I have to admit that yesterday at the time I wrote the post I did not check this information - but yesterday I personally accelerated 3 transactions that were between 10-15 sat/byte and all were successfully confirmed. I'm looking at your link now, and I see that according to that data, everything below 19.1 sat/vB, shouldn't enter mempool.

I'm just wondering if the mempool is being cleared of only new transactions that have a lower fee than the one listed - or will all older transactions will be purged over time as well?

I wouldn't say there are any secrets or tricks, I've always been lucky when it comes to that accelerator - and that luck doesn't seem to have changed. Maybe the trick is that I don't always have to solve the captcha - sometimes that step doesn't show to me at all - but the acceleration is still successful - I don't know if it has anything to do with the IP address - something like when you need to solve reCaptcha x times before you succeed log in somewhere - and sometimes you don't have to solve it at all.

For me personally, slide to validate captcha is one of the easiest - and as someone who has clicked a lot on faucets in the past, I can say that I have a lot of experience with all types of captchas

You don’t seem to have learned anything from all those answers you got in the second thread, and you are certainly advised not to invest all the money you have because of all the possible risks. @o_e_l_e_o warned you nicely as well as some other members. Furthermore, you cannot expect to make a profit without trading, unless it is a matter of borrowing your BTC and earning interest - but $400 cannot bring you any significant profit.



I think you sold your BTC for less than $400 and now you think something has been lost - but as long as you keep the BTC in your possession you can expect to be able to sell it at that or even higher price. So you have Bitcoin or fiat in some amount, it is impossible that you have nothing - try to better explain to us what you currently have in your Binance account.

The administration has never interfered when it comes to the amounts someone pays participants to sign campaigns, and I don’t think that would be right. Anyone who wants to promote something can thus decide to pay someone $5 a week or $500 a week, it is up to each member of the forum to accept it or not.


What I see is that most signature campaigns are fairly uniform in how much they pay (with exceptions of course), but that part of the responsibility lies with campaign managers who negotiate with service owners and compete to offer better terms (read lower price). There were a few threads like this, and I remember one campaign manager admitting that he thought prices were low, but that if he didn’t accept the job, someone else probably would.

In other words, if you can pay a max $50 to a Legendary/Hero member to write 25-30 posts a week, why would someone else pay $100 for the same service?

First of all, this kind of drop is always a good opportunity for all those who mostly complain that the price is too high, and there are a lot of them. Secondly, what has happened in China is a very good warning that something must start to change regarding the decentralization of hash power - which means that it might not be a bad thing for the Chinese authorities to gradually make life harder for local miners - whether it is done about denying them electricity, making it impossible for them to sell BTC via OTC, or banning mining altogether in some parts of China.

Only when China is at max 20 hash power will it no longer matter to us what is happening there, and until then the whole world has its eyes fixed on that part of the world because they are afraid of the moves of the Communist Party. However, the situation seems to be changing a bit because according to some data, the largest percentage of mining equipment is sold outside China.

Via generally finds a block every 3-4 hours on average, so if he succeeds with acceleration it won't have to wait any longer than that. They take 100 transactions every hour, and they are confirmed in the next block they find.


Many shares your opinion, but yesterday and today I accelerated several transactions without any problems - I succeeded from the first attempt. I can only share those whose transactions are publicly shared on the forum - example 1 & 2 & 3 - last is accelerated and waits for the next Via block. 2&3 linked to this post.

---

Royse777, the option with ViaBTC is a good option for me - you just have to watch the fee, but I think even 25 to 30 sats would be enough to meet the criteria they require. If you make a transaction, you can try ViaBTC on your own, or send me a link to PM - I will be online for at least another 2-3 hours.

Please stop speculating without any basis, because there is no point in what you imagine - why would the price of 1 BTC drop to only $20 000 in a few months? This is called nothing more than the spread of FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt), and some people who read it may believe you - will you take responsibility for all the financial losses that result from it?

Also this is a board for Bitcoin Discussion, if you have something to say about altcoins there is a forum board for that.

Tetrazepam, check BitMaxz post and adjust fee to 11 sat/vbyte, and then try to send desired amount. If your transaction has only one input (you send from 1 address) and 2 output (recipient's address and change address) it will mean that the transaction will be of standard size and in combination with low fee will cost you only a few $.

The problem is that you would wait days, maybe weeks, to confirm such a transaction - but you can always try the ViaBTC accelerator, which is a bit tricky, but it has been proven to help. If you post the transaction ID publicly I or someone else will surely try to help you with it - just keep in mind not to set a lower fee than the one I recommended.

Francie17, are you located in the EU? If you are then it is possible that your withdraw has been blocked due to the following : Bitstamp To Track Off-Exchange Addresses Via KYC, and in this thread there is a discussion of that stupidity of theirs which at that time was in force only in the Netherlands.

As for Bitstamp, some users say they have always had a fairly strict KYC - and that has gotten even worse since the company was sold. I read some really stressful experiences, here is one from our forum :

Is Bitstamp still a good exchange for trading?

I was thinking more of the use of other types of mass destruction, such as chemical or biological, which could fall into the wrong hands - and it is possible that a nuclear attack with a home-made bomb can happen at any time. States are very cautious on this issue because they know that any attack will provoke a sharp counterattack and that no one emerges victorious from a nuclear war.

You must be familiar with the movie The Peacemaker, so even though it’s just a movie, if anyone had the desire to do it, I believe it would be feasible today. Of course, the question is how to get to the most important components - but given what is happening in Russia - Russian 'doomsday' plane's radio equipment stolen by thieves, I think anything can be bought or stolen for the right price.

The fact is that there is a huge amount of weapons of mass destruction, and that is a huge risk given that there are always those who would be happy to use them against their enemies.

No one should be surprised to receive such a message, because everyone is trying to squeeze into the 100 spots that are offered every hour. There are probably thousands of requests and everything becomes a matter of luck - and I believe that there are those who abuse the whole thing by offering paid acceleration, and then use scripts to try to push in as many transactions as possible every hour.

If you look at this thread, at least 50% and more successful transactions are related to Via BTC - maybe a person has a paid service from them, but I would bet he uses a free service.

Edit : just to show it works


https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/c35881595c6d6d5a53e84afaa866fd934e6f709f7a3bf0e7b2ec6a29bbd0131c

I hope @NotATether will be satisfied in a few hours when the transaction is confirmed

The only weird thing about this story is that they are only now thinking about their digital currency, while some others have been doing it for years. Of course, such initiatives stem from the fear that they will lag behind other countries in this regard, but also that there needs to be some competition to Bitcoin which nonetheless is still perceived as a threat - for the reason that no one literally controls it.

When someone says they want to defeat Bitcoin by creating a CBDC, then it really doesn't make sense - those two are quite diametrically opposed things that have nothing in common, except maybe that they're both digital. When a finance minister says things like this in public, then it is clear that today anyone with good political connections can be a minister - but that does not necessarily mean that he is an expert in the finance sector.

Most countries will have their own CBDC in the next 5-10 years, but it will be nothing but digital fiat - things will not change much between fiat and Bitcoin.

In that case, do not put all the eggs in the same basket, which would mean considering the distribution of your funds in several coins. Apart from BTC, I believe that there are other coins that will survive in the next 3-5 years and bring you a profit, but no one can tell you for sure in which coin to invest - the same as no one can tell you what numbers to pick on a lottery ticket.

As you say, you dream of waking up as a millionaire one day, but to do that you need to buy at least 1 BTC and hope that it will reach $1 million one day - or gamble with some less valuable altcoins worth a few tens of dollars today. Example - ETH in early 2017 less than $10, today over $2000 - BTC at the same time about $1000, today about $55 000.

If only it were that simple then we would be talking about a 100% secure solution for secure cryptocurrency storage. Yet every device of this type has at least two weaknesses.

- a seed that serves as a backup, and which if stored incorrectly (e-mail, plain text document on PC, or a piece of paper lying around) means that it is only a matter of time before the user is greeted by an unpleasant surprise.

- human ignorance that results in typing that same seed into various fake apps or fake websites looking for just that information with the pretext that HW is corrupt or that the user will get a certain amount of some coin if they enter their seed.

Also, not everything is always perfect when it comes to sending and receiving coins through the apps behind HW, sometimes you need to look for alternative solutions through a third-party wallet - an example is Ledger who had problems with DOGE transactions a few days ago, and in this case there were none alternative wallets.

I can only repeat that the best crypto wallet is one in which the user fully understands all its advantages and disadvantages - because how else to explain that every day users of custodial and non-custodial wallets lose their coins due to phishing, fake wallets or cheap tricks like "send me 0.01 BTC, and I'll send you 0.02 in 5 minutes"

I also agree that news like this has a positive impact, because they send a message that cryptocurrencies are a legitimate thing that anyone can use. However, this way of owning a cryptocurrency is not something that should become commonplace since the user can do nothing but buy and sell crypto within an app - and this is very far from actually owning a cryptocurrency.

Of course this is a simplified way that allows anyone to be a part of the game, but the difference in ownership is huge for someone who has a non-custodial wallet and for someone who uses Venmo or PayPal for crypto.

What I don't like at all is enabling BCH trading in almost all services of this type - which in my opinion is a bad move that will confuse many to buy the cheaper Bitcoin - the only luck is that they will not be able to send it to the wrong address as is the case with those who buy on real crypto exchanges.

People need to understand that times are changing and that it is no longer possible to pay $0.10 and get confirmation in the next block because the number of users is increasing, and now we still have a specific situation in China where some miners dropped out of the game (temporarily), and mempool is additionally congested. Of course for microtransactions at this time paying on chain does not make sense - the alternative is Lightning Network, or some altcoins that have very low fees, or they do not even exist.


Yet if we look back we can see that there have been similar situations - so in one short period it took almost $50 to confirm in the next block, and now that amount is around $30.

It is not serious to me that anyone thinks that the risk of weapons of mass destruction is not likely given the amount of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons that will sooner or later be in the hands of some fanatics who will use them. I would move that risk at least in the middle or even further, but I agree that the risks in the upper right corner are already practically a done deal, and it's just a matter of their intensity when it comes to climate and dangerous weather phenomena that everyone can already feel on their skin.

When it comes to hacking Bitcoin, I don't think any option is likely in the near future, and I mean that someone manages to hack someone's private key and apply it en masse - because the technology behind Bitcoin is quite complex - and 51% an attack is an endeavor that is theoretically possible, but would require an incredible amount of money and coordination to perform. I would place that risk in Likelihood less then 2.5.

Ordinary people in China have never stopped investing in Bitcoin, they just needed to replace centralized crypto exchanges with decentralized ones or turn to the p2p way of buying and selling. For the Chinese government, all these years, bans on crypto trading have not affected mining too much, nor has it affected the production of mining devices that are exported worldwide.

Such statements are only in line with what has been speculated about for years, and that is that China is looking for a model according to which it will allow Bitcoin again, but in a way that it will be able to control it to a greater extent. Given that the Chinese government is not one of those who do not understand the potential that BTC has, I have no doubt that they have secretly bought quite large quantities.

On the one hand, if China allowed crypto trading again, it would be really positive and would undoubtedly affect the price - the only question would be how long it would take for a new ban, because they often change their minds.

I personally have never had such an experience, but I think there are several reasons why you got such a message. I think maybe your recipient has flagged messages that contain some keywords (bitcoin, crypto, etc.) as spam - or perhaps a more likely possibility is if you use Outlook as your client for which there are many examples of blocking emails showing that particular warning.

I also found another possible cause of the problem, so try to see if any of this information helps.

From my personal experience, I can say that for the vast majority of people Bitcoin it is still complicated, especially in terms of transactions, private keys, public addresses and setting fees. People are just used to someone else doing complicated things for them (a bank clerk), or taking their card and using it at an ATM or POS device in a store - all you need is a 4-digit PIN - quite simply - or it could be even simpler with the face recognition technology associated with a bank account.


In fact, there is no need for governments to make any drastic moves (at least not globally), because as we have already concluded, people are still not ready for what Bitcoin was created for, and for the most it is too complicated. That is why the best estimates range from 1% -2% of the world's population who are in some way involved in crypto. This is too little to pose a threat to the current financial system.


This is already a done deal, most central banks are working on creating what they call CBDC (central bank digital currency), and China has already conducted very serious tests among the general population with its version of the coin. Libra (no longer called that - rebranded as Diem) is not a coin of the central bank, but of a private company - and it is nothing but stablecoin which did not go well in the first attempt, because of course the FB user base has 2.4 billion users who would directly get the opportunity to use it. Nobody liked that, especially the US and the EU, which were strongly against it.