All block explorers will show that.  I personally find Blocktrail and Blockcypher to be very smooth block explorers, but many users will use blockchain.info.
Bitstamp doesn't charge fees for Bitcoin withdrawals. 

However, all professional exchanges set transaction fees themselves (on the actual transaction).  You must not be reading it correctly.  A professional exchange like Bitstamp will most likely set fees of >200 satoshi/byte, often higher, and will have bundled up these transactions into one for efficiency.

You should look at where it mentions the satoshi/byte of the transaction.  Ideally they will have set fees of >400 satoshi/byte, but anything over 200 satoshi/byte.

Post the transaction ID so that we can check.

No cryptocurrency investment is particularly "safe" due to the state of Bitcoin businesses.

Casinos, for example, are extremely poorly regulated and sometimes they can either run off or fail to make profits after a pretty small amount of time.  Even when diversifying some people have lost money in them from not doing their due diligence on the company and its intentions.

Really, you have no good choice.  You could just hold or you could invest in alts (give the top 10 a miss for now, too risky).

Many Core devs are against altcoins.  There's no point cherry picking one person with no actual evidence that he's investing in ETH, and then trying to pass it off as some kind of logical argument.

Don't forget the tin foil hat.

I've bought and sold more GBYTE than that on Bittrex and I've been fine.  There might be some other circumstances causing this situation.

Plus, 0.11 BTC is hardly a "large amount" for them to properly scam anyone for.

Bullshit.  Genesis Mining is a super shady company.

Even worse, their two-year contracts will never reach ROI.  Your mining profits rely on the price rising constantly, because the difficulty takes a long time to catch up with the price when the Ether price rises 3000%, for example.

---

Your choices (all of them poor) are:

-Hashnest
-Hashflare
-Genesis Mining.

If you want to see your coins again, don't do it.  And any site with a referral program offering >5% is a scam or will never reach ROI.

Well, let's evaluate their characteristics:

Bitcoin - long-term security/code, making fatal bugs and other major issues unlikely.  High fees, making it incapable of smaller transactions (for now).  Great for big transactions and safer businesses.

Ethereum - shorter-term support which grew extremely suddenly, making major issues more likely but still not particularly.  Implements smart contracts, and is good as a platform for other cryptocurrency tokens to be created.

The reason that ETH is mainly just a platform for smart contracts is because the fees are also high, just lower than Bitcoin, and it's currently not scalable (plus the centralisation problem, which makes innovation potentially compromise security).  If a cryptocurrency were to replace Bitcoin so to speak, it would be one that actually has low fees.

This is the amount sent overall in the block, with all the transactions in it.  That means that the one with 37,000 BTC in it was all of the 2,291 transactions in the block.

There have been way crazier transactions in the past, such as this one (sending 194,993 BTC a long time ago).

If you're talking about it being unusual that the mean average amount sent in a transaction is a large amount, that's just because fees are very high.  Microtransactions are impractical, so people send large ones instead because Bitcoin is good for that (and very secure).

Simple question gets a simple answer:  because more transactions are being sent than the amount that the network can handle.

If you based it on that, it would be on the assumption that every transaction has to be confirmed while the network is in this state.  That would mean that as demand continues to exceed supply, the amount of time you have to wait for your transaction to be confirmed gets longer and longer.

The point of fees is to prioritise your transaction so that it gets in earlier.  Of course recently this has changed in that you have to pay a fee, but it's still similar in that to get your transaction confirmed earlier it's justified for you to pay a higher fee.

---

Plus, this isn't something that can be implemented anyway because miners are working on a profit incentive.  All talk about this would just be about morals speculation of what could theoretically happen, even when it's extremely unlikely.

True, but it's mainly to do with a consensus.  If a large majority of hashrate and a lot of businesses start supporting a new proposal, it's fine for it to take some time before the code is actually developed.

It's not really an "empty promise" this time, because it's DCG actually telling everyone about who has now agreed on something.

Obviously time is always needed to peer review code etc, but I don't think that any of these companies will be saying "nah, this line of code is wrong, guess we can't support that anymore", when the points are all there.

Changing your password wouldn't do a lot if you have a keylogger.  Often that's the best way that hackers will find your passwords, and they can end up getting your funds out more easily than you'd expect.

Also, you could have used that password/email combination on another site which was less trustworthy, and they decided to try that combination on several major services.

These scenarios always exist and 2FA is the only way to be safe.  Strong passwords just don't cut it, all they do is mean that people couldn't crack your password quickly with a computer.

The UK stance is pretty good - just tax it as a commodity.

When buying it, it should be subject to VAT in the same way that other goods, digital or not, are.

That said, I hugely benefit from governments being incompetent and I highly doubt that HMRC, which deals with UK tax, would be competent enough to actually find and tax anyone who holds Bitcoin.

---

I hope they don't clarify it or crack down on Coinbase.  The longer that cryptocurrencies are basically free without anyone getting prosecuted for tax evasion, the better.

Many of the exchanges are well behind.  The Coindesk price BPI is showing the price hovering around $3000, but the Bitstamp price isn't even $2950, nor is the Coinbase, BTC-E or Bitfinex anywhere near there either.

From most of our perspectives it's still falling short.

I won't be excited until the Bitstamp price has stayed >$3000 for a couple of days without a correction.

Alternative implementations make up more like 15%.  But Core is still the reference client, yes. 

I thought BITMAIN and many other miners/large block supporters would agree with SegWit if it involved an increase in block size and a hard fork?

What changed?

I think you need to read up a bit more on hardware wallets.

They give you a seed which lets you recover your funds from many major wallets (in TREZOR's case Electrum for example, as well as many others), or you can recover from another TREZOR.  When you recover from another TREZOR you don't even expose your seed to the computer, because your TREZOR randomises which words you have to put in, making it very difficult to find the order of the 24 words.

This makes hardware failure, loss or even stealing basically irrelevant, unless they take your seed.  Most modern robbers would only take it because they see a piece of technology, so they wouldn't search for your seed when it's hidden in a bank safety deposit box for example.

You also have passphrase encryption, and you can use multiple passphrases and hidden wallets to protect against 5-dollar wrench attacks.

It's not the most secure thing in the world but for someone who's not very tech-savvy it's extremely good.

The "real" Bitcoin is the majority chain.  But I wouldn't make that judgement for at least a few weeks, because it might not be completely clear how BIP 148 has done for a while.  

Obviously if there's a split it means that BIP 148 starts off as a minority chain, so I'd give it a bit of a chance to see if the economic pressure on miners ends up working.

People who sell one chain as soon as the split happens are very likely to shoot themselves in the foot and are basically gambling with their money.  If they have a large amount they'd be insane to go 100% on either chain, no matter how strongly they believe in something or how bleak it looks for one side.

ETH doesn't really have an "unlimited supply" though.  It has a supply which increases by 18 million Ether each year, beginning with the 60 million from the crowdsale.

This means that the relative inflation rate decreases each year.

Also, due to lost coins the increase in supply would eventually match the amount of lost coins, making the inflation rate approximately zero.

---

The real threat is ETH devs toying with the supply later, since they fork 24/7.  Centralised development is the problem, not any current systems which are intended for ETH.

It would be pretty profitable to start mining in the midst of a speculative bubble or to be mining through one - the reason being that difficulty can take quite a long time to catch up with price when the price goes up extremely fast (like it has in the past few months with Bitcoin and alts).

If the market growth is slow it would probably end up being less profitable, unless the speculative bubble ended too violently and the price went really low after the difficulty went up.

Really, the fee shouldn't be more than 0.001.  With the withdrawals bundled together I'd be surprised if they had to pay more than 0.0005 in fees for each withdrawal.

---

The main reason why they would do that is to encourage people to bring liquidity, but this doesn't actually bring a significant incentive.

Exchanges can get away with some crazy policies now just as a "fee" for being relatively trustworthy.  People don't even care about exchange fees much anymore, just about avoiding the 99.9% of exchanges that are shady as hell.

Because your everyday transactions could be traced if someone wanted to analyse the blockchain.

For example, you sign up to an exchange like Coinbase and you give them your ID.  Then every time you send Bitcoin, it could be linked back to that address and potentially to your identity.

Or, you sign a message with an address on Bitcointalk and your email is public.  Then someone could potentially find your identity through other means.

Any ties that you have to your addresses can be a privacy issue for you.  Even when it's not likely, mixing is a nice convenience when you're not a public figure.

It says this on BITMAIN's site.

Antminer S9:  16-21 August.

Antminer L3:  28th of August to 12th of September.

It's a damn shame that it's so long from now, considering just how quickly the difficulty will be rising to reach the price.