|
You're going to have to provide more details. Bitcoins aren't paid to "servers", and TXIDs don't usually disappear from Electrum.
I noticed that since 2018, it's almost an annual event for you to lose your Bitcoins and open a topic about it.
|
|
|
|
The first thing I noticed when I checked the Robosats' website was a flaw: I opened http://robosats6tkf3eva7x2voqso3a5wcorsnw34jveyxfqi2fu7oyheasid.onion/, then in a new tab, I opened https://unsafe.robosats.com/ (which redirected me to the .onion site again). I went back to my first tab, and downloaded the JSON credentials file. This file had a different token than was shown in my browser. When I reload the page and save the JSON without opening the same site in another tab, the token matches. I would have expected the token to be stored as a browser cookie instead of changing at each reload, but I guess it's a privacy feature. I like how open they are on "don't trust us, use small amounts"! That's refreshing, and much better than just shouting "we're the safest". The Wallet Compatibility Table isn't promising. The 2 LN wallets I use vary from "not recommended" to "so-so", and I wouldn't like switching just for this. It's actually the first time I've heard of a "hold invoice", it sounds like a reservation on a creditcard and I had no idea LN can do this. The thing that worries me most is disputes: "It is useful to send images/screenshots." If you're selling P2P for a bank transfer, it's not possible to have hard evidence, and screenshots can be faked. It gets worse if you buy a gift card that gets cancelled later (for instance because it was bought with a stolen creditcard), used by the seller himself, or you receive dollars from a compromised bank account. Gift cards are pretty good when it comes to this, as far as I know - one of the reason online scammers actually like gift cards as payment method. Amazon for instance charges your creditcard (with zero amount) if you pay by gift card, and can block your account if you try to use a gift card without creditcard connected to your account. So if the gift card is stolen, Amazon won't lose money over it. You will. The downside of SEPA payments is that the trading partner will know your IBAN; however you don't have to disclose your name (if the bank's UI requires it, tell them to input anything at random) - IBANs are unique and completely sufficient to make the money reach the right bank account. Within my country, (some) banks check the account name when making a transaction, and it will for sure show up on your bank statements. That's one reason why I don't like P2P Bitcoin sales. |
|
|
|
Oh btw what method are you using to improve bitcointalk forum readability on smartphones, and please don't tell me to use bigger screen?  I sometimes use my kid's tablet, does that count? On a phone, you just have to keep scrolling. This is when I click on Show/Hide, and I can click few times down and see only Thank You text, second and third line are not shown:  I just checked: Chromium on desktop doesn't show it correctly, Firefox works okay. |
|
|
|
In other words, the minimum number of satoshi you should have in that case would be 434 to be able to send a transaction and have it processed. 140 for the fee and 294 for the dust limit. Is that right? Correct. And whoever receives this 294 sats, will need another 294 input to be able to send it. You're not really doing anyone a favor by sending $0.06 in on-chain Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Are you telling me that if I have just 1 280 satoshi input in my mobile wallet in a segwit address and I send a transaction with just 1 segwit output setting the fee to 1 sat/vbyte it will be processed? So, sending 140 satoshi and paying 140 in fees, being the dust limit 294. You can't send 140 sat. Think of the dust limit as a limit of usefulness: if you'd have a 140 sat Bitcoin input that you want to use, you'd have to spend (almost) all of it on fees. Even if you use the minimum fee, it's useless. The dust limit prevents that from happening. If you want to send smaller amounts, see if you can use the Lightning Network for what you want to do. Here's a faucet that gets you 8 sat as a demonstration  |
|
|
|
what is the best way to sweep a paper wallet from an Android phone? I have a Google pixel 5a. The best way is not using an Android phone. I assume you created a paper wallet to be absolutely sure your private keys don't touch the internet, right? And I assume it has substantial value that you don't want to risk. In that case: sweep it offline, sign offline, and broadcast the transaction after copying it. That means you need to use a PC instead of a phone. It will probably be okay if you just use a hot wallet on Android, but I prefer the "better safe than sorry" approach. I wrote this short guide last year: Online:Install Electrum on your PC. Import your address to create a watch-only wallet. Preview the transaction, Copy the unsigned transaction. Put it on a USB stick. Offline and running without hard drive storage:Get a Linux LIVE DVD. Use Knoppix or Tails for instance, or any other distribution that comes with Electrum pre-installed. Unplug your internet cable. Close the curtains. Reboot your computer and start up from that DVD. Don't enter any wireless connection password. Keep it offline. Start Electrum. Import your private key. Copy your unsigned transaction from the USB stick, load it into Electrum. CHECK the transaction in Electrum. Check the fees, check the amount, check all destination addresses ( character by character). If all is okay, sign the transaction. Copy it back to your USB stick. Turn off the computer. That wipes the Live LINUX from memory and all traces are gone. Online:Use your normal online Electrum to (check again and) broadcast the transaction. Bonus:After moving all your Bitcoin, and once the transaction confirmed, check if you own Forkcoins.
For reading: Topic title style guide. |
|
|
|
For a legacy output, the dust limit is 546 satoshi and for a segwit output, the dust limit is 294 satoshi. But then, if I set the fee to 1 sat/vbyte for that 1 input and 1 output transaction, thus only 140 satoshi, it wouldn't be processed because the dust limit is 294 right? Or am I missing something here? If you have 546 sat on a legacy address, you can send 294 sat to a Segwit address. You could even send a bit more, if you use the minimum fee. This transaction is the best example I could remember, but the input is above the dust limit (and the fee 5 times higher than needed). |
|
|
|
Someone could sell the soul for money Would that be Digital goods or Invites & Accounts? I'm tempted Is there any way do disable or hide this coinzilla ads in Mycellium wallet, maybe with some external app or custom settings that hide ads for all apps? I'm not sure which ads come from Coinzilla. After disabling anything it allows, all I see are the BUSINESSES and FIO REQUESTS tabs, but usually I don't scroll that far. I don't need anything right from TRANSACTIONS (I don't use the ADDRESS BOOK). The FIO thing looks like a shitcoin that somehow got added, and the BUSINESSES has offers like (I kid you not): "Small aircraft. $570,000 (only for Mycelium users)." |
|
|
|
What good is a steel back up if it is buried under 50 feet of rocks and earth Good point, if I wouldn't live in the Netherlands  The flood-scenario on the other hand, is much more likely. Proper redundancy and off site back ups should be the most important thing that people focus on. I agree, but backups out of the safety of your own house also add another risk factor. |
|
|
|
A single centralized register controlled by whom? And if that single entity decides an address is blacklisted, then that address can't transact with any registered business in the country/world? Completely centralized nonsense. A centralized database with information on all transactions sounds like a bank! That doesn't even need a blockchain. Unfortunately, many people are very comfortable with centralized organisations that know far too much about them. |
|
|
|
How many of those who advised saving phrases in colorless ink themselves use such methods? Rampant fantasy? I can think of many different ways to store sensitive data, but I'm not comfortable sharing how exactly I do it myself. I can say I don't use invisible ink though |
|
|
|
I don't know how to use quotes Click the quote button, then remove what's irrelevant and type under it. I use it to run the full node, to help the network. Check how much you're actually uploading: ./bitcoin-cli getnettotals
{
"totalbytesrecv": 29438090096,
"totalbytessent": 101234865671,
"timemillis": 1658816681347,
"uploadtarget": {
"timeframe": 86400,
"target": 536870912000,
"target_reached": false,
"serve_historical_blocks": true,
"bytes_left_in_cycle": 531385000534,
"time_left_in_cycle": 3079
} This is my pruned node. After several weeks of continuously being online, it started uploading more. That makes me think you won't get many nodes rely on you if you're only online for a few hours per day. The download of blockchain and sync takes 15-20 minutes, not a big deal. Is that per day, to catch up on the 20 hours that you missed? That's quite slow for 120 blocks, I expect my old laptop to do about 1 new block per second (with 4096 MB dbcache, and chainstate on SSD). |
|
|
|
This option never worked correctly for me, or should I say sometimes it works but most of the times it only shows first line of text. On mobile, I get the first line only when showing ignored posts. On desktop, it works as expected. |
|
|
|
In my opinion, there is a difference between receiving a payment directly from a casino's address or receiving a coin that in the past has been withdrawn from a casino.
The former is normal business procedure: some businesses are simply not allowed to receive a payment from a casino, be it in crypto or fiat. That's nothing new. Bitcoin is supposed to be electronic cash. If I get cash from a casino, there's no way anyone can know, and nobody is going to refuse my cash for that reason. Ideally, Bitcoin should be treated the same. |
|
|
|
I was very sure what I saw, the mempool flagged it as a CPFP. I used the minimum fee: 111 sat for 111 bytes. According to your link, it turned into 110.25 vbyte, which makes it 1.0068 sat/vbyte. I guess you can call it CPFP, but the 0.75 sat "extra" isn't going to make much of a difference. My point was that it's not intended to be CPFP for all practical purposes. Assuming that the second transaction was child pays for parent, is 0.01sat difference enough to override the parent transaction if the fee should go lower ? I have not seen median fee as 1.5, 1.7, 3.5sat before. There is no "overriding": miners do simple math: they calculate the average fee for "combined" transactions, and pick the most profitable ones from there. With such a small difference, I expect it to confirm together with other 1 sat/vbyte transactions. |
|
|
|
First, this has nothing to do with ChipMixer. Second: I made that transaction It has nothing to do with CPFP, it's just a regular "spend unconfirmed input" (which can go much deeper than just one unconfirmed parent). Second question, if they were both confirm at the same time in the same block, where did the second transaction have his transaction reference from? For it to confirm, it need the previous(reference) transaction hash but seeing they both confirm at the same time is unclear to me. The txid is already known when broadcasting the transaction, that's why you can spend unconfirmed inputs. The risk is double spending the original transaction, in which case the second transaction would no longer exist. But that's not a risk I worry about in this case. I don't know where you got the median fee of 8 sats/vbyte, but at the time I made the transaction, the minimum fee was enough for a fast confirmation. |
|
|
|
System Hardware Specs: Intel(R) Xeon(R) Silver 4208 CPU @ 2.10GHz Core 2 Cores of CPU with 4 GB RAM 1Gb swap and 1TB EXt HDD for blockchain That CPU has 8 Cores. I'd say 4 GB RAM is quite low for such a system. Description of Problem: I am using Biotcoind -Bitcoin Core IDB seems to and gets stuck at Block Height-372235 then constantly shows peers stalling.I have rebooted and changed db_cache-1024. I found some testnet references related to stalling on big blocks, but block 372235 isn't big. The testnet solution suggested to increase BLOCK_STALLING_TIMEOUT, and even though that wasn't the solution, it sounds reasonable. Especially if your system is low on RAM I can imagine it's just slow. |
|
|
|
Is there a way to have a ranking of best user sorted with high ratio? Subtle So you've been planning to reach the top of the Top-merited users list since 2018 Well done, such dedication |
|
|
|
In my opinion, it's fine if a business doesn't want funds that come straight from an online casino for example, as long as they don't call a coin 'forever tainted' if it once came from such a casino.
If you withdraw to your personal wallet and then send the funds to cex.io, they should absolutely be accepted. But then the casino could do the same and just transfer their funds to a new wallet and then use them again. Just trying to taint a coin for whatever reason creates a whole lot of unnecessary problems. Agreed. Coinbase's "you're not allowed to send coins to or from a casino" demands are the oldest form of "taint" I've seen, and somehow the Bitcoin community largely accepted that. As if Coinbase has any business checking how people spend their money. I've never used Coinbase for many reasons, but this adds to the list. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
