If the scam involves Bitcoin addresses, you can tag a specific address for being used in scams on this site: https://bitcoinwhoswho.com. On this website, if you click on the "Tag An Address" button, you will be redirected on a page where the tagging action can be performed.

Excepting this, if you click on the "Report Scam" button from the top of the Homepage, you'll be redirected on a page where you can also fill a scam report. On this page you have also the option to fill a report directly on FBI's page (https://complaint.ic3.gov/default.aspx).

Practically, by tagging an address involved in a scam, you help the other users. If you fill a scam report, you help yourself.

You may give it a try

Oh, OK, I understand now.


Just need more clarity here: by this, you mean that if a transaction is "forgotten" by nodes, the funds will reappear in the sender's wallet? As of now, that wallet is empty. Will the funds become available in the wallet after a while?


But if I keep trying to accelerate the transaction through various accelerators won't that make it more difficult for the nodes to forget it?


Then it's either I wait for the fees to drop or for the nodes to forget the transaction...

I would need some help from experienced bitcoiners regarding three addresses. I would like to find out (at least) if they belong to an exchange or if they are simple wallet addresses. I tried to check them by my own, using Wallet Explorer, but it showed me some curious results (detailed below), therefore I'm wondering if anyone knows about an alternative tool.

OK, let's see some details.

First of all, I am interested in these two addresses:

1GENmtQhhFhrEKLqV8JRftxYWdCdDxRG7D
1EGNSasgE9uwrok6vviw4Bo7nSu1XgKubY

By checking them with Wallet Explorer (1 and 2), they don't seem to belong to an exchange, therefore I believe they are simple wallet addresses. Wallet Explorer also tells that they belong to different wallets.

What is common for both addresses is that 0.005 BTC transaction which is associated with all spent coins from both addresses. The difference is this: the first address sent all coins together with those 0.005 BTC, while the second address sent funds twice in the same day (to BTC-e and to a wallet (?)) and spent those 0.005 BTC in a separate transaction, but still in the very same day and almost at same hour.

Another common thing for both is that both addresses were initially funded by the same wallet (which is also a wallet not recognized by Wallet Explorer).

---

Now we get to the third address. This one is the address where the 0.005 BTC were sent at each transaction by the addresses mentioned above. Wallet Explorer identifies that those 0.005 BTC transactions were sent to CoinJoin Mess. I don't know what this CoinJoin Mess could be. Could it be a particular implementation of CoinJoin, which has the name "CoinJoin Mess"? Or is it a normal CoinJoin transaction and the "Mess" part is due to the way Wallet Explorer shows these transactions...?

Anyway, now if you click in Wallet Explorer on that CoinJoin Mess you'll see very many addresses. But if we search both initial addresses with another block explorer (e.g. Blockchair), we can see that each time, the 0.005 BTC transactions were actually sent to a single address:

1A8JiWcwvpY7tAopUkSnGuEYHmzGYfZPiq

Now, if we check this address again with Wallet Explorer, it is still displayed as CoinJoin Mess, so Blockchair's result is correct. But now we also know precisely at which CoinJoin Mess address were sent those funds.

Going forward with these 0.005 BTC transactions, we can find something even more interesting. Given the fact that the transactions made with those two addresses are from 2012, in order to identify them, I thought that maybe they were made from a wallet which offered CoinJoin services back then. Therefore I tried to search for old services with CoinJoin implementations, but I couldn't find anything from 2012. Or almost anything. What I found though was a topic on BitcoinTalk, from 2013 (so 1 year later than those transactions), where Greg Maxwell explained how CoinJoin works: CoinJoin: Bitcoin privacy for the real world. As far as I could find, this was also the very first public mention of CoinJoin, which implies that those transactions used CoinJoin even before CoinJoin was first publicly discussed! (Which, if true, I believe it's amazing!) However, in that topic Greg Maxwell stated this:


Which means that although CoinJoin was first publicly discussed in 2013, it was possible since the creation of Bitcoin, therefore it was possible for those transactions to use this mixing. This aspect doesn't bring more light about the "CoinJoin Mess" part, but it's still interesting to read.

---

OK, now going a bit deeper into the rabbit hole named 1A8JiWcwvpY7tAopUkSnGuEYHmzGYfZPiq (meaning the CoinJoin Mess), if you search this address on Google you can find some interesting results (1, 2, 3) which seem to correlate this address with Blockchain.com wallet. Furthermore, I found also an old topic on the forum talking about this address: which address will get the money in multisig?.

Could this be an address of Blockchain.com? Eventually, an address where Blockchain.com collected transaction fees? And if so, could it be that in 2012 Blockchain.com (named at that time Blockchain.info) used CoinJoin? At present, this wallet doesn't use CoinJoin.

If that address belongs to Blockchain.com, does that imply that the first two mentioned addresses belong also to Blockchain.com?

Any technical opinions are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

Topic is self-moderated for avoiding spam.

Unfortunately, I am in a similar situation, having a transaction which is not processed for 17 days already. I even started a thread for trying to manage to have it processed (Is there a miner to manually confirm a transaction for me?), but no luck so far.

By chance, I found also this topic and a post made by odolvlobo raised my interest:


I tried to contact all these pools, in order to kindly ask them if they can process that transaction of mine. The results are the following:

• Poolin

The problem is that accelerator is a paid one, and for my transaction of 109,000 satoshis (0.00109BTC), which represents 51.76$, their accelerator required 68.59$.

• F2Pool

• AntPool

There is no contact section on their website.

• Huobi.pool

Did not answer so far.

• ViaBTC

Their accelerator requires for transactions to have higher fees than mine.

• SlushPool

• BTC.TOP

There is no contact section on their website.

• WAYI.CN

The site is only in Chinese and I could not see if they have a contact email.

• SBI Crypto

The contact form is not functional.

• OKExPool

• EMCD Pool

Did not answer so far.

• NovaBlock

Did not answer so far.

Unfortunately, F2Poll is unable to help. I emailed them and I received the following answer:

---

I had better expectations about the this other proposal:


Thanks! I will try to contact him as well [/quote]

Unfortunately, no luck here as well. neutraLTC is unable to help me, although it seems that in the past s/he was able to help the user from the above mentioned topic.

---

Having this said, I wonder about the following:
- is it possible that after the nodes "forget" about the respective transaction to have the funds shown again in the wallet which sent the funds?
- is it possible for the transaction to be processed at some point in the future, in case fees will get lower?

Rezervat.

Am aflat recent ca a aparut o noua firma romaneasca de ATM-uri crypto de unde se pot achizitiona, dar si vinde criptomonede. Astfe, in afara aparatelor oferite de shitcoins.club, Bitcoin Romania, BitMahavi si ProHash, un nou jucator intra pe piata romaneasca.

Numele companiei este AtmByte si, momentan, detine patru ATM-uri in Bucuresti. De pe site-ul https://atmbyte.ro aflam ca aceste ATM-uri sunt plasate la urmatoarele locatii:

• BANEASA SHOPPING CITY, Sos. Bucuresti-Ploiesti nr. 42D, sector 1 (Nivel -1, zona food court acces din parcarea subterana,sub scarile rulante,langa tonomatele pentru plata parcare)
• MEGA MALL BUCURESTI, Bulevardul Pierre de Coubertin 3-5,sector 2 (Nivel -1, sub scarile rulante,in vecinatatea zonei de acces a hipermarket-ului Carrefour)
• BUCURESTI MALL, Calea Vitan 55-59,sector 3 (Nivel -1, in vecinatatea zonei de acces a supermarket-ului Mega Image)
• PLAZA ROMANIA, Bulevardul Timișoara 26,sector 6 (Nivel -1, in vecinatatea zonei de acces a supermarket-ului Mega Image)

Se pot afla de pe site si valorile disponibile in fiecare aparat.

In prezent, de la aceste aparate pot fi achizitionate si vandute doua criptomonede: BTC si ETH.

Conform preturilor de achizitie si vanzare afisate pe site, informatie care mi-a fost confirmata inclusiv de catre un reprezentant al firmei, ATM-urile practica o diferenta de curs fata de CoinMarketCap de 5% la achizitia de BTC de la ATM si o diferenta de curs de 7% la vanzarea de BTC catre ATM.

De retinut, aparatele efectueaza conversia USD-RON la curs BNR.

Din perspectiva anonimitatii, tranzactiile de pana in 30.000 lei ar fi anonime, conform reprezentantului AtmByte, iar de la aceasta suma in sus ar fi necesara parcurgerea unui proces KYC. Totusi, reprezentantul firmei mi-a transmis o informatie de care nu am mai auzit pana acum si anume: in functie de tipul portofelului din care sunt trimise fondurile, este posibil ca ATM sa solicite uneori date personale clientilor. Cand am solicitat mai multe detalii mi s-a spus ceva de genul ca aparatul ar putea considera unele portofele / fonduri ca fiind suspicioase si din cauza aceasta sa solicite date personale. Acest aspect este unul deosebit de ingrijorator, intrucat practic nu poti avea certitudinea (precum in cazul Bitcoin Romania) ca poti efectua o tranzactie 100% in anonimitate.

Una peste alta, este benefica aparitia mai multor aparate crypto de tip cash-in / cash-out. Compania este abia la inceput, deci are timp sa ajusteze unele aspecte, inclusiv ingrijorarea exprimata de mine mai sus. Ca aspect pozitiv, este de apreciat ca folosesc curs BNR. Comparativ, Bitcoin Romania aplica un curs diferit de BNR la conversia USD-RON, astfel ca acel comision fata de CoinMarketCap poate deveni chiar unul mai mare decat in specificatii.

Daca a folosit cineva aceste ATM-uri sau daca are informatii suplimentare despre ele, este binevenit

Se poate discuta si despre XRP, doar trebuie sa existe si o moneda drept exemplu de "asa nu". Nu?

De ce este XRP un exemplu negativ? Din cauza ca Ripple s-a laudat ca a construit "moneda bancilor". Astfel, intr-o lume crypto descentralizata, menita sa-i ajute pe oameni sa se descatuseze de guverne, banci si alti intermediari; intr-o lume a anonimitatii; intr-o lume in care criptomonedele sunt create prin proces de minerit; intr-o lume care inceara sa le ofere oamenilor control total asupra finantelor lor, apare si Ripple, cu strutocamila numita XRP, ca un fel de oaie neagra in mijlocul unei turme de oi albe. De ce oaie neagra? Pentru ca nu elimina bancile din ecuatie, ci le incurajeaza; pentru ca monedele nu sunt minerite, ci generate de firma Ripple; pentru ca motivul anterior face ca XRP sa nu fie o criptomoneda in adevaratul sens al cuvantului; pentru ca este centralizata, firma Ripple dictand tot ce este legat ce XRP. Si, nu in ultimul rand, pentru ca Ripple a mintit oamenii ca le ofera o moneda, dar in realitate a oferit titluri de valoare, motiv pentru care SEC ii actioneaza in instanta. Cine este SEC? Nimeni alta decat U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, adica, pe romaneste, Comisiei americane pentru bursă şi valori mobiliare.

---

Intr-adevar, multi au mari asteptari in acest moment de la XRP. Asteptarile sunt ca SEC sa-i desfiinteze odata si pentru totdeauna, astfel incat aceasta companie, care a mintit oamenii de ani de zile, sa dispara definitiv impreuna cu shitcoin-ul numit XRP. Eu unul am asteptari chiar foarte mari. Si, probabil, foarte multi alti oameni.

Subscriu la ce a spus kevin. Pe langa ca bancile sunt suspicioase la modul general, BT, in particular, nu agreeaza tranzactiile crypto. Mai multe detalii in pozele de mai jos.

---

Data fiind pozitia oficiala a bancii, probabil ca in curand te vei trezi cu contul blocat si va trebui sa dai cu subsemnatul. Incearca sa nu mai asociezi tranzactiile crypto cu bancile si cu exchange-urile centralizate...este cel mai gresit mod de a folosi crypto. In plus, nu ai absolut niciun motiv sa faci asocieri intre crypto si banci / exchange-uri centralizate. Nici macar cel mai mic motiv. Ca sa nu mai pomenesc de beneficii: pe langa ca nu ai niciun beneficiu, ai parte doar de prejudicii.

Lol


Sincer sa fiu, nu stiu nimic despre acest aspect... Printre altele, cei de la PayPal spun (in prezent) ca


Poate de la acel "currently" interpretabill unii s-au gandit ca este posibil sa ofere si protofele crypto propriu-zise... Si, intr-adevar, acel cuvant te poate duce cu gandul ca, poate, intr-un viitor vor opera o astfel de modificare. Dar cine stie cand si daca se va intampla...?!

Daca citesti cu atentie, e acelasi lucru cu ce citasem si eu. Eu lasasem partile esentiale.

"You will own the rights to the financial value of any cryptocurrency we buy for you." - Propozitia aceasta spune faptul ca detii dreptul financiar asupra criptomonedelor, nu criptomonedele in sine. Mai departe, spun ca ai control asupra lor. Ai control in sensul ca poti decide sa le vinzi sau cumperi, prin intermediul Revolut, dar tu dai ordin asupra banilor fiat pe care ii detii in Revolut, nu asupra vreunei criptomonede, intrucat nu ai nicio criptomoneda. Nu ai cum sa ai criptomoneda, neavand portofel pentru ea... Ei cumpara pentru tine criptomoneda, o tin intr-un cont virtual (adica Revolut-ul are un portofel de Bitcoin, evident, dar acela e al Revolut-ului, nu al tau) si tu poti decide ce faci cu ea mai departe, dar doar prin intermediul lor, intrucat tu nu ai acces direct la crypto, ci doar la contravaloarea lor in fiat. Acesta este CFD-ul.


Ai doar dreptul la contravaloarea ei in fiat, nu asupra criptomonedei. Revolut nu ofera portofele crypto... E ca si cum ai spune (scuze daca pare exagerat exemplul) ca Pi ar fi o criptomoneda, in conditiile in care nu are blockchain. Propozitia de mai sus confirma ca Revolut cumpara pentru tine criptomonede de la un exchange, insa tu nu te poti folosi direct de acel exchange pentru a cumpara crypto. Poti cumpara doar prin intermediul Revolut. Daca achizitionezi, de fapt nu achizitionezi propriu-zis, ci doar dai ordin Revolut-ului sa cumpere pentru tine; Revolut cumpara crypto, il depoziteaza in acel cont virtual la care tu nu ai acces, iar tu vezi in contul tau valoarea in bani fiat a achizitiei facute anterior de Revolut.


PayPal sunt mai sinceri si mai directi, cinste lor Revolut face acelasi lucru, dar nu iti spune la fel de "verde-n fata".

Yep, that exchange in beta stage it certainly looks like an important step.


Excepting the exchange in beta stage, which is just another chance for losing money, let's take a look over the other important steps achieved recently:


1. During the biggest / longest bull run from the entire crypto history, WEBD "manages" to hold its value at under 1 satoshi. Or at a seventy millionth part of 1 ETH.
2. Still during the biggest / longest bull run from the entire crypto history, WEBD "manages" to hold itself outside Top 1000 CMC.Even outside Top 1300.
3. Out of millions of crypto users, and still during the biggest / longest bull run from the entire crypto history, WEBD "manages" to raise the interest of just 1587 individuals.
4. And again: during the biggest / longest bull run from the entire crypto history, WEBD "manages" to reach a trading volume of 2384$ in 24 hours.

All in all, everything looks very promising indeed! And the entire community should thank to the developers, especially to the ones specialized in ninja scissoring! When you have such developers inside your team, your project's success is ensured from the very beginning!

Atentie, aici e o diferenta intre a detine crypto si CFD-uri. Revolut vinde o iluzie doar, similar PayPal, in sensul ca permite achizitia si vanzarea de crypto, insa fara a detine propriu-zis criptomoneda. Mai precis, detii valoarea in fiat a activului (ex. BTC) si nu activul respectiv. In cadrul Revolut nu ai un portofel crypto, nu ai nici chei publice, nici chei private; fondurile crypto "detinute" nu pot fi transferate in alt portofel crypto (intrucat ele nu exista, lol) etc. Si asta intrucat Revolut lucreaza cu CFD-uri, nu cu crypto. Cu alte cuvinte, detii contravaloarea criptomonedei "achizitionate", nu criptomoneda in sine.

Acest aspect este detaliat si la ei pe site:

---

Mai multe detalii despre aceste CFD-uri cu care lucreaza Revolut gasim pe site-ul Asociatiei de Supraveghere Financiara (se gasesc si pe alte site-uri, dar cred ca acesta e cel mai relevant):


Atentie, aceleasi CFD-uri le regasim si la alte firme oarecum populare, care una spun si alta fac, cum ar fi eToro sau PayPal.

Daca doar ai fi intrat la ei pe site (https://ldvbank.com/ro/exchange), ai fi vazut ca acolo poti tranzactiona doar BTC, ETH si eGLD. Deci nu, nu poti cumpara XRP.


In primul rand, la modul general vorbind, nu inteleg de ce ai fi interesat de acest shitcoin numit XRP, care nici macar criptomoneda nu este. In al doilea rand, daca chiar vrei sa arunci banii pe geam, ar trebui sa nu apelezi sub nicio formala un exchange centralizat, unde esti obligat sa iti predai datele personale. Ca o gluma, din punctul meu de vedere, decat sa arunci banii pe XRP, mai bine faci o donatie cuiva


Ai lucrat de pe Revolut ca sa faci ce? Revolut nu permite sa detii criptomonede. Nici XRP, nici alta criptomoneda.

Tare rau stirea asta despre Grayscale. S-ar putea sa fie exact ce avea nevoie XMR pentru a deveni mai cunoscut. Pentru cei interesati, exista si un topic amplu al lui fillippone despre Grayscale: Tot ce voiai să știi despre trustul BTC Grayscale dar îți era teamă să întrebi!.

Pe langa asta insa, cred ca si orice actiune a guvernelor orientata spre sporirea supravegherii poate conduce pe mai multi spre Monero. Aici intra: orice pas in plus spre legiferarea crypto, orice actiune de genul celei intentionate de FinCEN cu privire la KYC pentru portofelele non-custodiale etc. Cu cat oamenii vor simti mai tare "jugul", cu atat mai mult vor fi determinati sa se alature acestei nesangeroase revolutii pornita de Satoshi.

This is amazing! CH, with -7 Trust score (which is also a sort of "achievement"), appears in the list of top merit earners. A few days ago I found that andulolika was in DT2 (yes, the one which made death threats, the scammer, shitcoins shiller, loan defaulter and ban evader). The mentally ill Timelord is accusing theymos.

Day after day I keep finding such amazing news. Is this really the future of BitcoinTalk? I hope not

Thank you for mentioning me again, Coin-1, in this topic of yours! As always, it is a great honor and joy for me to see my name mentioned here! It's been a long run to reach this point, time-wise (although merit-wise I became eligible almost a year ago), but at least I have no longer the Sr. Member rank, which made me feel so old Still talking about time, I have now another long run until I'll reach the Legendary rank. I met the merits treshold a while ago but still, I have to meet also the activity requirement and this means a time probably as long as the time I spent for becoming Hero, if not even longer. I just hope I won't be as unlucky as coinlocket$, which had to wait until he reached 1030 activity points in order to become Legendary.

Besides, the last link I inserted was from a thread which I, for one, found very useful: Legendary Rank up Observer. Unfortunately, this topic of TheBeardedBaby is discontinued. And the same happened with Self-made Legendary Observer, which was another interesting thread. By mentioning them here, I hope that maybe some forum statistician would be interested in resurrecting these topics in a form or another and continue them.

You'd better refrain from offering bad advice in the future...


That's not a reason for trusting it. No house is broken by burglars until it is broken by burglars for the first time.


That should be your very first reason for not trusting a wallet: its connection to a centralized exchange. But, in order to understand why crypto should never be associated with centralized exchanges and banks, you should learn the crypto-anarchic and libertarian ideology which led to the creation of Bitcoin, encrypted communications si privacy at large. Maybe this thread will help you: 12 years later and people still don't know to use Bitcoin nor what it's good for.

The second reason for not trusting / using Trust wallet is that it has closed source code. Meaning nobody can verify its code and only the developers know what's inside it. With other words, you'll have to trust the developers. And trust in any third party is what Satoshi eliminated when he created Bitcoin.


Using the services of a third party and offering your trust to that entity only ruins Satoshi's work. And can make you huge prejudices.

Of course we are active Why wouldn't we?


Lol, thanks!


Thank you, but please be aware that this topic has a posting rule since October last year. Please make sure you follow this format when recommending movies:

Well... did you know about forum rules? To be more precise, did you know about rule 32?

---

At least 99€, like our previous mentor. Maybe even 149.99€.