Whats with that Transaction HASH? i don't understand that at all  Can you explain me about that? if possible. Thanks for the reply  A hash is a one-way mathematical function which converts arbitrary length data to a fixed length piece of data. Hashes are usually unique so they are used as identifiers and for indicating whether data has changed. The transaction hash is the hash of the transaction and is used as an identifier for that transaction; it is also called the transaction id (txid). The txid of your transaction is b29c456635c42d5f71054cefc8a61eae46685daae338c9788b355a60c77558ca. The link you provided is to a block explorer which displays the details for blocks and transactions. |
|
|
|
So, if the biggest miner employer there is decides to be malicious to the system; we are fucked for all eternity?
No. A malicious miner cannot force a consensus rule change or violate any of the consensus rules. There is a big problem with this. I don't even know if there is another ASIC miner producer other than bitmain. (there was KNC, but it is ded)
Bitfury does. Bitmain releases products which don't even work with SEGWIT and he can do that legally without going to jail. How's that going to work?
Bitmain miners do work with segwit. Making hardware that wouldn't is not illegal by any laws. There are no laws governing the policies and protocols in Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
The transaction is confirmed. If it does not appear in bitkong, then that is an issue with them. Contact their support.
|
|
|
|
|
This topic has been discussed multiple times already. Please use the search function or google and read up on the subject.
There are no known ways that quantum computers will break sha256.
|
|
|
|
I also don't understand why don't the devs just add SEGWIT instead of waiting for the impossible. %95 consensus is never going be achieved. Can't they see that? Why chase the impossible and create SEGWIT at all if it is not going to be used at all?
If you are able to change the blocksize without asking anybody, then just activate segwit and end this shit ffs.
The devs have no power over what gets deployed. They are not a central authority that controls the consensus rules of Bitcoin. They have implemented segwit and released it. It is up to the miners to activate segwit. |
|
|
|
What version of Bitcoin Core are you running?
0.13.2 Try using 0.14.0. I don't think it should matter, but it doesn't hurt to try. |
|
|
|
0.95.99.2-testing_win64.exe: Log file opened at 1492164611: C:\Users\Antonio\AppData\Roaming/Armory/dbLog.txt
-INFO - 1492164611: (..\main.cpp:23) Running on 2 threads
-INFO - 1492164611: (..\main.cpp:24) Ram usage level: 1
-INFO - 1492164611: (..\BlockUtils.cpp:907) blkfile dir: G:\blockchain/blocks
-INFO - 1492164611: (..\BlockUtils.cpp:908) lmdb dir: C:\Users\Antonio\AppData\Roaming/Armory/databases
-INFO - 1492164611: (..\lmdb_wrapper.cpp:388) Opening databases...
-INFO - 1492164612: (..\BitcoinP2P.cpp:947) Connected to Bitcoin node
-ERROR - 1492164612: (..\nodeRPC.cpp:150) unexpected cookie file content
-ERROR - 1492164613: (..\nodeRPC.cpp:150) unexpected cookie file content
-INFO - 1492164613: (..\BlockUtils.cpp:1091) Executing: doInitialSyncOnLoad
-INFO - 1492164613: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:169) Reading headers from db
-WARN - 1492164613: (..\lmdb_wrapper.cpp:1175) No headers in DB yet!
-INFO - 1492164613: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:208) Found 1 headers in db
-INFO - 1492164613: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:51) updating HEADERS db
-INFO - 1492164620: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #1
-INFO - 1492164631: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #3
-INFO - 1492164643: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #5
-INFO - 1492164660: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #7
-INFO - 1492164673: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #9
-INFO - 1492164682: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #11
-INFO - 1492164692: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #13
-INFO - 1492164701: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #15
-INFO - 1492164709: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #17
-INFO - 1492164718: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #19
-INFO - 1492164726: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #21
-INFO - 1492164735: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #23
-INFO - 1492164743: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #25
-ERROR - 1492164747: (..\BlockDataMap.cpp:79) merkle root mismatch!
-ERROR - 1492164747: (..\BlockDataMap.cpp:80) header has: 9a6d8750cc8847f72c0c0fe01e079868791308df02a98fe4dc6e0e838f38b87d
-ERROR - 1492164747: (..\BlockDataMap.cpp:81) block yields: 3f13e511dbc811b68e17b15a4c4064252bb63108d427dc6381d3b898a7433c0a
-ERROR - 1492164747: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:353) block deser except: invalid merkle root
-INFO - 1492164747: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:477) Found next block after skipping 269696bytes
-ERROR - 1492164747: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:353) block deser except:
-INFO - 1492164752: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #27
-INFO - 1492164761: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #29
-INFO - 1492164769: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #31
-INFO - 1492164778: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #33
-INFO - 1492164786: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #35
-INFO - 1492164795: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #37
-INFO - 1492164802: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #39
-INFO - 1492164811: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #41
-INFO - 1492164827: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #43
-INFO - 1492164843: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #45
-INFO - 1492164869: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #47
-INFO - 1492164879: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #49
-INFO - 1492164896: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #51
-INFO - 1492165012: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #53
-INFO - 1492165019: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #55
-INFO - 1492165046: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #57
-INFO - 1492165074: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #59
-INFO - 1492165189: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #61
-INFO - 1492165196: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #63
-INFO - 1492165217: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #65
-INFO - 1492165246: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #67
-INFO - 1492165273: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #69
-INFO - 1492165376: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #71
-INFO - 1492165482: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #73
-INFO - 1492165489: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #75
-INFO - 1492165553: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #77
-INFO - 1492165658: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #79
-INFO - 1492165665: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #81
-INFO - 1492165695: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #83
-INFO - 1492165731: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #85
-INFO - 1492165827: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #87
-INFO - 1492165834: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #89
-INFO - 1492165867: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #91
-INFO - 1492165905: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #93
-INFO - 1492166009: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #95
-INFO - 1492166015: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #97
-INFO - 1492166034: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #99
-INFO - 1492166065: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #101
-INFO - 1492166156: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #103
-INFO - 1492166163: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #105
-INFO - 1492166193: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #107
-INFO - 1492166216: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #109
-INFO - 1492166284: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #111
-INFO - 1492166355: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #113
-INFO - 1492166374: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #115
-INFO - 1492166403: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #117
-INFO - 1492166427: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #119
-INFO - 1492166537: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #121
-INFO - 1492166623: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #122
-INFO - 1492166634: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #123
-INFO - 1492166641: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #125
-INFO - 1492166669: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #127
-INFO - 1492166698: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #128
-INFO - 1492166713: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #130
-INFO - 1492166731: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #132
-INFO - 1492166779: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #134
-INFO - 1492166820: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #135
-INFO - 1492166844: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #136
-INFO - 1492166851: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #138
-INFO - 1492166858: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #140
-INFO - 1492166864: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #142
-INFO - 1492166871: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #144
-INFO - 1492166939: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #145
-INFO - 1492166955: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #146
-INFO - 1492166961: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #148
-INFO - 1492166996: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #150
-INFO - 1492167022: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #152
-INFO - 1492167097: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #153
-INFO - 1492167122: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #154
-INFO - 1492167146: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #156
-INFO - 1492167176: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #158
-INFO - 1492167224: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #159
-INFO - 1492167253: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #161
-INFO - 1492167279: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #163
-INFO - 1492167320: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #164
-INFO - 1492167346: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #166
-INFO - 1492167370: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #168
-ERROR - 1492167412: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:353) block deser except:
-INFO - 1492167412: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:477) Found next block after skipping 323840bytes
-INFO - 1492167412: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #169
-INFO - 1492167438: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #171
-INFO - 1492167468: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #173
-INFO - 1492167512: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #174
-INFO - 1492167539: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #176
-INFO - 1492167565: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #178
-INFO - 1492167605: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #179
-INFO - 1492167632: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #181
-INFO - 1492167663: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #183
-INFO - 1492167708: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #184
-INFO - 1492167735: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #186
-INFO - 1492167761: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #188
-INFO - 1492167814: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #189
-INFO - 1492167834: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #191
-INFO - 1492167862: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #193
-INFO - 1492167896: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #194
-INFO - 1492167921: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #196
-INFO - 1492167945: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #198
-INFO - 1492168007: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #199
-INFO - 1492168034: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #201
-INFO - 1492168052: (..\DatabaseBuilder.cpp:268) parsed block file #202
-ERROR - 1492168089: (..\BitcoinP2P.cpp:1037) caught StopBlockingLoop in processDataStackThread
-INFO - 1492168089: (..\BitcoinP2P.cpp:969) Disconnected from Bitcoin node
What version of Bitcoin Core are you running? |
|
|
|
I only installed bitcoin core because Armory Needs it. I don't do and haven't done anything with bitcoin core. None of the wallets has any coins so no big risk I guess.
Check that a .cookie file exists in Bitcoin Core's data directory. If it doesn't, restart Core. I'm going to split this thread and move it to Armory. |
|
|
|
I'm using Armory.
If you have rpcuser and rpcpassword set in the bitcoin.conf, remove or comment those out and restart Core. |
|
|
|
|
That is not normal. Do you have any software on your computer which is supposed to use or try to use Bitcoin Core's JSON-RPC server?
|
|
|
|
I am sorry for that of course, however one can't put OP_RETURN anywhere else except in transactions.
I had assumed you were talking about the coinbase transaction, not regular transactions. Nope, if the period is long enough one can't game the whole world on fees amount.
How long of a period are you proposing? Currently transaction fees make up between 1 and 2 BTC per block. One transaction every couple blocks which pays a large transaction fee (like something bigger than say 0.5 BTC) would be able to make the aggregate fees for one proposal grow larger than the other. There are certainly people who make enough money and have enough Bitcoin in storage who can sustain doing that. |
|
|
|
Can you recommend a better wallet service to use for next time?
Don't use a web wallet. Use a desktop wallet like Electrum or Bitcoin Core which actually do fee estimation and can provide ways for you to actually bump the fee of the transaction. |
|
|
|
That still is incredibly slow if it is a lower fee.
Not really. You are paying less than half of the current recommended fee rate. Although what is interesting is that fees recently shot up a lot. Transactions can be unconfirmed indefinitely. I have seen transactions that have remained unconfirmed for several days before being confirmed eventually. Is there anyway I can cancel it so I can try resending it right away rather than waiting it out which could take a long time?
With blockchain.info, there is nothing you can do. |
|
|
|
|
This is why you need to actually provide details as to what you are proposing. It is not immediately clear to me (and probably other readers too) that you are talking about putting an OP_RETURN output in transactions that people make. Nowhere do you mention that, or any other details about your proposal. If you want to actually be taken seriously, you will need to follow the BIP process and actually detail out and specify the specifics of your proposal instead of making short few word or few sentence posts about what you want to do.
You need to provide more details. Is the OP_RETURN to signal for activation or to simply show support? Is it a vote? Does it require humans to actually intervene and enable a proposal?
Your idea can be easily gamed. It is fairly trivial for people to make transactions and to essentially spam up blocks full of transactions supporting one proposal over another. Each person can make more than one transaction, so this is not really a good indicator of what user support is.
|
|
|
|
Thank you so much for your time in responding! I can't believe I never realized that my transaction leading to the subsequent transactions would affect the subject transaction. That is fascinating. I have always bragged on behalf of my favorite wallet, copay, for their allowance of spending unconfirmed funds. Is this a show of smoke and mirrors? Are they claiming to do the impossible? Thanks so much for writing back!
Spending from unconfirmed funds is generally ill-advised because it can cause situations like the one you are currently stuck in. However, it is not impossible to spend from a unconfirmed transactions, but it also is not as safe or as user friendly as spending from confirmed transactions. |
|
|
|
Your "slow" transaction has nothing to do with the transaction fee and everything to do with the fact that it is spending from a chain of unconfirmed transactions. Your transaction cannot confirm until the unconfirmed transactions that it spends from confirm as well, and that chain is being held up by https://blockchain.info/tx/8f53d15494c71036ffae716e63402d68cf49524f42561b02c226738cc1fba277 which pays a low transaction fee. Also, the absolute value of your fee does not matter, and how that is related to previous transactions matters even less. What matters is the fee rate in BTC/kB, which your transaction sufficiently covers. |
|
|
|
How is it fairly low if that was what was the default was set at? 5+ hours for a transaction is ridiculous.
The default does not mean that it is a good fee. Blockchain.info is well known for having poorly written software and horrible fee estimation (if any fee estimation at all). There are many things which are "default" but are not actually good values for the default. |
|
|
|
I guess so. Make an announcement that 01 in OP_RETURN field is a vote for SegWit and 02 - for Bitcoin Unlimited. Then aggregate fees for each option over a period of time.
And how is this any better than the current system? The current system with BIP 9 for signalling for segwit and the use of the coimbase for BU are clear enough signals for block support of a proposal. There is no need for yet another way to signal support for a proposal, especially one that takes up more space by needing another output in the coinbase. Also, in what way is this a UASF? Users have no access to what goes into a block for signalling. |
|
|
|
|
The transaction has already confirmed.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
