Hello. I am wondering if anyone can help me, i tried mining with my laptop GPU and cant seem to get more than .5 mh/s, but when i ran a speed test i was able to find out my computer is able to run at 15 mh/s. I realize its not a good idear to use ones laptop, but i briefly want to try it just to see what it can do, how it works, to set the hook in deeper before i go out and spend money on building a rig?
Thanks
Anyone recommend any miners i should/could to make things easier, and good starter outs?
Digger
Stop right there... Don't mine with your CPU, don't mine with your GPU... Not even to learn the ropes. Just for fun, i calculated how much BTC you could potentially mine with a server with XEON CPU's and 6 of the best GPU's available, turned out to be about $11/year for running 24/7, power costs not included. If you want to learn how to mine BTC, invest some cash in geccoscience's latest USB miner or buy a second hand antminer S5 or something. You'll never break even with this gear, but at least your hashrate will be high enough to find a couple of shares now and then... A GPU won't even find enough shares to properly register on a pool. |
|
|
|
Hello, I was in a hurry and used the minimum fee instead of the recommended. My .25 btc transaction is still unconfirmed in memory pool. Will this transaction eventually get processed? It's been almost 4 days. Thanks.
The best and free solution for this is to accelerate your transactions via this tool : https://www.viabtc.com/tools/txaccelerator/ but remember theirs a limitation on using that tool. Hope that helps  I agree that ViaBTC is a great tool, but i'd like to see the txid before recommending it... ViaBTC doesn't accept transactions with less than 10 sat/byte, transactions with unconfirmed parents, transactions with dust outputs, unconfirmed transactions whose inputs have been double spent,... @OP: can you post the transaction id? |
|
|
|
It's possible, but i wouldn't recommand buying $5 from anywhere... There are a couple of reasons: 1) you'll pay a hefty premium 2) the seller will pay a hefty fee (and pass this price on to you) 3) you'll start gathering dust outputs, so you'll have to pay a big fee if you want to spend those again. At this moment, https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ tells me that at current BTC price, you'll have to pay more than $1,5 fee for an average sized (226 byte) transaction if you want a decent chance of getting a confirmation in less than an hour... It breaks my heart to say this, but if you're dealing in micro payments, it might be a better idear to switch to an altcoin instead... And pop goes the bubble... This is what I feared. I suppose I have to weigh the novelty of buying $5 in btc vs the reality of buying $5 in btc. I'm afraid so... If you buy $5 worth of btc, i'd be supprised if you could use your $5 to buy a $2,5 item using your BTC... At this point in time, i suppose you'd lose more than 50% in premium and miner's fees... Don't worry tough: i'm confident that in a little while, a scaling sollution will popup, and i hope the fees will go down as a result of this (no guarantee tough, just an educated guess). It's just the wrong moment to start experimenting with micro payments and BTC. Like I said: it breaks my heart to say this, but for micropayments, you might be better off using altcoins... I'm not really into altcoins, but if you picks an old, stable one with a good reputation, it should work for smaller payments... A client of mine instisted in paying in ETH just this week, payed me 0.75 ETH, looked like an ordinary, small transaction, payed 8 cents in ETH fee... |
|
|
|
Some shameless promotion, but my website also allows you to push raw transactions to my own node: http://www.mocacinno.com/page/txpusherBTW: if you want to keep your thread clean, PM me if you want me to remove this message after you've read it  |
|
|
|
It's possible, but i wouldn't recommand buying $5 from anywhere... There are a couple of reasons: 1) you'll pay a hefty premium 2) the seller will pay a hefty fee (and pass this price on to you) 3) you'll start gathering dust outputs, so you'll have to pay a big fee if you want to spend those again. At this moment, https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ tells me that at current BTC price, you'll have to pay more than $1,5 fee for an average sized (226 byte) transaction if you want a decent chance of getting a confirmation in less than an hour... It breaks my heart to say this, but if you're dealing in micro payments, it might be a better idear to switch to an altcoin instead... |
|
|
|
I thank anyone who can help me.
I activated a transaction on electrum 2.5.4 setting as a fee 0,0007 and unfortunately since 2017-05-24 16:00:45 has remained pending as unconfirmed transaction - 5008463c794518e0a108a498d1ccc55240affa0022751b9cac878b66776e78fc
What can I do to unlock the operation?
Sorry for the text translated automatically.
Thank for your attention
Gio.Co
http://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=5008463c794518e0a108a498d1ccc55240affa0022751b9cac878b66776e78fcBoth the problem and possible sollutions can be found in above link |
|
|
|
I'm reputable trader on localbitcoins, now offering a services for people that need to speed up their transaction confirmation. I can provide a vouch services for trusted member  Contact me @ https://telegram.me/josephyapHow are you going to do this on a technical level? Are you going to use viabtc's free txaccelerator, or do you have a deal with an existing pool? |
|
|
|
I already thought about that ... so I learned something for the price of 0.04 BTC
Nevertheless many thanks
I'd still keep my 2 options open tough: 1) if the fee ever drops to a much lower rate (check https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ every couple of weeks), you'll probably be able to withdraw. However, since at this moment, you'd need 0.05 BTC fee when the optimal fee is @ 360 sat/byte, you'd have to wait untill it's @36sat/byte if you want to withdraw with a 0.005 BTC fee (which would be acceptable i guess). 2) if block.io support can help you generate a transaction with a much lower fee, eventough it would have little chance of getting confirmed, you could keep rebroadcasting this transaction untill it eventually gets picked up by a miner (or you could use viabtc's txaccelerator). In this case, blockr.io support does have to help you generate such a transaction!!! |
|
|
|
You really shouldn't need to do a CPFP transaction, as your transaction has already confirmed. Honestly not sure why Electrum is still saying "low fee". Can you right click the transaction, select "details" and just confirm the transaction ID.
Electrum is generally pretty solid, so for it to still say low fee, I'm wondering if it is a different transaction that is "low fee" and now stuck.
Your earlier transaction was: 8ef53c0af0d9e4994f4ca744ab7241acc5b7ead4eaad5e453036d1ef9b40dbcd
please confirm this ID is the same as the one that still says "low fee"
HCP, I checked the ID and it is different?! So strange, I even asked the company that I bought the Bitcoins from to tell me the ID which was the one I posted earlier. Anyway, I right clicked and "details" shows the ID as: 18da4880116c8f13a834f452a97f85d3fc5b4ab78ac22d7a917ad4d3ef9af970 Note: I see that the transaction on blockchain.info is for more than $7,000 but I only transferred 1.5 Bitcoins? the fact that you see ~3BTC worth of inputs while you only withdrew 1.5 BTC is normal, it's basically how bitcoin works. The company paying you used a bunch of unspent outputs they controlled as input for a new transaction. This (new, unconfirmed) transaction has 2 outputs: one output to you, one output to either their change address, or to somebody else that needed to get payed. |
|
|
|
This looks like something you'd have to ask block.io's helpdesk.
Could you post your wallet's address, so i can have a look at the number of unspent outputs, and see if such a high fee would be needed?
I already asked them but they dont reply... and not only once. I try this since one month my wallet adress: 3P1J5Yjruk89BTRKgxSBn3xCMwTqzCj3f9 I was to lazy to count those unspent outputs, but i estimated there are over 120 of them. If you want to create a transaction using those 120 outputs as input, and create one output, the estimated fee would be around 0.05 BTC if you wanted a 95% chance of getting your transaction into the next 6 blocks. So, i'm sorry to be the bringer of bad news, but block.io does have a point... The sum of the unspent outputs is smaller than the recommanded fee you should add when spending those outputs... This is why i keep on warning people not to gather dust amounts... In the end, the fees to spend this dust might end up being larger than the total balance. There's not much you can do at this moment, i'd personally recommend you to wait it out, and hope the (future) scaling sollution will lower the mempool backlog, and this might result in lower fees per byte... If the fees ever go down, you could retry to empty out your wallet... |
|
|
|
Hello guys!
I was thinking of starting to do bitcoin mining with my 8 year old tiny laptop (Asus EEE PC, still functioning only when plugging, battery's out). My room is airconditioned, so it's good enough to keep it cool. I can also borrow my dad's old unused HP laptop, and my sis' old netbook to mine bitcoins together.
I don't know where to begin haha! I'm confused. Should I use Electrum wallet? Do I need to buy external hardware?
Any helpful advice will do. I'm very new into mining with hardware stuff. Thanks!
No, don't mine bitcoin using a laptop, a pc, a server, a gpu,... As soon as you start mining with this hardware, the power will cost a lot more than the profit will ever be... A while ago, i estimated that a server with XEON CPU's and 6 of the best GPU's on the market today, running 24/7 at 100% (both CPU and GPU) would make about $11 a year in BTC (not counting the energy cost)... I've even written a blogpost about this very subject, please read the CPU and GPU section before even thinking about proceeding:http://www.mocacinno.com/blog/is-bitcoin-mining-equal-to-free-money-printing/ Last but not least: even if you have free hardware AND "free" power, and you don't mind spending hours/days setting everything up, you'd need to recompile old cpu mining software, since cpu mining has been removed from all recent versions of cgminer, bfgminer,... Also, if you would pool mine, it would take decades before you even reached the minimum withdrawal amount. Long story short: take a step back, don't do it... |
|
|
|
I need some help with my wallet... that damn block.io...
My balance ist 0.04078 BTC and when i want to withdraw and type the whole balance, it says i have to type 0.03793 so there are still 0.00285 for the network fee.
After i type that 0.03793 in the line the following info pops up:
"Cannot withdraw fund without Network Fee of 0.1017080 BTC. Maximum withdrawable balance is 0.000000000 BTC."
Isn't it a bit too much even when the fees are high at this moment?
I only want to leave this wallet ...
I'm happy for every help
This looks like something you'd have to ask block.io's helpdesk. Could you post your wallet's address, so i can have a look at the number of unspent outputs, and see if such a high fee would be needed? |
|
|
|
Thank you for the response, is that the Outputs and not the Transaction ID (which I posted)?
you posted the transaction id, wich is usually fine, but in this case, it looks like either something went completely wrong when broadcasting your transaction, or there might be something wrong with the transaction to begin with (so all nodes reject it). Like hexafraction said, it might be nice to see the raw transaction, that way we can have a look at it, and if it looks ok, we can help you by rebroadcasting it. Go to electrum, right click the stuck transaction, go to details, click on save, save the raw (signed) transaction in a textfile. Then open the textfile with a text editor (notepad, wordpad, nano, vi, gedit,..), and copy/paste the content in this thread. |
|
|
|
I have a question regarding electrum & fees, since this is the first time i am using this wallet.
While playing with the fees slider, i get 5 different fees for "within 25 blocks", starting from 0.0015 up to 0.0027 and of course there is a final option for 0.003 for "within 2 blocks"
Which one should i choose?
Does it really make any difference if i choose 0.0015 or 0.0027 fees? All are for "within 25 blocks"
Let's say that the amount i want to send is 0.0245 in total, so i guess 0.003 for "within 2 blocks" is a little too much
First, let me start off by telling you that the fee isn't based on the monetary value of the btc that is being sent. The network does not care if you're sending 1000 BTC to a drugdealer, or if you sent 0.00001 BTC to a charity. If both transactions use the same amount of inputs and create the same amount of outputs (amounts, not values), they should have the same fee. The fee is not a percent of the amount of BTC transferred, it's an incentive for the miners to include your transaction into the block they're currently working on. Since the size of a block is limited to 1Mb, it's normal the miners want to optimize their income by picking the transactions with the biggest fee per byte of transaction data. At this moment, the size of the unconfirmed transactions that is kept in blockchain.info's nodes mempool is +100 Mb. Blockchain.info is just one (or a couple of) node(s), so there are probably much more unconfirmed transactions floating around on the network. But if you're saying blockchain.info's mempool is an average mempool, there are sufficient unconfirmed transactions floating around in the mempools to fill 100 blocks... So, if nobody would create a new transaction for the next 4 days, and the miners kept creating completely full blocks the whole time, there would still be unconfirmed transactions left after the 4 days have passed... So, yes, there is a big difference in paying 0.0015 or 0.003. The fee you pay per byte is double when paying 0.003, so you'll have a bigger chance of ending up with a confirmed transaction. If you look at the threads in the technical support subforum, you'll notice dozens of threads opened by users that payed insufficient fees, and now have to bribe miners to add their transactions, try to double spend, RBF, CPFP,... Save yourself the headache and don't cheap out on the fees! If you want a "second opinion" to see if electrum picked an appropriate fee, you can count the number of inputs used for the transaction you're generating, and count the number of outputs, then punch in these numbers in option 2 of my fee estimator: https://www.mocacinno.com/page/feeestimate |
|
|
|
You need to track back through all the Red U's... that is the full chain of unconfirmed parent transactions... until each and every one of those is confirmed, your transaction will not be able to be confirmed (or accelerated).
I think there are like 3 unconfirmed parents...
Just a quick tip: IF the dependance chain is "clean" (no double spends, no dust outputs, no child/parent transactions broadcasted in reverse order, no 0-fee tx's, no really weird situations), it should be in my mempool. If it is, you can use this beta tool to look up the full chain: https://www.mocacinno.com/showchain.php?txid=a871fc14eecbae818a99581af8eeb2cf0173875dd5ebe0a664ff459f1044b8d1In this case, you are correct (didn't doubt you in the first place, just wanted to give everybody a faster way to look up these chains) Transaction a871fc14eecbae818a99581af8eeb2cf0173875dd5ebe0a664ff459f1044b8d1 depends on following transactions: Array ( - => a4f76f6c820e8ed7dab4ab09939d77993c7c7365ca13a56c544937791619d53c
[1] => f55049d3db713b7077bc3a0c7bc33fba22fe49121da8baf4dde78fb6c83a9d7a
[2] => ac9a7e825ddb43f2f26c5018edbba804a97944a882baa1b853f60c29d7b0f3db
)
|
|
|
|
ID: 8ef53c0af0d9e4994f4ca744ab7241acc5b7ead4eaad5e453036d1ef9b40dbcd
Wallet: Electrum
This transaction was confirmed several hours ago, so the fee no longer matters |
|
|
|
|
Could you give me the following information:
- the transaction id
- which wallet you were using to create the transaction (core, electrum, multibit, blockchain.info,...)
|
|
|
|
Sorry guys, a rookie lack of knowledge about how to proceed:
buy the way, by now I am already stuck with 3 transactions,
here are the ID:
78bec0664a95233cab6e9eb0794d355d54b272c529b8c0760c412ec7ac43199e
(since a week, I am the receiver on mycelium wallet)
1fe63dc6f7b5c14b2073e4010884854eb55df986e442e136631d49d145387dc3
(since Monday, I am the receiver on mycelium wallet)
b0de48aafa2855b4f8de2ef095b9162eaf0be1a2136f320675c14dcfe11c4b17
(since yesterday, I am a sender from mycelium wallet to my own Poloniex account)
thank you all for the support
The problems with the fist two, where you are the receiver + possible sollutions can be found here: https://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=78bec0664a95233cab6e9eb0794d355d54b272c529b8c0760c412ec7ac43199ehttps://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=1fe63dc6f7b5c14b2073e4010884854eb55df986e442e136631d49d145387dc3The thirth one isn't even in my own mempool http://www.mocacinno.com/getraw.php?txid=b0de48aafa2855b4f8de2ef095b9162eaf0be1a2136f320675c14dcfe11c4b17The reason why it's not in my mempool is pretty simple... To generate transaction b0de48aafa2855b4f8de2ef095b9162eaf0be1a2136f320675c14dcfe11c4b17, you use the unspent output of unconfirmed transaction 1fe63dc6f7b5c14b2073e4010884854eb55df986e442e136631d49d145387dc3, which uses unspent output of unconfirmed transaction 0a949a42fee77a6c209dbf5c18c7e698b4e7b47979b519f102b9ba6481753d1f Here it gets even worse, 0a949a42fee77a6c209dbf5c18c7e698b4e7b47979b519f102b9ba6481753d1f has 2 inputs, both coming from the outputs of unconfirmed transactions, namely b1c157ed4e6e12ba11900c153befb9862ed9a4be91dd8e92415b95c14de304a4 and 52e912a8877c462bb3ae86956c1a409b0d571751201b80d2595c022f6e952bf7. the inputs from 52e912a8877c462bb3ae86956c1a409b0d571751201b80d2595c022f6e952bf7 come from a transaction which is confirmed... yay... b1c157ed4e6e12ba11900c153befb9862ed9a4be91dd8e92415b95c14de304a4 is using unspent output of unconfirmed transaction 0c6bbfe7300b7311e791838c905a203c3d91b23320a3918a26775fc1986cd1ab , which uses unspent output of unconfirmed transaction 52ab02efe45d1d01abdcaeb0e3e89a7643359671425f77f338a7df40837c691d , which uses unspent output of unconfirmed transaction b465b7df4916a21db3aaa08ea1bfd3618edd9fcee149fd3d01505873675b3a7b, which uses unspent output of unconfirmed transaction 1a1fbd6b5071adf2bc71e2de57c2760b9d9ec27d414635fab516684599f88628 , which uses unspent output of unconfirmed transaction 8527adff4445d4cba6d2e675847b9103a8f17073a2bc9c972f81ac61d8068eac, which uses unspent output of unconfirmed transaction 6811249c8c6a7044dc865149b35eb74fb9771533fcc7a3cb7bcd7a04ea3a313a, which uses unspent output of unconfirmed transaction 579255d487873c66cc0ee2d6e51a092cd881fa7c0cbf89309ef658f800c0669f But the "good" new is, 579255d487873c66cc0ee2d6e51a092cd881fa7c0cbf89309ef658f800c0669f uses inputs which were gotten from the outputs of a confirmed transaction... ALL of these unconfirmed transactions have a fee that is lower than the fee that gives you a 95% chance of getting into the next 24 blocks... ALL of these unconfirmed transactions have to get into a block before b0de48aafa2855b4f8de2ef095b9162eaf0be1a2136f320675c14dcfe11c4b17 even has a shot... I don't know who made all these transactions, but the person that did messed up big time. Your wallet also messed up by using the outputs of an unconfirmed transaction... If all those unconfirmed transactions belong to you, i'd suggest making a list of who you need to pay how much, and doublespending the original input to create a new transaction paying everybody at once, but this time leaving sufficient fees. If all those unconfirmed transactions belong to a thirth party, i think it might be time to contact them and ask them to fix the problem... |
|
|
|
I've already talked to the guy who paid me. he claimed that he didn't spend a double transaction for himself, but these tech stuff you showed me states that it is double spend. I'm quoting his messages: Do you know if there are any similar problems with other wallets or this is only blockchain.info issue? This is making me crazy What about other wallets? Do they have the same issue? or is it only Blockchain only? blockchain.info had indeed issues in the recent past, but most were only "display" problems. blockchain.info is a block explorer (shows transactions) but also has online wallet functionality. Today I've read indeed a post that somebody was complaining that lately some of the transactions he sent out from blockchain.info wallet became unexpectedly double spends. I don't know if it's the same guy, I don't know if the claim is real (sorry, I learned to believe in nobody), but if he's right, other people's wallets on blockchain.info may be affected by the same issue. If you trust this guy and it's not the first time he pays you, give him more time; you don't really have much other choice either... Edit: if he wants to learn, tell him to download Electrum wallet, transfer all his funds there (or import the private keys) and use that to pay you. This way he can chose better the fee/byte and also can send all the payments in one transaction, saving a little on fees. I just tuned in on this topic again, seems like you already explained a bit about CPFP, thanks As for your statement about blockchain.info: i can vouch that i received a couple of PM's from people i've worked with in the past that describe similar problems. Since i wasn't the beneficiary in these cases, i have the strong urge to believe them, and indeed conclude that blockchain.info is doing some weird stuff.. |
|
|
|
It doesn't exist in my mempool either... So i dug a little deeper: 618fd46987cf54d8b61f05408708962fcb60a4a21f574f8a5a01106298f3c5a4 depends on unconfirmed inputs that were generated by 966d9a0be165593850e90e1c42adbfdf1a475b893a617425dfa0eb0af81dca88 which inputs are double spent by a4f76f6c820e8ed7dab4ab09939d77993c7c7365ca13a56c544937791619d53c ViaBTC's node rejects transactions double spending inputs (as does my node), so viabtc didn't have transaction 966d9a0be165593850e90e1c42adbfdf1a475b893a617425dfa0eb0af81dca88 in its mempool (since it double spends inputs), so when it received your transaction it was rejected because the inputs were not in the UTXO set (they were not in the utxo set because the parent transaction was rejected)... This one is actually pretty hard to crack... Can you tell me a bit about what happened? Were this transactions between your own wallets, or did you get payed by somebody? Did you use escrow? Was it a trusted person/service? What kind of wallet are you using??? Yeah I got paid by somebody and he's trusted because I'm paid few times. The wallet I'm using is Coins.ph, and I have received bitcoins from him with this wallet for my simple tasks. This is turning into a big cluster here... Somebody (probably the guy paying you), had an unspent output that he could spend, namely the output of (confirmed) transaction 2b6892629f357dc2ab26ee2d1dcea7c7cf5a6772e40ed1857b55bf57a5c01190 He used this one output to create 2 new transactions, namely 966d9a0be165593850e90e1c42adbfdf1a475b893a617425dfa0eb0af81dca88 and a4f76f6c820e8ed7dab4ab09939d77993c7c7365ca13a56c544937791619d53c... Both transactions use the same input, thus are double spending it, meaning only one of the two transactions can actually ever end up in a block, as soon as it does, the other one gets voided since it now uses an input that is no longer in the UTXO. Both transactions use the same input, but also generate the same outputs, albeit, one of the two has a smaller output to the change address (thus a bigger fee) The problem is that the outputs of both double spending transactions are now used to generate 2 new transaction chains... 966d9a0be165593850e90e1c42adbfdf1a475b893a617425dfa0eb0af81dca88 is a parent for 618fd46987cf54d8b61f05408708962fcb60a4a21f574f8a5a01106298f3c5a4 is a parent for fce42478c33fc984c6acbb0242fec68061f0521f3211db491975549b4bf3e7d1 Addresses receiving funds from this chain: 33gvwFn2qMwCf3FnRBAN3w4eQP5AhVW1SQ, 39UJnWMpVKyegPJxotDZEVrrwGtXcygkB9, 19przVDzBdPYCUeqfEKACmWTRinNgDReCS AAAAND a4f76f6c820e8ed7dab4ab09939d77993c7c7365ca13a56c544937791619d53c is a parent for f55049d3db713b7077bc3a0c7bc33fba22fe49121da8baf4dde78fb6c83a9d7 Addresses receiving funds from this chain: 33gvwFn2qMwCf3FnRBAN3w4eQP5AhVW1SQ, 3Lvd22fLHeari3VqHZjVcT4DHHJRTY4bAR One of these chains is going to get voided sooner or later, and everybody payed by the voided chain will be a victim... It's pretty hard to predict which chain will get voided. Your possible sollutions are rather minimal... You could contact the guy paying you and point out the problem or you could try a CPFP, altough i have no idear how to do this with an online wallet (like coin.ph). I don't think a lot of miners will be able to help you... Since most of the transactions had a sub-standard fee, you might get lucky if both transactions get dropped from the mempool of most nodes before a miner decides to put them into the block he/she is working on. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
