's the only file you have on your system. Can you please post the listing of your .bitcoin directory (or C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\Bitcoin)? Inside that directory is a "blocks" subdirectory (if you are using 0.8 ). If that directory is there, can you post that too? Finally, can you send me the logfile? You can export it from Armory (File menu), or copy it from .armory/armorylog.txt. Feel free to browse it for any sensitive information to calm your nerves, but it never includes any security-relevent information (but it may contain evidence that you own certain addresses). I actually posted about this yesterday. Since then, I reverted back to 6.2 (to stay consistent with the other computer). I deleted blkindex and am currently rescanning the blockchain with bitcoind. I figured this might do the trick. I'll post the results. |
|
|
|
|
On one of my computers, armory only loads up to block 101,000. It will scan the blockchain and eventually say that Armory is "online," however it won't load past block 101,000. As such, it states that all of my wallet balances are zero when they clearly aren't zero as indicated by my other computer which is also running armory with watch-only copies (the other computer is intended to be an offline computer, however I'm getting used to armory so I'm making 100% sure that I'm familiar with it and that everything checks out before I dump everything into cold storage).
Has anyone else had a problem getting Armory to recognize the entire blockchain?
|
|
|
|
|
I apologize if the following issues have already been discussed in this thread:
I downloaded armory onto two different computers last night in order to set up an online system and an offline system. I downloaded version 0.87 Beta. One of the computers uses bitcoind 0.6.2. The other computer uses bitcoind 0.8.0.
Now, here's what's interesting. The computer running bitcoind 0.8.0. is plenty powerful with its 16 GB ram. The computer running bitcoind 0.6.2. only has 4 GB of ram. However, it takes the computer with 16 GB about four times longer to scan the blockchain so that Armory can enter online-mode.
Not only that, but this is even weirder. On the computer running bitcoind 0.6.2., armory syncs with the network fine and displays the full number of blocks in the network (~222760 as of this post). However, when armory syncs on the computer running bitcoind 0.8.0, it displays an unchanging block count of exactly 101000 blocks. This number does not update even when it detects that additional blocks have been solved in the network.
Anybody else experience anything like this? Thanks!
Edit: Now, Armory won't sync at all on the computer using bitcoind 0.8.0 despite waiting for hours. I tried restarting the program and the computer multiple times, and it always fails to sync and remains static at "connected (0 blocks)"
|
|
|
|
I've bought a few hundred bitcoins through Coinbase, and once had a order cancelled right after a large price increase. I don't know if the price increase is related or not, but I did note that the email notice they send you never explains precisely what risk they are talking about. It could be the risk of fraud, the risk of insufficient funds, the risk of Coinbase losing money on the exchange rate, the risk of alien abduction, the risk of running out of beer - they never specify.
Well, I specifically asked support to explain the criteria used to determine that my transaction was "high risk." I'll forward the response if/when it arrives. |
|
|
|
I decided to make my first purchase on Feb. 17th for 1 BTC. Total cost including fees was $26.24 USD. Just to see if there is a pattern that exists, I am curious about this ... did you verify using the "instant" verification or using the deposit verification? Others reporting this seem to usually have also placed more than one order. Was this your only order or had you subsequently placed additional buy orders? I used the "instant" verification. This was the only order I had placed, though I had attempted to buy additional coins after I had placed the initial order (I was told I had to wait until the first transaction cleared after which I would be allowed to make multiple purchases). I specifically wanted to purchase only a single BTC to make sure that everything checked out. I just placed another order for 1 BTC in light of this little price dip, so we'll see what happens. |
|
|
|
|
After registering with Coinbase and verifying my banking information, I decided to make my first purchase on Feb. 17th for 1 BTC. Total cost including fees was $26.24 USD.
My account told me that the transaction was in "pending" status and that the coin "will arrive" on Feb. 22 (tonight) after the bank transfer clears.
Result: I received an email notification 6 minutes before the transaction deadline notifying me that my order was "cancelled" because it was found to be a "high risk" transaction.
I have emailed support and am awaiting an explanation.
My questions:
1) Why was my transaction flagged as "high risk" when it was for such a low amount, and when my bank account is supposedly "verified"?
2) Is it natural that I'm questioning whether the recent and continuous rise in BTC price may be the supposed "high risk" factor?
|
|
|
|
|
@ OP, don't mind everyone else. You have a belief and were able to tell us why you believe it.
Whether or not Mt. Gox is a scam is a problem lateral to their apparent customer-service issues which can be found littered throughout this forum. Maybe they need a little help. Maybe their staff is way too small. Who knows?
I personally don't use Mt. Gox. Do they seem to be actively working to improve the customer's experience?
edit: change your thread title to remove "SCAM". They have been found to be a business.
|
|
|
|
Received my coins today, great condition! Was a pleasure doing business!
dito. Yes, I took good care handling the coins. I didn't even touch them when putting them into the zip-bags (used gloves), because looking at old series 1 coins made me realize that in fact the fat or acid or whatever from human fingers will darken the brass considerably over time. One of the coins even has a very clear fingerprint on it. Some might like that kind of "patina", but it's up to my customers to decide that for themselves   (click for larger version)The one on the lower right has been the coin I've been carrying around in my wallet for quite some time. I touched it a lot and gave it to people. I can vouch for the excellent (looks to be untouched as molecular claims) condition of the series 1 coin he sent me. Even 1.5 years old, it has zero tarnish on it. Ditto. |
|
|
|
I've received word that the coins arrived at my shipping location today. I will pick them up tomorrow and report back here  I picked up the coins today. They arrived yesterday here in the USA and were placed in the mailbox; no signature was required. The coins look great! This is my 2nd purchase of Casascius coins from Molecular, and both transactions were as smooth as silk. Thanks, Molecular! |
|
|
|
I've received word that the coins arrived at my shipping location today. I will pick them up tomorrow and report back here |
|
|
|
In regards to fees, we only charge .1 BTC as a fee. The rest is for an ACTUAL delivery fee that domino's charges us or charges ANY customer who would pay in USD.
Wow. $6 in delivery fees from Domino's. What a jip  I retract my comment about you being pricey. I'll definitely use this service again. It was a fun experience! |
|
|
|
Just tried this service. It was only 58 minutes from the time I placed my order on the pizzaforcoins.com website until the time I had hot, fresh, Domino's pizza in my hands. Advantages: Easy-to-navigate site; on-screen invoice for easy payment; fast delivery! And an extra +1 because I'm under the weather and don't feel like cooking, and this service came through in the clinch Disadvantages: A bit pricey (from what I can tell, using this service costs somewhere around $5 USD for "processing fees"). Also, tipping with BTC is still not an option, and it would be nice to see the full, expanded menu. If three changes could be made to enhance my consumer experience, they would be: 1) Allow tipping via BTC (I saw that you are working on this) 2) Allow the ability to relay a typed message to the delivery driver (e.g. in my situation, I wanted the driver to call upon arrival, but there was no text field for me to request this) 3) Expand the menu selection! No wings?  Also, a bug you might want to fix -- when I attempted to click on the on-screen invoice to submit payment, I was redirected to a new, blank tab instead of being redirected to a payment page. Consequently, I experienced a few minutes of panic between the time that I decided to send payment directly to the Bitcoin address provided on the invoice and the time when payment was confirmed via confirmation email. It might be useful to provide a little warning to let users know that there may be a slight delay in the time it takes to confirm payment, but as long as BTC has been sent to the correct address as provided on the invoice, there is no need to worry. If I'm correct, it seems that you wait for 1 confirmation before confirming the order with Domino's. |
|
|
|
This is fucking hilarious. I assure you, I have more than 5 BTC. How much? None of your fucking business, thanks I have 5 BTC in dog years. |
|
|
|
 I'm liking the overlap in the order book. |
|
|
|
|
+1 foggyb
I sold him a 5870 with a loose fan for 4.5 BTC. He was kind and trusting enough to pay up front. I would do business with him again.
|
|
|
|
I'm only buying if it's edible.
You could print it, put some Tabasco sauce on it and well... Yeah, yeah, I know, I saw those commercials too...it'll explode. |
|
|
|
|
I'm only buying if it's edible.
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't this be like comparing someone who decided that the family budget didn't allow them to take a vacation to Las Vegas with someone else who decided to go and won a million dollar jackpot?
In November 2011, people were either in the process of leaving Bitcoin for dead, or seeing how low the price was gonna go before buying back in. Either way, in November 2011, buying bitcoins instead of mining them was a more sensible decision.
I mined for a little while in early 2011. My conclusion was that the initial money I spent on mining gear would have been better spent on bitcoins, but after selling the mining gear and factoring in a recovery of the residual value of the hardware, the net money I spent yielded more bitcoins via mining than buying. It was an interesting experience.
Well, I'd say it's a lot like your analogy except that I doubt that any budget limitations would have prohibited anyone from mining. Mining may not have been profitable for a lot of people due to electrical costs and whatnot, but seriously, it couldn't have been that bad unless some dumb miners jacked their mining configurations. Besides, if they wanted to buy outright, they could have sold their gear for BTC. If people sold their rigs for cash and sold all their BTC, I'd understand that. If people sold their rigs for cash and kept all their BTC, I'd understand that. If people kept mining and kept their BTC, I'd understand that. If people kept mining and sold their BTC, I'dunderstand that. If people stopped mining but kept their rigs and kept their BTC, I wouldn't understand that. If people stopped mining but kept their rigs and sold their BTC is irrelevant |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
