|
You, sir, are unfairly discriminating against the robots and cyborgs of bitcointalk.org. We have but rudimentary image recognition abilities and, although we are able to interpret your post, doing so places great load on our processors. Please use plain text for the bulk of your communication and reserve images for simple messages only, such as memes. The robots and cyborgs of bitcointalk.org thank you in advance for your cooperation.
|
|
|
|
"Offline" means Bitcoin Core had no network connection at the time you tried to send the transaction, possibly because your Internet connection went down briefly, or perhaps because you sent it too soon after starting Bitcoin Core, before it had a chance to establish a connection. In any case, Bitcoin Core will automatically resend any offline transactions once it is back online, which is why the problem solved itself. which makes no sense, since you can see it on blockchain.info (which basically is just a node). Mabye try a restart.
Please read all replies before claiming something makes no sense, especially when there's only one reply and it explains everything. |
|
|
|
|
An input is one of the outputs of a transaction you have previously received. The output must not been previously spent (used as an input for another transaction) and you must have the private key(s) necessary to spend it. The listunspent command will give a list of transaction outputs which satisfy these criteria. A transaction can (and often does) have multiple inputs.
Each input specified will be spent completely. It is not possible to partially spend an input. If you wish to send an amount smaller than the inputs, you must create a change address and send the remainder there (as a second output).
The transaction fee is simply the difference between the sum of the transaction's inputs and the sum of the transaction's outputs. If you forget to make change, or calculate it incorrectly, you will pay an unexpectedly large transaction fee. I forget whether Bitcoin Core gives a warning when this happens; I think it just assumes anyone using raw transactions knows what they're doing.
Do not create raw transactions unless you know what you're doing.
EDIT: Typo
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't mind that you participate and can win the prize. As long as it's fair and you don't get to see our guesses  Problem: he needs to see our guesses in order to administer the contest. There's no simple way he can enter the contest himself and prove he's not cheating. |
|
|
|
The name sounds strangely familiar. Isn't this the same guy who came up with the "selfish mining" nonsense a while ago?
No, he had another paper where he 'invented' a number of long used mining optimizations like elimiating the final three rounds, mining from a midstate, and merging adder carries, and then spent the last half ranting about how the geometric subsidy decline doomed Bitcoin to failure with strange all-caps bold words mixed in, and saying that we must adopt his proposal to adjust the subsidy every 600 blocks, while simultaneously ignoring that we made it through one subsidy halving without incident. Oh, right. There are so many terrible papers floating around it's getting hard to keep track of them all.  |
|
|
|
|
The name sounds strangely familiar. Isn't this the same guy who came up with the "selfish mining" nonsense a while ago?
|
|
|
|
|
Let me see if I've got this right: you bought scamcoins; your scamcoins are now worthless; you're now blaming the exchange for this even though they had no way of knowing the coins would become worthless, no way of preventing that even if they did know, and the decision to buy the coins was entirely your own. Is that pretty much how it went? Quit blaming others and take responsibility for your own actions. You'll get absolutely no sympathy from anyone here until you do.
|
|
|
|
|
The exchanges aren't filling their pockets with your money, you idiot. They're filling the pockets of the people who sold you your scamcoins, because you're literally paying the exchange to make that transfer happen. It was your choice to buy the coins, so you have to deal with the consequences. It's not the exchange's fault you made a stupid investment decision.
|
|
|
|
I would teleport only very short distances, due to the Coriolis effect. Teleporting to the other side of the planet is right out: ______________
/ \
/ < --- \
/ \
/ \
| | | ^ | |
A | | | B / \ | | D
| | | | | |
\ / | \ / C | | \ /
v | v | | v
\ /
\ /
\ --- > /
\______________/
Velocity before teleportation (A) = Velocity after teleportation (D)
But due to the Earth's rotation,
Velocity of the ground at departure point (B) =/= Velocity of the ground at destination point (C)
Result = SPLAT! |
|
|
|
It's like a receipt.
No, it isn't. A receipt is something that the receiver of something has, and nobody else has. Transaction hashes are public record. Anybody in the world can look up anybody else's transaction and claim it as their own. Knowing a transaction hash does not prove you sent or received it, and anyone who assumes it does is not just mistaken, but criminally incompetent. Transaction IDs identify transactions, not people, and should never be used for any other purpose. |
|
|
|
why did you gave high % to 70 USD region? Are you that bearish?
I didn't. I gave <0.1%. But everyone else (except bluemoon) seems to think it's more like 0.01%. Are you really that bullish? where are the participants with green lines for high and low values? haven't seen any? |
|
|
|
Hey, I can make pretty charts, too.   |
|
|
|
interesting, even my conservative entry assumes too much volatility. (who can blame me with BTC's history though!)
This is what it might score in the first month...
Wow. This is mine: Price Score
< $0.044 -5.68 - 0.00
$0.044 - $0.178 +0.29 - +5.83
$0.178 - $0.224 -0.11
$0.224 - $1.256 +0.04 - +1.68
$1.259 - $1.995 -5.98 - -0.19
> $1.995 < -20 OOPS! I get the most points (5.83) if the price falls to between $0.071 and $0.079, with a predicted probability of 0.0900%. Apparently everybody else thinks such a crash is even more unlikely than that. I ascribed the highest probability (20.0749%) to the range $0.447 - $0.501, earning 1.33 points if realised. If the price stays the same ($0.442), as wachtwoord hopes, I get only 0.81 points. I only have a positive score between ~$316 and ~$501
A risky strategy. How many points will you (hopefully) score? |
|
|
|
More than atoms in the universe
That is not correct, not even close. The estimated number of atoms in the observable universe (10^80) is 71 million trillion trillion times greater than 2^160. Molecules? Yes, because the average molecule contains more than 71 million trillion trillion atoms.  I think you're being sarcastic. What's the average for a molecule? 3? More like 2. |
|
|
|
More than atoms in the universe
That is not correct, not even close. The estimated number of atoms in the observable universe (10^80) is 71 million trillion trillion times greater than 2^160. Molecules? Yes, because the average molecule contains more than 71 million trillion trillion atoms. |
|
|
|
I yearn for orange numbers!!!
They are coming in about 3 hours! It's been more than about 3 hours. What's the hold up? |
|
|
|
The quoted price is from Mt.Gox .AvaTrade has released the price difference contract ,but it can not run temporarily .
Gee, I wonder why. |
|
|
|
The direct translation would be "long haired". Basically means it's complicated.
Hairy is the word you're looking for. |
|
|
|
|
Why were you asked for a transaction hash? You should know that ordinary users have no need for that information, and it's only useful in very specific situations, such as investigating why a transaction failed. If you are asked for a transaction hash for any other reason, the person asking is probably doing something wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
