Thanks again!!
Hope it will be confirmed soon!
Did you send the goods yet? If not it might be faster to let the network forget about the TX and tell the person to resend with a proper fee. |
|
|
|
I sold 5 accounts to the scammer.
I am innocent.
Which part of "I sold 5 accounts to the scammer" makes you think you're innocent ? What is the definition of innocent in your dictionary ? You had two accounts already negative tagged for scamming and a accusation was opened against your current account for the same reasons as your alt/neg'd accounts.The feedback is well deserved. All I am saying is that I am not wealthy$ but i feel you have something against me with your harsh words why not pm me may be we can resolve it. I have spent years building these accounts but I maintain that I am not wealthy$ because I have sold the account. All Im saying is that showing 5 incoming transactions means nothing. Please stop wasting our time and show actual evidence of a sale. |
|
|
|
I sincerely thanked everybody that have contributed in making this community a safe place for everybody but as i have said about my accusations, i am innocent of the whatever crime that wealthy$ have committed because i had sold the account among 5 accounts that i sold for the scammer and the screen shot is now provided though it came late but this is because i am not a tech guy. Though i agreed to be punished as meadefreling though i have since then turned a new leaf but i am not wealthy$ and i am innocent of whatever crime he must have committed.  I have spoken the truth and nothing but the truth. I am innocent. Im not convinced, that could be anything. |
|
|
|
Not once a week, but I see similar things on my node. The TX that keep pilling up mostly pay a very low fee, so it could be avoided by setting limitfreerelay minrelaytxfee lower and high respectivly.   |
|
|
|
moved to CFNP Not yet adding them, because it looks like they will have a new thread soon anyway. Will if it helps at all I can go with notaek after this one is spent. Let me know if this is enough for people to get going on this. I've had half dozen people offer management of this so we'll see. fixed Again: they are the sponsors for the tipster competition we are running; they are not the ones running the competition, the signature campaign, or even paying for the signature campaign, for that matter.
But the competition takes place at DirectBet.eu? For me, that makes the thing at least Y/N ( as they are no independent 3rd party), but it's not on me to decide, let's wait for Mitchell/shorena. As far as the signature campaign is concerned, they might as well be: they have no say in who gets enrolled into the campaign; how the campaign runs; what posts we may consider spam or constructive; who gets paid and who doesn't; or anything else really. The only role they have to play here is as escrow, in case something goes horribly wrong, and neither FrueGreads nor I can make the payments to the participants.  Where the competition will then, eventually, take place, is not really of consequence (we could even change sponsors until then - I don't think that will happen, but for the sake of argument). Thanks for making it easy to add them, I changed the escrow to Y/N though, because DirectBet.eu is not independent here. They directly profit from the campaign as well as the event. I also doubt they would sponsor or escrow a similar event that would take place on a platform other than their own. -> http://pastebin.com/A9dW2pVF |
|
|
|
To clarify on the situation: 1) I last used the wallet (created in Armory) in 2014 and worked fine. 2) I tried to open the wallet with Armory recently 3) Repeated attempts at getting Armory to start failed, got it working with BT core, and then after full sync and adding the wallet would crash/fail to launch 4) I retreated and found instructions to export the private keys 5) Imported those into Bitcoin Core 6) I see transactions, but it's confusing to me since they seem to zero out 7) I received one transaction in 2014, sent one transaction later that year, but it seems something else happened. I expected to see .4 BTC minus .02566 Any clues on this? Here's the screenshot:  Did you also export and import the private key for the change address? From the screenshot and what you write it should be 1JQ... |
|
|
|
I want to appeal to all bitcointalk escrow providers. Please stop providing escrow for bitcointalk account sales. It is incredibly unethical and I think we as a community need to do our part to stop this practice, or at the very least not assist those who choose to participate.
Could you elaborate a bit? What morally wrong with account trades that justifies to make these trades more risky? |
|
|
|
The best way to reduce fees no matter what carrier you signed your address to is by making small transactions.
signing a text will make the transaction size go bigger than usual but it doesn't matter if you'd giving fees atleast 0.0001 , size is no matter,otherwise if you'd sending big amount of btc you'll need to increase it No signing a text message will not change your past or future transaction size. You can attach a message to transaction if thats what you had in mind. Any fixed fee you will get accustomed to will also be wrong eventually. 100k Satoshi may sound like enough, but its not if your TX is over 3500 bytes. Size in byte has the biggest influence on the fee, because miners typically sort by fee per byte. The amount of BTC you transfer however is irrelevant. If you dont use a wallet that estimates the fee for you based on the current state of the network (like core or electrum) use something like cointape[1] to see how much a fee you need to pay. [1] new URL: https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ |
|
|
|
Have you tried importing the master private key from your old wallet into the new HD wallet?
Multibit classic has no master private keys, its not a deterministic wallet. The safest way is to just transfer all your coins to the new wallet. There is a step by step by the devs -> https://multibit.org/en/help/hd0.1/how-to-upgrade-from-classic.html |
|
|
|
It's probably some bug in the java function used to display the amount of BTC that was transferred. Nothing to worry about  Why? There are 8 decimal places after the decimal point in bitcoin. Well, just because the screenshot shows that the amount sent of the last heights were rounded down to 2 decimals, but the last block showed 8 decimals... Sounds like a round(int,2) that wasn't applied to the last line or something. I see, I only focused on the first line. |
|
|
|
Why can't the miner use the PoW for the orphaned block to create a completely new block to add to the current longest chain? If that PoW hasn't been used in the current chain, then surely it can be retried.
Part of the data that is hashed in order to find a valid block is the reference to the previous block in the chain. If you change that in an orphaned block the hash is different and very likely no longer valid (in terms of difficulty). |
|
|
|
It seems that if it was never confirmed, then it should go back in the wallet. Otherwise, it's in limbo forever. Is that even possible? It is either sent or not sent.
This makes a good point. Bitcoin isn't "in limbo." At a low level, bitcoin relies on inputs and outputs, so the bitcoin is either in the original "spot" or the next "spot." Nothing gets 'returned' and nothing 'goes back' because it is either in spot A or in B. ;-) There is a 3rd state though when an input was spend and the TX its used in is well known to the network. In this state is difficult to move it from its original spot to a different next spot. Id call that "in limbo" even though its an abstraction of what really happens. How would you solve this problem? Just trying to learn a thing or two  (my wallet has tens and tens of microtransactions, and i'm thinking about sending all those microtransactions to myself with a 0 fee, so when i use my coins the next time, i'll have to pay less fees because i'm using only 1 input instead of tens of them... I just want to make sure i don't lose my coins) Once 0.12 is deployed no node will by default relay transactions without a fee (or any fee below the dust limit). If you want to fuse your inputs you can do so now with a large and old input[1], but probably not in the future. You can increase your change to get a confirmation slightly by rebroadcasting the transaction, but it will still take longer than normal and may not happen in a time you consider acceptable. The alternative is that you suck it up and pay a high fee to get them combined into one. [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1339944.msg13670324#msg13670324 |
|
|
|
It seems that if it was never confirmed, then it should go back in the wallet. Otherwise, it's in limbo forever. Is that even possible? It is either sent or not sent.
This makes a good point. Bitcoin isn't "in limbo." At a low level, bitcoin relies on inputs and outputs, so the bitcoin is either in the original "spot" or the next "spot." Nothing gets 'returned' and nothing 'goes back' because it is either in spot A or in B. ;-) There is a 3rd state though when an input was spend and the TX its used in is well known to the network. In this state is difficult to move it from its original spot to a different next spot. Id call that "in limbo" even though its an abstraction of what really happens. |
|
|
|
If I may suggest a slightly different approach. Instead of dumpprivkey [your bitcoin address here] use dumpwallet filenameThis will create a file with all your private keys you can easily import into electrum. You import into electrum via: File -> New/Restore -> pick a name -> select Restore a wallet or import keys and Standard wallet. -> put your private keys in the box (one per line remove the comments that came with the export) and follow the rest of the steps (set a password, let it sync). |
|
|
|
the best place for you to store your bitcoins in in an online wallet like coinbase. I personally think that Coinbase is the best one for you to put your bitcoins in cause it is fast and effective
dont get goxed with your "best" wallet. using electrum and blockchain. for now. no problem to both and easy to use
I do not use the online wallets. I have a Bitcoin wallet in my computer and I use that to support the network. It depends on individual conditions. I think all wallet need connection internet dude for using it. what do you mean about depends on conditions? certainly if the wallet can be using without internet, I would choose it. because the internet connection in my village, it is very difficult Wallets need an internet connection to get the current state of the blockchain and to broadcast a new transaction, but the private keys can be stored offline. |
|
|
|
Hopefully everything will go back to normal once maintenance is finished and hopefully theymos will explain to us what's going on Actually it went quicker than expected, only 10 minutes. I think that the previous problem should be much less common now. Problems with the disks again? |
|
|
|
i like that idea and i think that it could work
but what if there was a captcha that you had to answer after every x amount of posts
that could eliminate the automated bots at least
This could be very annoying. I don't like this idea. Yes this could be end for most of bots, but i will "survive" if something like this become mandatory. The bots only post 1-3 posts until they are nuked, they have to solve a captcha to register a new account. I dont think its a solution. |
|
|
|
thanks |
|
|
|
-snip-
bitcoin's full transparent encryption
-snip-
What is that supposed to be? |
|
|
|
I just downloaded the "Bitcoin Classic" to try out. I found that when I first load the software it displayed "Bitcoin Classic" followed by the version number and then "(C) 2009-2015 The Bitcoin Core developers"
Who are the "The Bitcoin Core developers" that the "Bitcoin Classic" is referring to? Just curious...
Classic is just a fork of core (a copy with some editing if you will), they didnt write it from scratch. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
