Most accelerators nowadays don't do anything but instead data-mine/ serve ads to you. So they gain adsense eligible traffic for no cost at all. (Minus hosting.)

Real accelerators which are free do not monetarily benefit from offering their services other than brand awareness, well, if that's expressible in money at all. (After all, they're allowing transactions with "less fees" to be confirmed.)
(The only one that i know of that is free and which might actually do something is the one from VIABTC.)

And well, accelerators which ask for money... their businessmodel is self-explanatory (if they aren't scams that is!).

Bump:
Fuck this service. As if skimming 2-5 percent wasn't enough, they also randomly failed my transaction and then told me to "contact support", after which they refunded me only 75% of my original inputs.

I would definitely NOT recommend using them. Avoid at all cost.

Yeah, there aren't any critical security vulnerabilities (although there does seem to be a minor crash vulnerability in 0.18), but if you're getting disk errors or whatever, I'd advise you to at the very least back up your wallet, and perhaps try to find out what's going wrong..

If you don't, you might run into a situation where your disk becomes corrupted or whatever. Of course, I don't exactly know your situation, but "disk errors" don't look like a healthy sign to me.

(If it's just a permission error, the solution might be trivial.)

I removed my post because it seemed* that the problem can be solved much easier, although I sorta doubt this now reading a bit more. ( I can't test this because I'm running a pruned node.)

It seems to me that even with txindex=1 you'll just get stuck after using getrawtransaction / gettxout on TXID A. This will just return information on the address/ txid A.

Now you're stuck, because even with txindex=1, you cannot use something like scantxoutset,  (because the input is spent), and you cannot use something like getreceivedbyaddress/listreceivedbyaddress because it only works for your own wallet[1], that is according to sources, (I have not tested this..).

[1] https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/53496/bitcoind-change-to-txindex-1#comment62179_53497

So really, the only functionality that changes by using txindex=1 is that of the getrawtransaction call (?).

2FA using what authenthicator? If you used Authy, you've probably set up backups, read more here; https://authy.com/blog/how-the-authy-two-factor-backups-work/

But i guess it depends.

By the way, this is not a topic for Bitcoin technical support, probably best to move it to Offtopic or something.

I'd say the odds of this are astronomical

You didn't even order a card. I'm not sure what exactly you're vouching for.. That they didn't rob you? Wow, such an accomplishment.

OP, can you make it more clear; do we need to undergo KYC verification before using your service?

If so, there's no way in hell i'm giving you my private information.

I think you'll need to setup a node (bitcoind), and then you can connect to it using those parameters.

You'll just need to sync a full node, configure the launch commands to work with -rpc=USERNAME, -rpcpassword=PASSWORD, port for bitcoin core would be 18332 (for testnet) or 8333, and HOST = your ip (which can be local host if you run the marketplace on the same server?!).

Good joke. Doesn't even load for me.

Oh shieeeet, it loaded. Look at the absolute monstrosity of a waterfall on this thing.


Edit:
0.5 MB later:

They use herokuapp for their hosting. I'm not exactly sure what their plans are, but i think that bandwith is the most pressing "resource". It could be that they offer unlimited plans, in which case hosting something like preev really doesn't need to be expensive, but i can't find any source on their bandwith plans. [maybe related: https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/limits#network]

Not sure. I like it because it loads fast, has no ads / is kind my eyes, and is fairly accurate price-wise.

Perhaps there's some data-collecting on the side , but other than that, I assume so.

It's back!

I do wonder how much they're paying in hosting fees. Sure, the requests are quite small ~ < 100 kb, but still, if you have 10k users "concurrently" (- more or less) refreshing the page with no advertising model... well.. I can only imagine that that adds up...?

I sorta disagree. I think that just wearing a signature for a company that has ripped off it's customers, even if you've denounced said company after the fact, still bears some of the responsibility of what that company did to their customers.

If Chipmixer were to go bust tomorrow, I know i would feel at least partially responsible considering my role of promoting them, even if i've stated the risk of using them multiple times, if that makes sense.

Hmmm. That's very strange. I don't really have a solution for this as I don't understand what could cause this other than human error (edit: or malware!).

I'm unfamiliar with the blockchain wallet, but in electrum you can go to the console tab, and do the following command:

Which returns true or false.

If it's false, it's unlikely the address stems from electrum, and so it should come from your blockchain wallet (?)

(Or, perhaps you've fallen victim to either a copy paste hijacker, or other malware.)

Are you sure both your electrum wallet and your blockchain wallet are synced // connected?

Well... If you want me to actually help you, you'll need to explain EXACTLY what you did, with what wallet, and what actors. you should leave the details out (although it could be useful to know what service you used, it's not strictly necessary.), but explain your "workflow" so to speak.

An example of what happend could be: ""I used wallet Z (example: electrum) to order product Y (doesn't matter.) by making a transaction from address (input) A to address C (the vendor's address), but the vendor of product Y declined my payment and refunded me on address B (or A), and now i can't find the bitcoins!""


Did the merchant ask you for a refund address at all? I'm thoroughly confused.

You can't. Blockcypher is not a wallet, it's simply an explorer, which in it's most simplistic form just shows balances of addresses.

You provided an adress for the refund, right? You need to open the wallet for that address, and if the wallet is somewhat decent, it should be pretty noticeable that your funds are there.

---

If you did not provide an address for a refund, they most likely used the address which you used to initiate your transaction with. Note: If that address belongs to an exchange, or rather, not to you, you'll need to contact the entity that actually owns that address.

(For example, if you send funds from binance, and the vendor refunds you on your binance address, it's up to Binance to give you your bitcoins back. You have no control over this.)

Have you tried the reasons listed in the image you posted?

Try clearing your cache/cookies for imgur.

He should have a seed he can recover from, no?

We're gonna need more info than this.
Are you using the GUI or signing through the RPC?

Is your wallet fully synced? Are you sure you're signing inputs for which you have the private keys in your wallet.dat, yadayayada...?

If you think something is wrong with your wallet.dat, it might be smart to make a backup first, and go from there. (https://bitcoincore.org/en/doc/0.16.0/rpc/wallet/dumpwallet/)

I'm not exactly sure what happend there.

It could be that it were just people spamming threads with a yobit signature because it was in a period where every forum gangster was wearing one. (I'm not sure - i think Yobit had some special signature promo campaign at the time.)

But, they may have been instructed to post there, i have no idea. I'm not even sure what the thread looked like anymore without all the purged replies.


As for the unnamed exchange, again, it could be they have ties to yobit, but their design and site seems at least an order of magnitude worse... Uhh.. anyway... I have never really looked into it - i don't know.

https://bitcoin-rpc.github.io/en/doc/0.17.99/rpc/wallet/sendtoaddress/

It seems you can set a conf_target flag.

Although you should probably first probe a conf_target to see if the amount of sats/b is somewhat near what you want to spend on fees. using for example (https://bitcoincore.org/en/doc/0.16.0/rpc/util/estimatesmartfee/)

I have never used the sendtoaddress command, but it should return a txid automatically on success.

Alternative to this workflow, you can also use createrawtransaction <your parameters> -> fundrawtransaction <use the result of prev> -> signrawtransactionwithwallet <use the result of prev> -> sendrawtransaction <use the result of prev> -> results in TXID.