yes, if you re-use the same unspent outputs as you used for the stuck transaction and broadcast the new (double spending) transaction, there is a reasonable chance it will confirm before the stuck transaction... The only problem seems to be that a lot of nodes reject the new transaction, but you shouldn't worry about this.


Only one input, sequence = 4294967295, so this one wasn't opt-in RBF

Just back up the seed words you got when creating a new wallet, that's all you ever need
Disabling the change addresses shouldn't have any impact on the ability to restore your wallet from seed.

I just wanted to add one last thing: it seems like you (the OP), are a bit confused on the topic of fees.
Electrum doesn't charge any fees* to send BTC on their network, neither does core, neither does blockchain.info (as far as i know).
There is one network, different wallet clients that help you keeping track of your outputs, create transactions, sign messages,... All these wallets should use the same network, the same ledger, the same protocol,... (unless you're talking about altcoins)

YOU use unspent outputs as input for a new transaction, the difference between the sum of the inputs and sum of the outputs is the fee. The fee is payed to the miner that mines the block that includes your transaction. The higher the fee per byte of transaction data, the better the odds will be that a miner will pick your transaction to be added to the block he's currently working on.

Altough some wallets have a built-in security, there are a lot of wallets that will allow you to create 0 fee transactions, but your chances of getting those ones in a block are very small.
There also used to be some wallets that did charge a fee (like the old multibit HD), but i think most of them have stopped this practice.

* PS: electrum works together with a 2FA provider that does charge a fee, so if you enable 2FA in electrum, you might have to pay a per-transaction fee (afaik)

No,
It's an SPV wallet, it only downloads the block headers (it should only take a couple of minutes).

I would also recommend either electrum, or bitcoin core... Both have a paytomany (sendmany in core) function. The upside from core would be that your wallet actually downloads and verifies every block, so you're also helping the network... It can also signal something (in case you have a "political" opinion on the current blocksize debate).
The upside of electrum would be that it's SPV and HD (altough more recent versions of core are also HD)

I'll push it to viaBTC in 37 minutes.


EDIT: tx pushed, it should be in the next block viaBTC mines (can take a couple of hours)
If you want to learn what went wrong, you can visit this link: https://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=277cec10ae67695104bad347ef522aa9a05344d3f3204a30c518fb98c7eae985

here you go: https://localbitcoins.com/country/MY

LN is running on testnet4 of litecoin... I did a testsetup a couple weeks ago... Got it running (more or less). Just for fun, see if it would do something.
Ran https://github.com/ltcsuite/ltcd on the testnet, then ran https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd
 

That is correct, altough if you want more info about ETH mining, you might want to start a topic in the correct subforum (altcoin mining).
Good luck!

Correct me if i'm wrong, but 130-190 Mh/s seems like you're trying to GPU mine?
I'm afraid to tell you that GPU mining is a thing of the past... If you own a GPU mining farm, i'd suggest browsing the altcoin mining subforum, and find a suitable altcoin to mine with your GPU, mining Bitcoin with a GPU will actually cost you money (in power costs).

Wait... Where did you get ETH?
You are using the BTC mining calculator, and you're looking at the BTC ASIC's list. You cannot mine ETH using sha256d miners (those ones are only suitable for sha256d coins like bitcoin).

It just looks like you're mixing up everything... You filled in values that seem to be consistent to an S9, but the price and block reward are those of ETH (at least, that's what i think, i didn't bother to check).

quoted, verified locally using electrum 2.8.2

HCP gave 2 of the best links... You can also use my fee estimator, it'll help you guestimating a fee that is appropriate for the transaction you're currently making, without having to know how to calculate transaction sizes
http://www.mocacinno.com/page/feeestimate

Yes, theoretically it is. Some people created an app for android which you could potentially use to mine for BTC and some other crypto currencies.
However, if you start running them, your phone will overheat in a matter of minutes, significantly reducing the lifespan of your mobile device, consuming a lot of power while generating fractions of a dollarcent per year.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Non-specialized_hardware_comparison#ARM

An A9 generates 1.3 Mh/s:
https://www.coinwarz.com/calculators/bitcoin-mining-calculator/?h=0.0012&p=1&pc=0.00&pf=1&d=678760110082.99000000&r=12.50000000&er=2964.75000000&hc=0.00

At current diff and block reward, you'd get 16 satoshi's per year (~0.0004622 USD at current BTC price)... given that you're able to find a single share that year (not guaranteed)

I don't quite get your question here...
Are you asking about mining on your mobile (short answer: VERY, very bad idear).
OR
Are you asking about controlling your farm from your mobile phone (this depends on your specific setup, IMHO, more info is needed)
OR
Are you asking about buying cloud mining hashrate (short answer: bad idear)
OR
Are you asking something else?

have you read the big post i made above? The transaction itself had loads of unconfirmed parents, that was the problem. I fixed those parents by submitting the ones that had problems to antpool and/or viaBTC. After the parent was confirmed, i re-broadcasted the unconfirmed children so they would be in the mempool of the mining nodes. If the children didn't have problems, other pools picked them up, if they had problems i used andpool or viabtc.
As soon as all parents were confirmed, F2Pool picked up the transaction posted by the OP.


Yes, antpool has a gui for adding transactions, it's free, but AFAIK, it's not public knowledge, so i don't think i can share the url freely...

must be a typo... If you type in

The reply should be either nothing or true... If the reply is true, the private key for 1EUokf7oC6e46PAknY18H2Fd4nb6EAvP8e is managed by your wallet, and everything should be ok.

For example, in my console, i checked if i helt your private key, and then i checked if i helt my own key:

any other replies should point to a typo when entering the ismine statement...

BTW: you posted an electrum question in the multibit subforum, it might be nice if you moved it to the correct subforum

this thread should answer your question:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1491627.0

You haven't given us your tx id (that's not a real problem), it does mean i cannot check when i received your transaction on my node.
You can look up your transaction on blockchain.info, and see at what time their node received your transaction. If they received it just now, it means your wallet indeed rebroadcasted it.

This is only a guess, but AFAIK, xapo was popupal amongst faucet users and PTC'ers... Since they didn't have to pay a fee to spend their outputs, i can only imagine a lot of people used xapo to send dust outputs to.
If this is still the case, xapo must have loads and loads of dust outputs, so if they have to combine a bunch of dust to create reasonable sized transaction outputs, the average size of xapo withdrawal transactions would be above-average, explaining the higher fees.

Once again: this is a guess, one of the possible theories...

I'm afraid it isn't your wallet... The conflicting transaction was found on my mempool, and the mempool of all other nodes i tried to broadcast your transaction to, so it's fair to say that most of the current network probably has a conflicting transaction in it's mempool...

So, yes, you can abandon the transaction, but you should wait at least 72 hours after the conflicting transaction was broadcasted before re-using the outputs to create a new transaction (default setting for nodes is to drop an unconfirmed tx after 72 hours).
If, in the meantime, the conflicting transaction makes it into a block, the outputs used for this transaction will be removed from the UTXO, and if your wallet remains sync'ed you'll be able to use the leftover outputs (if any).

So, to summarise:
- you can abandon the transaction
- then wait at least 72 hours
- then make sure your wallet is synchronised
- then try to use any leftover outputs (funds) to create a new transaction

This should work... I hope... Good luck!