For just one transaction, you'll end up paying more in fees than without using LN.

Correct.

It's very likely (centralized) hubs will emerge: you open 1 channel with the hub, and the hub has many other open channels. Say Bob <> hub <> Alice, or Bob <> hub <> exchange <> Alice.
As long as you don't close the channel, you can keep using it without paying on-chain fees.

ViaBTC just requires impeccable timing, if you click at the right second each hour, you're transaction is 1 out of 100 that gets accelerated.

Correct.

Altcoins made an amazing recovery in the past month. This little altcoin experiment was already in profit in dollars, it's now also in profit in Bitcoin!

January 4, 2018. Results ↑↓ after 3 months, with 7 months to go:

---

|

|

Altcoin

|

Start

|

Month 1

|

Month 2

|

Month 3

|

Month 4

|

Month 5

|

Month 6

|

Month 7

|

Month 8

|

Month 9

|

End

|

|

1.

|

0.22031 GBYTE

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00562569BTC↓

|

0.00544395BTC↓

|

0.01156026BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

2.

|

210.53186999 XRP

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00596016BTC↓

|

0.00455801BTC↓

|

0.04506645BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

3.

|

0.14729866 ETH

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00612011BTC↓

|

0.00599948BTC↓

|

0.00929455BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

4.

|

34.51676529 PPC

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00586785BTC↓

|

0.01044822BTC↑

|

0.01254132BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

5.

|

8.58611584 WAVES

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00429168BTC↓

|

0.00479646BTC↑

|

0.00711789BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

6.

|

1.24696229 NEO

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00463140BTC↓

|

0.00435177BTC↓

|

0.00853594BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

7.

|

118.6934793 CVC

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00563538BTC↓

|

0.00369493BTC↓

|

0.01046046BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

8.

|

81.32235448 WINGS

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00432960BTC↓

|

0.00441092BTC↑

|

0.00705390BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

9.

|

0.47118564 XMR

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00563538BTC↓

|

0.00817938BTC↑

|

0.01185927BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

10.

|

243.13910553 ARDR

|

0.01BTC

|

0.00682978BTC↓

|

0.01142997BTC↑

|

0.02853967BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

|

Total in Bitcoin

|

0.10BTC

|

0.05492703BTC↓

|

0.06331309BTC↑

|

0.15202971BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

|

|

Total in dollar

|

$433.60

|

$396.66↓

|

$714.94↑

|

$2,203.95BTC↑

|

**4**

|

**5**

|

**6**

|

**7**

|

**8**

|

**9**

|

**10**

|

---

Archived just in case it's needed later.

0.04228 GBB (GigaBlackbytes) from the last Byteball airdrop is not included in the table yet (the value is low).

I'm glad my pick (Byteball GBYTE) is in profit again, but in retrospect (after 3 months) I should have picked my other favourite altcoin: On October 4, 1 XLM (Stellar Lumens) was worth about 0.00000290BTC. 0.01BTC would have bought 3448 XLM. One XLM is now worth 0.00006135BTC, which means this would now have been worth 0.2115BTC.

The big winner in the past month is XRP, which went up about 10-fold and is now the best performing altcoin in this experiment. It has reached more than half of Bitcoin's market cap. In general, I assume altcoins pump&dump against Bitcoin, which means most money flows in and out of Bitcoin, as Bitcoin moves in the other direction away from the pumped coin. If my theory is correct, I don't think XRP can go up much more: if it would be much bigger than Bitcoin, there isn't much money left to pump into the coin.
I'm very curious to see if XRP can keep it's value in the coming months. The All-time graph shows a typical pump&dump pattern.

---

Title change from "Hero" to "Legendary" The "Small" had to make space.

The link you posted shows a link to this thread on Bitcointalk: The Legend of Satoshi Nakamato, FINAL STEP PUBLISHED.... 4.87 BTC GRAND PRIZE!. I suggest you close this topic (bottom-left corner) and read the entire 40 pages there.

Who doesn't have fake Facebook accounts? You could even create a new account through Tor!
I got my XLM for free, I sell some once in a while (a lot more often the past few days!), and I never bought them (although I regret not buying them 3 months ago for a 50-fold increase in value). I know I'm biased towards XLM, their bribe worked well on me

While on the subject: I totally don't get the hype with Ripple (or most of the altcoins with high market cap for that matter). Ripple is a centrally controlled CORPORATION that owns the majority of it's coins. How can this be worth $128 billion now? That means the company owns $200 billion in Ripple, that's ludicrous!

Ripple is a cryptocoin, but that's where it ends. It is nothing like Bitcoin, but just like nobody seems to care that Ethereum hardforks whenever the few rich guys in power need to get back their money (The DAO made them instantly abandon "code is law"), nobody seems to care that Ripple is centrally controlled.
"Banks use it" is not an argument to throw your money at it, it should be the other way around! Banks don't need you to become rich, banks want your money, and banks are very good at making sure they get it!

I wouldn't even be against a centralized cryptocurrency, as long as it's open and public. A corporation that owns the majority of the coins doesn't fit my image of an ideal currency.

I've always said altcoins (and later ICOs and now forks) are created for one reason: getting your money! They missed out on Bitcoin, create something new, hype it, and boom, people start throwing money at them.
By the time the guy owns $39.8 billion dollar, he doesn't care about any of the fundamental reasons to choose cryptocurrencies anymore. It's the 1% of the 1% of the 1% that owns 8% of total crypto market cap!

It's amazing how people just ignore the fact that it is indeed the Mt. Gox guy who has his next money maker!

Take a look at the orange line (Ripple's Bitcoin value) in this picture:

Can anybody come up with even just one reason why it shouldn't crash again like it did many times? Why do people keep telling themselves it must be different this time?

I never understand why people start buying a coin when a big corporation has "some" plan with it. Even if IBM is going to use Stellar, they won't be spending any money on buying their coins, so there is absolutely no reason for the coin price to go up.

I didn't, I failed
I misread 200000 satoshi for 1558 bytes, but it's 100000 satoshi for 1558 bytes. That means 64 satoshi/byte, which means it will most likely take a lot longer than 24 hours.

Yes. The moment you get a confirmation transfering one of the inputs to another address, the original transaction is no longer possible.

That's 128 satoshi/byte. My Bitcoin Core estimates it'll get confirmed within 24 hours (144 blocks).
(see my next post)

User akamy789 copy/pastes some text, then quotes himself and copy/pastes some more. He should be banned.

Copy (the quote is also a copy):

Original: https://btcmanager.com/the-future-of-cryptos-byteball-iota-vs-bitcoin-ethereum/

---

User Mantisa83 should be banned too:

Copy:

Original (or at least one of several websites with the same text): https://disqus.com/by/deepdish33/

Your fee is high enough to use ViaBTC's free accelerator. Submit your txid at exactly 1 second past the whole hour, and if it doesn't work, try again the next hour.

If you can't get it accelerated, you can wait until blockchain.info stops broadcasting the transaction, or use do a double spend with a higher fee through another wallet.

Not so long ago, both Stellar Lumens and Byteball were around the same place at Coinmarketcap, around #20 based on market cap. I remember this, because both were airdropped and both had my attention.
At the moment, Stellar is #6, while Byteball is #56. Byteball only has about 33% left to distribute, Stellar has about 83% left, and keeps a very large share for it's own foundation. Stellar is centralized, has very low fees, a high cost per wallet and hence no privacy in using different addresses, and yet, it has a much higher market cap.
While Byteball went up 4-fold in the past 3 months (measured in dollars), stellar went up 70-fold. I can only dream of Byteball following this path, it would mean more than a Bitcoin per GBYTE, or as many prefer: more than 0.001BTC per MBYTE.
Stellar always had a higher 24h trading volume than Byteball, it's now 450 times larger. But Stellar is traded al almost all possible exchanges.

You have a typo in "walletbroadcast", it won't work like this.
I'm not sure what you're asking here, have you tested these 4 steps already?

At current fees, you'd need to use your entire balance as fee to get it confirmed. My guess is you have about 50 inputs, most of them aren't worth the fee required to send them now.

After you've abandoned this transaction, my advice would be to Enable coin control features (under Settings > Options > Wallet), and use only your largest inputs. Anything under 0.001BTC isn't worth the fee at the moment. Keep them, and use them only if fees ever go down in the future.

Even if it is possible, you're increasing your risk by sharing your seed with different software. I prefer to keep all different wallets in their own VM, and they for sure don't get to know any private data from any other wallet.

The number of new (useless) coins is too big for that. The wallet also needs a server to connect to, to process your transactions. That server needs to connect to many different chains.
The most complete wallet I've found so far is Coinomi (closed source, runs on Android).

---

I only now notice this is an old topic.

Can you give the last output from ./configure, or better, the complete output from all the previous commands?

If needed, you can use script for this.

See if you can buy "credits" in bulk, for example pay $100 at once to be used as you need it later.
Paying small amounts is unfortunately no longer possible, not only for you, but also for the receiving party, they have to pay the same fee to use your $20, meaning most of it is lost to them too.

For your own fees, best you can do is switch to SegWit, and consolidate your small inputs at low fee when you're not in a rush.

Welcome

Now, for some ground rules: if you want people to (be able to) help you, you'll need to give more information than this. For starters: what console are you using, and what did you try to write? Or better: what are you trying to accomplish?

Lightning Network can't exist without miners, and there will always be miners. If it's less profitable (unlikely!), the hashrate would get lower, and the remaining miners would still earn money.

I didn't mean your Coinbase account, I mean the Bitcoin address Coinbase used for your withdrawal. The same address you used to send your payment to again.

Was the address that sent you the coins 1 address with a very high balance? If so, it's likely to be one of Coinbase's own addresses, and in that case they should be able to give you back your coins (if they're willing to do so).

Another possibility is that Coinbase sends funds from other user's deposit addresses. If that's the case, your funds were credited to someone else's account, and in that case it's unlikely they can give it back to you.
It depends on the way Coinbase handles withdrawals.

It's not cold storage if you create the wallet on an online PC.

I really like the other improvements Tony!

Byteball's 24h trading volume is very low, about 0.5% of it's market cap. For many other coins that's about 10 times bigger. I too think the lack of exchanges is holding back Byteball's adoption.