Well... I see you're stilling calling it "freshly minted coins"... Eventough i tought we established that this was not the case... You even partially agreed to this when you said:


But now it seems you're once again saying that these coins were actually coinbase rewards (freshly minted coins) after i actually gave proof that the one trustworthy person who tried your service and was completely open when sharing tx-id's only received 0,000000000000000019% "freshly minted coins" when looking at the 5000 closest "parent" transactions...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5314083.msg56313687#msg56313687

Good luck with finding a campaign manager tough.

I don't have the mobile version on my phone anymore, so i can't try it out for myself, but i'm wondering if you're on the correct tab inside electrum mobile.

When you create a transaction you should not end up creating an invoice... But i'm going to step out of this thread so people that do have the mobile version installed could give you some pointers.

Wait... One step back here... You were the one creating invoices? Did you give the address to the person you were invoicing?

https://blockstream.info/address/bc1qsz45xhr97hwprsczylerpl6z52cxa957arqa0t
https://blockstream.info/address/1M2YPQ4kSBfbDmuSNte88JMpjZXCmGfJep

The legacy address (1M2YPQ4kSBfbDmuSNte88JMpjZXCmGfJep) seems to have been used about a year ago... Are you sure it's yours?

Neither of the addresses were funded recently, it seems there are no unconfirmed transaction funding either of these addresses in the mempool.

So, you created a invoice, can you walk me trough what you did next?

By the way: you don't need to create invoices to receive funds... An invoice is a concept that only exists inside your wallet... All you need to do to receive funds is generate an address and give it to the sender.

The stats you're looking at are probably not for the same algorithm/coin...

Some algorithms (like sha256d or scrypt) require an ASIC. If you'd mine those with a GPU you'd earn nothing (since the difficulty for coins using sha256d or scrypt has been pushed sky-high by people running ASICs). Other algorithms don't have ASIC's, those ones can probably be mined using a GPU.

It's also possible you're looking at a page from 2010 and comparing it with a page written in 2020... Years ago, bitcoin was only mined using a CPU, if you were one of the first GPU miners your hashrate would have been really good compared to the CPU miners back then, but it would be neglectible compared to an ASIC's hashrate right now.

Don't compare apples with oranges...

If you'd share the address that was shown to you (the address you wanted to fund) we might be able to work backwards from there... Do realise that sharing an address like this might hurt your privacy (not your security, only your privacy).

With the info you provided, it's impossible to tell what's going wrong.

If i had to guess, i'd say the chances are reasonably high you're not using a sufficiently high feerate.

If you want to find out if this guess is correct, you'll need to provide a lot more details: which feerate are you using, what's the txid (posting txid's and addresses decreases your privacy, but not your wallet security), which payment provider is issuing an invoice,...

Paying an invoice shouldn't be that hard. If you're spending outputs from confirmed transactions, using a decent fee and there's nothing wrong with your connection, the average waiting time *could* be as low as ~5 minutes.

Well, on a technical level there is no "need". Labels are for your accounting purposes only, it's completely irrelevant (and unknown) for the rest of the network.

Personally, i'd rather not have my labels saved on any external server, eventough the encryption seems good (at first sight). It's nobody's business if i created an address to receive payments from Bob, or if i used transaction with txid "x" to pay Alice for a certain service. If those labels are important to me, it's up to me to backup them regularly.

That would be a fun project idear: a personal electrum label synchronisation server... Run a little deamon on your vps to synchronise your labels on all your machines... I mean, we already have projects that let you run your own electrum node, so running your own label synchronisation server seems like a reasonable next step privacy-wise.

I guess it wouldn't be to hard to do either (eventough i wouldn't call it a simple project): Pick trough electrum's sourcecode and see how the external synchronisation protocol works, then build a little daemon that does the same as the "real" synchronisation server.
The downside would be that the user would have to run a modified version of electrum, since his/her own synchronisation server would have to be hard-coded into electrum's binary instead of the current synchronisation server. Or maybe editing the hosts-file on the user's machine would be sufficient if we don't run into issues with invalid certificates (add a record that points the current synchronisation server to your vps's ip).

Something to try out on a rainy day

He already answered in this very thread... Click on his username, then click on "Send this member a personal message." and you'll end up on this page:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=pm;sa=send;u=1177176

I would only use the PM function to point him towards this thread... And since he already answered in this very thread, he is aware of it's existance. I would keep most communication public (except if he asks personal information). By keeping things public, you increase the pressure to unlock your account, as soon as you go private there is no more "bad publicity" for them, so their incentive to help you out soon decreases dramatically.

If you read my previous post, you'll see that things might even get worse... They asked 4 of their 6 possible options... Next to these 4 things, they also give themselfs the freedom to make you proof the origin of your funds, and they're judge, jury and executioner as to wether or not your explanation is sufficient... And they also gave themselfs the freedom to sniffle around in your ACTIVE social media accounts.
By the way: their TOS says the information you give them has to be in english, or you'll have to pay for a notarised copy.

Like i said: they're judge, jury and executioner... Not a pleasant feeling to have your lifesavings taken hostage i'm afraid...

There are only 2 things you can do: bend over backwards and hope you've made enough noise to convince them to access funds that belong to you, or search a good lawyer. Oh, you can also warn others, but that's what you've been doing.

As soon as you regain access to your funds: make sure you empty your wallet with them and walk away... Don't get suckered into thinking "I already passed their KYC, might aswell keep on using them". If this ordeal proves anything, it should be you should never trust a non-custodial wallet, especially not one that has massive red trust and negative reviews all over the place. (btw, this is not legal advice... Do what you want with your money... I'm just saying what i would do if i was faced with the same situation you are)

THEY have access to your coins... YOU don't have access to your coins...

When you use their app and you're withdrawing funds, all you're doing is asking them if they pretty please (with a cherry on top) want to create a transaction using your funds (which you don't controll) if it's not to much trouble...  This is not a wallet, it's an exchange (as said before), an exchange with over-the-top KYC procedures that selectively lock accounts based on factors they do not want to disclose.
If you want to give all controll away and no longer be your own banks, that's up to you... Just don't come crying if they lock your account again and ask access to your social media accounts to unlock your account (and if you're like me, you don't have any active social media accounts with your real identity, so you're pretty much f*cked)


Their KYC procedure can ask for following things... I suppose that if you fail to provide a single one, they can keep your funds??

• screenshots of any incoming transactions or deposits to Freewallet from the INITIAL SOURCE. They have a bunch of extra requirements for these screenshots
• Provide information about the origin of funds. They have a bunch of extra requirements for these screenshots
• A clear closeup photo of your identification document in English. What if you don't live in an english speaking country? Grounds to rob you i guess?
• A photo of yourself in front of the image “Attention” (an image they provide) open on your app or your monitor
• A recent copy of a bank card statement, an excerpt from a household register, a tax bill or tax return or a utility bill payment receipt. If these documents aren't in English, you need a NOTARIZED translation... Woooooop, these things cost a lot of money.... If they're not stealing several hundred bucks from you, you might aswell forfeit your funds...
• Links to active profiles in any social network

source: https://support.freewallet.org/support/solutions/articles/9000184127-how-to-pass-kyc-procedure-

On top of this, i've heared they're asking video proof aswell...

This is not a service where i'd keep my funds... like, ever... But bitcoin is about the freedom of choice... If you chose this service, it's up to you... We will not stop you (we couldn't if we tried).

Eventough the other replies are correct, i feel most of them are not addressing the underlying issue here:

Fees are not payed to the wallet creator, they're payed to the miners to give them an incentive to add your transaction to the block they're trying to solve... The only thing your wallet does is trying to estimate witch fee would be sufficient for your transaction so it doesn't get stuck... This fee selecting is not an exact science since it depends on the size and feerate of the other transactions in the mempool (both current tx's and future tx's). Electrum is reasonably good at selecting a reasonable fee, so if you start messing with it, you risk getting your tx stuck.

It doesn't matter if you use electrum to manually set your fee, or if you import your seed phrase into an other wallet that lets you pick a lower fee: if your fee is to low, no miner will include your transaction into their block, and your tx will sit in the mempool for a long, long time...

So, your best bet would be to wait untill the mempool is allmost empty, and at that point you can create a tx with a 1 sat/byte fee... Eventough you'll never be able to create a transaction with a single input with a value of 100 sats... Most nodes simply don't relay tx's with a fee that's lower than 1 sat/byte, and a tx with 1 input and 1 output is larger than 100 vbytes, so your 100 sats will all be needed as a fee if you try to spend this unspent output... I do think your output value will be > 100 sats since a transaction with a dust output would also be invalid, so it would be very hard to have an unspent output with a 100 sat value funding your address in the first place.

I've seen many, many, many people complaining on bitcointalk about this exact thing....

The reply i agree most with is:

This is exactly what i've witnessed time and time again: he locks somebody's account, asks ridiculous things in order to unlock the account, doesn't repond swiftly... Untill the victim starts posting on bitcointalk, on twitter, on reddit, on other platforms... Then, all of a sudden, the owner pops up and "resolves" this issue (he created).

Makes me wonder how many people try to comply with him without starting to complain on fora and social media... I really wonder if those people ever see their funds again...

OP: send a PM to the owner and ask him to chip in on this thread, that's possibly the fastest way into pressuring him to look into the issue he created... And if he resolves this issue, please chose a decent non-custodial wallet to move your funds to...

My best guess is that that's what the OP is doing: seeing if somebody steals those $116. If somebody does, he has learned something about private key(s), and he might be less likely to get his real wallet robbed because of his newfound knowledge.



The address quoted by the OP is indeed funded... However, like said by somebody else: it's not certain that the private key is correct... Might aswell be a wild goose chase.

IIRC, this is something that goes back to very early versions... I noticed the same years ago with the electrum clone for LTC (back when you could still mine LTC @ home). IIRC, i did open a ticket for this issue, but it never got fixed.

Samourai is non-custodial (AFAIK), it would be a good choice.
As for your arguments keeping funds in a trusted exchange: Mt.Gox was the golden standard for years... Untill at one point, it wasn't and thousands of people lost all their funds...

Like you already said: everybody tells you "not your keys, not your coin"... There's a reason WHY everybody tells you this... It's not an easy catchphrase... It's possible you grew tired of hearing it, but that doesn't make it any less true...
Same goes for hardware wallets: there's a reason everybody keeps suggesting them... It's possible you grew tired of hearing it, but the reason still remains...

How safe your coins are stored is completely up to you:

• if you pick a non custodial (online) wallet or an exchange, you put 100% of your trust in an unknown person. Did they do their homework? Are they insured? Will they lock your account? Will they work with tax authorities? Will they get hacked? You simple do not know
• if you pick a decent desktop wallet, and make a safe backup of your seed phrase on a piece of paper (or backup your wallet on a couple removable media), AND use a strong passphrase to encrypt your wallet AND make sure it's up-to-date and verified the signature AND harden your OS (firewall, virusscanner, no unknown software, patches applied,...) you're probably pretty safe
• if you pick a  decent hardware wallet, an airgapped setup or a properly generated paper wallet, it should beat the other 2 options by a longshot (in terms of security)

but everything still boils down to YOU: be your own bank... Do your homework and do what sounds best to you, nobody is going to refund you if you lose your money, so take some responsability

If you're only holding a couple hundred bucks worth of BTC, and you're fine with the risks of a custodial service because the ease of use they offer: Why not? Don't come crying if they close your account, get hacked, do an exit scam,....

If you use a desktop wallet and you don't install an antivirus, firewall, updates, patches, you don't verify your wallet's signature, use a weak passphrase, backup your seedphrase on your icloud: you might even be better of with a custodial service.

Wot  
Can you try to rephrase this, cause it makes no sense at all... Given your current rank, giving an answer like this is very confusing to newbies.
I'm not saying it's wrong... With some imagination i can make something from this post that does make some sense, but not in it's current form tough...

@OP: i agree with the other posters, but wanted to address the last part of your question "can we just reset the diffuculty level back to 1 ".

IF we'd do such a thing, it would have to be hard-coded and it would cause a fork... The chain following the new, hard-coded rule would have a diff of 1 at block height "x".
At height x+2016 (or sooner, depending at which point you'd force the diff to go to 1), the difficulty would jump to 4. Why? Because those 2016 blocks would be mined in mere seconds (even less). Remember: there are big company's out there running big ASIC farms, at a difficulty of 1, they'd solve blocks at a rate of hundreds per second. Why would it only jump to 4 then? because that's the maximum it can jump in one retarget (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Target).

At height x+4032 (or sooner), the diff would jump to 16

At height x+6048 (or sooner) the diff would jump to 64

At height x+8064 (or sooner), the diff would jump to 256

All of this would happen in mere minutes (mostly because it would result in orphaned chains and to many new blocks for the nodes to parse and relay). At this point, your cpu miner would already have some troubles finding a block... And even if you did, the ASIC farms would produce thousands of blocks before you found a second one, so you'd be mining in the shortest chain and the chain paying you a coinbase reward would be stale...

So, in the end, resetting the diff without changing a lot of other parameters would cause a big mess, a lot of confusion, a chain split... But a CPU miner would not profit from this... The big ASIC farms would take a lot of extra money, but the home miner would get nothing....

By the way: don't sell yourself short... It's not a stupid question... You're obviously trying to learn, and that's a good thing!

I'll try to give an ELI5 (very simplified) explanation...

Bitcoin isn't something physical... It isn't stored IN your wallet...
The blockchain is a decentral ledger, it records which unspent outputs are used to fund which address... Your wallet just parses the blockchain and keeps track of which unspent outputs with witch value(s) are funding your address(es).

Let's give a very simple example. I have a wallet containing the private key whose public key hash (address) is 1MyAddress.
The ledger contains a record that says 1MyAddress is funded with output 0 of transaction "transaction1". It does NOT contain a record where i spend this unspent output. Hence, the unspent output sits in the UTXO (the database of all unspent outputs that can, theoretically, be spend)

Since i own the private key belonging to 1MyAddress and the ledger contains above record, i can create a transaction spending the unspent output funding my address. In order to do so, i create a transaction that basically says (in human words):
"I use output 0 of "transaction1" to fund address 1ReceiverAddress with a value of x satoshi's. I sign this transaction with the private key belonging to adress 1Myaddress, which is the address that was funded with output 0 of "transaction1". I call this transaction "transaction2". The input is "output 0 of transaction1", the output is "output 0 of transaction 2".

IF this new transaction gets into a block, all nodes will remove the first unspent output from their UTXO db, and they'll add "output 0 of transaction2" to their UTXO db. The wallet of the person who owns 1ReceiverAddress will parse the blockchain and see a new unspent output funding one of it's addresses, and it'll update the value of the wallet accordingly (and allow the receiver to use the unspent outputs as an input for a new transaction if he/she wishes to do so)

Exactly... I only update my node's bitcoind if (and only if) there's a feature i truely need or if a security vulnerability is found that would actually impact me.
I ran 0.16.0 untill I upgraded to 0.20.1. I skipped all versions in between and was able to create transactions without any issues... I'm currently running 0.20.1 and i'll probably skip (at least) 0.21.0.

It's not like you're running 0.1.0....

by the way, have a look at this: https://bitnodes.io/nodes/?q=United%20States
I'm defenately not the only one not upgrading to the latest release every time It seems like 34 us nodes (out of a total of 9204 monitored nodes) are still running version 0.8.x

All coin transactions?

The first coin i sometimes use is litecoin:
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/litecoin-transactionfees.html

Current average fee, about 2 cents...

But even if you stick with bitcoin, have you experimented with the lightning network yet? Once a channel is open, it usually costs only a couple sat's to move funds trough open channels.. Sure, opening and closing channels happens trough an on-chain transaction, so they'll cost a couple of bucks (if you time them right), but as long as you have funds on your side of the channel, you can send payments allmost instantly and very cheap.