err... I don't think marcotheminer manages bitmixer sig campaign.

I'm pretty sure it's allowed but is frowned upon. especially when the one who's asking for trust was not actually trusted with anything. I don't think he'll get a negative for that, if that's what you're asking (might be wrong). it looks like that user already got a neutral for that in the past, anyway.

identification is also not a valid collateral. it's written right there on the post Atomical linked.

you're asking a question which doesn't have an actual answer unless you tell us what you want/expecting to get by gambling.


absolutely. this is true for everyone.

there's no reliable way to send a message with bitcoin transaction. unless you wanna use the OP_return script which have a limit of 80 bytes of hex characters.

edit (someone replied with this but the post is gone.):
there's the blockchain.info transaction note, but those notes can only be seen using bc.i's explorer.

that's exactly what I meant by almost zero chance of getting any bitcoin addresses with balance. I was only correcting the guy who thinks that those private keys are fake.

oh. it's 904625697166532776746648320380374280100293470930272690489102837043110636675 page with 128 addresses each btw. far surpasses the 1461501637330902918203684832716283019655932542976 mark. which means that there's a room for lots of address collision (which is even more improbable.).

you think? I know they are real. but the probability of getting an address with bitcoins in it is next to zero.

hmm... I don't see the option to sign a message with and view the private keys of the new addresses anywhere... only imported addresses.

you'll need to be a little more specific on this assisting process. are you going to sell their bitcoins for them or act as a mediator between the seller and the buyer or what?

you'll have to take this to their support and not here. there's nothing much we can do about a service problem. just make sure that you're not hacked. oh, read too quick didn't see that it was just a text error.

looks like china is finished with the quick dump. up we go and fuck finex for the moment.

look at some node stats like this (that's shorena's.). it's a good way to know how much bandwidth you'll be using. if your upload speed is around 400~500KB/s then you're good to go.

give it another 18-40 hours.

it was rejected as double spend because the inputs are being used on another existing transaction. 1FRF1ccWNKFuv83RCcA5G5D2ok4RXdCuy7 should be the change address.

that's a lot of questions.


the size of transactions are calculated "by adding up all the bytes necessary to create the transaction". so it can be very hard to calculate it manually. you can however get a rough estimate by using this[1] formula.


if you withdraw all btc you'll be left with 0 balance. electrum won't allow you to send btc if you don't have enough balance. you can't get negative balance.
don't even know what you mean by "always happen this way"... have you experienced it?


what you enter in the "amount" box doesn't include the fee. the fee is deducted separately from what's left in your balance.
you can view electrum's estimated fee before you send anything by ticking the "Set transaction fees manually" option from preferences. electrum will still suggest what fee you should use even if you have that option on.

---

[1] input*148 + output*34 + 10 . this can get really off-target for transactions with lots of inputs and outputs.

no. afaik there's no wallet around that can do this. shorena might know something about it.

it's not possible signing a multisig address (address that begins with 3.) with electrum or any other known wallets.

what version are you using? and on the second box of the sign message window, does it say address or public key? if it says public key then you are on the wrong menu. nvm there's no sign button on ecrypt/decrypt tool.

I'll stay pessimistic and say no. the price have been going opposite of my mind since it hit $600.