If they can confirm it, then i can go back to him and say, blockchain says you got the money back, if not im going to have to eat the .75
You don't need blockchain.info to confirm that the money was "returned" to him. All Bitcoin transactions are public, so you can simply check his address(es) yourself and see if he indeed has the 0.75 back. Anyways, if you don't have the Bitcoin, then he does, that is simply how Bitcoin works. Bitcoin cannot simply disappear. If you do contact Blockchain.info's support, I highly doubt you will get a useful answer. |
|
|
|
Is there anyway I can get Blockchain to confirm this?
No, Blockchain.info is just a service. They are not the Bitcoin blockchain nor do they have any power over Bitcoin. Confirmations come from miners and those miners are the only ones who decide whether your transaction goes into the blockchain or not. What about if they use his account balance history to determine? To determine what? That he sent the Bitcoin? Sure they might have it in their logs, but nothing can be done about it. For all intents and purposes, the transaction never happened and the entire Bitcoin network doesn't know that such a transaction existed. |
|
|
|
Is there anyway I can get Blockchain to confirm this?
No, Blockchain.info is just a service. They are not the Bitcoin blockchain nor do they have any power over Bitcoin. Confirmations come from miners and those miners are the only ones who decide whether your transaction goes into the blockchain or not. |
|
|
|
Thats what he sent, What should I ask for? thanks
You should ask him to provide you an image that can actually be read. An image that small means he made it that way for a reason before sending it to you so it tells me he is hiding something. An iPhone can take better screenshots than that. Your address shows you successfully received the 0.4 BTC from him but that is it. 0.75 was not sent previously. https://blockchain.info/address/1PYmyVML85i3d2gwjiHx4sPYyzW8XtgKmfIs there any reason it would show .75 and then have it disappear? wheter he sent it or not. Because my account 100 percent had .75 in last I checked before today. Is there a lawyer I can talk to, because I want my account balance history sent to me from blockchain, because I am pissed off No, you cannot talk to a lawyer and that will not fix anything. What probably happened was that the transaction was sent with a low fee such that nodes probably wouldn't relay it. Then over a few days as it remains unconfirmed due to the low fee, it is dropped from nodes' mempools so the transaction is essentially forgotten by the network. The coins would have gone back to the sender as if that transaction had never happened. |
|
|
|
|
What do you mean "second layer"? Are you talking about the lightning network or something else?
|
|
|
|
I was poking around with the ignore user settings, and I found that if you use the "find members" link in the ignore options at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;sa=ignprefs, it will add a name with an escaped newline (\n) for some reason and then updating the profile promptly clears the entire list of ignored members! Also, I found that the admins can't be ignored. They don't have ignore buttons  |
|
|
|
I doesn't matter which branch you push these kind changes to, I merge PRs manually anyways. dev is unstable right now, I'll merge that stuff in once it builds again.
So do I need to resubmit the PR? You can just reopen it. Go to the PR and you should have a button which allows you to reopen the PR. |
|
|
|
|
AFAIK the only legit online wallet that operates a Tor Hidden Service is blockchain.info.
If you are doing things on Tor, I think it is best that you use your own desktop wallet. This is because Tor sites that offer online wallets and don't have a clearnet service are shady at best and are actually most likely scams. Instead, I recommend that you use Electrum if you want a lightweight client or Bitcoin Core if you want a full node. You can set those up to use Tor.
|
|
|
|
|
For trading, are there other decent trading bots out there besides CAT? Preferably free ones?
|
|
|
|
With the growing block size, it makes me worried that only user with large disk space is capable of running a full node.
What's that got to do with blockchain blocks. The blocks in my Bitcoin directory are around 16.5Mb in size. I meant to say blockchain size. Nowadays you can't run a full node with a machine of 20GB disk space, can you? Sure you can. You can have pruning enabled. It is still a full node as it still fully validates every single transaction and block it receives before relaying it. It just doesn't store all of that data. |
|
|
|
TrueCrypt is a good way to encrypt, double encrypt, and hide anything you want and it is also free to use. You could encrypt your entire computer if you wanted to or just a single partition.
It has also been tried and tested, and passed.
TrueCrypt is no longer developed and its developers have apparently taken down nearly everything related to TrueCrypt. luckily it is open source so there are forks of it. I recommend using VeraCrypt which is forked off of TrueCrypt. I think a good thing to do would be to GPG encrypt the text and then encrypt it with VeraCrypt for extra security. |
|
|
|
So no one else experienced the "0.12.0 won't start up" problem like I have? It's a weird issue that only affects 0.12 and I can't understand it.
So I am still running 0.11.2, and I minimized it to the taskbar, however the taskbar icon disappeared and now I cannot bring core up. bitcoin-qt.exe is still running per my task manager, and my node is still up per bitnodes, but I guess I'll just have to wait for the program to crash (like it always does) before I can get the gui up again.
You should probably take this to another thread. Anyways, what OS are you using and what are the specs of your system? |
|
|
|
Can anyone give advice on what i could use to encrypt a text file with my private keys on it?
You can use something GPG to encrypt text. Alternatively, if you want some serious encryption software, I recommend that you checkout VeraCrypt( https://veracrypt.codeplex.com/). VeraCrypt is forked off of the now-defunct TrueCrypt which was one of the most popular encryption software. |
|
|
|
You have a low fee so it will take a while to confirm. People can help it along by rebroadcasting the transaction. Here is the raw hex for anyone that wants to rebroadcast it: 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 |
|
|
|
First of all, please ignore the blockchain.info's confirmation time estimate, it is not accurate at all. The problem with your transaction is the low fee. You are paying a fee of about 9.5 Satoshis per byte. This is not optimal. According to https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ (which IMO is fairly accurate) you need a fee of 40 Satoshis per byte in order to have a transaction that confirms within 1 block. |
|
|
|
Since most node run the bitcoin core client you imply that it does by default reject such a transaction?
I think that it will but I haven't tried on the mainnet yet so I'm not sure. I just did one on the testnet and it went through but testnet has the standardness rules disabled so I can't know for sure if the transaction would be considered non-standard. You can try it yourself with a little bit of Bitcoin and see what happens. |
|
|
|
Hi
Is it possible to make a bitcoin transaction where you would transmit exactly zero bitcoins from one address to another. Fee would be paid however. Are such transaction rejected by the protocol or the miners?
Greets
It is possible, but I think they are considered non-standard. This means that it can be included in a block, just that (most) nodes will reject the transaction and not relay it. |
|
|
|
Thanks. I don't know the script language, but can't you build a script with those opcodes that fails to validate if the opcode is interpreted as a NOP, but succeeds if it is redefined to something else? I suppose that the only redefinitons that would allow a soft fork are of the kind "if (condition) then FAIL else NOP", correct?
Yes. You can see this in OP_CLTV: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0065.mediawiki#summary and OP_CSV (upcoming): https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0112.mediawiki#summaryToday there is a third kind, the dedicated "full but non-mining" relay, aka "node", which apparently has a very distinct role and is supposed to be an essential defense against misbehaving miners and other menaces. And, TIL, needs special validity rules.
No, a full node (non-mining relay) does the exact same thing as a miner when it comes to validation but it simply doesn't produce blocks. The "special validity rules" are not consensus rules unlike the validation rules which are consensus rules. Those rules are called standardness rules and both miners and full nodes have them. The standardness rules are local node policy so they tend to change more often than consensus rules because if something is non-standard it can still be valid. Full nodes are even more important nowadays due to the prevalence of SPV mining. Many miners now aren't running full nodes, meaning they are not fully validating every single block and transaction they receive. The only nodes that do this now are the full nodes and they are what are enforcing the consensus rules because most miners aren't doing it and SPV wallets cannot. These full nodes protect against either major mining screw ups like the July 4th fork and against malicious miners. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
