--snip--
Do you have contact info of the owner?? Someone mentioned I can PM him?
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=1177176I 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. |
|
|
|
After three emails asking me ONLY for my selfie, they now requested stupid unnecessary documents. I swear these people are the worst of the worst. Why couldn’t they request everything in one email. Damn. I send everything to them right away so let’s see what happens. Mind you not I’ve been talking to four different employees all of them feeding me BS after BS.
Here’s copy of text from email:
Hello,
To proceed with the verification procedure, the security department requests the following information:
1) Screenshots of your incoming transactions where we can see the hash, amount and the name of the sending service (another wallet, exchange and so on);
2) Photo of your identification document of the owner of the account: an international ID or a driver’s license (a photo of both sides).
3) Bank statement or utility bill where we can see your name and resident address. Information should be in English;
4) A photo of the owner of the account in front of the image “Attention” (attached below) on your computer monitor (if you use a web version of Freewallet) or near your mobile device with the app open so that we were able to see your user ID.
Once we receive all the required information, we will forward it to our security department for verification.
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) |
|
|
|
--snip-- and no one would get access to my coins.
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: --snip--
He has a history of returning the money if conveniently pressed.
--snip--
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... |
|
|
|
You're holding just $116 worth of BTC and changing people to steal it. Please learn to protect your small funds now so that you can do the same for bigger ones.
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. Hilarious! has anyone checked to see if the wallet actually contains anything or the op is just here to troll, to be honest, i have never seen where anyone wants to have their asset stolen voluntarily, it has always been the opposite, i can already tell there is nothing that will worth the effort.
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. |
|
|
|
So far, blocks that have been filled in will be locked, because the system works according to the data on your date when you access it, but blocking will only make the desktop look new with new data. that's the risk.
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)
|
|
|
|
--snip--
However, if you just simply want to send your coins as fast as possible, there is no need to update it. After the sync is done, you should simply be able to send your transaction if that's what you want to do.
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%20StatesI'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.htmlCurrent 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. |
|
|
|
Would you buy Tesla using your Bitcoin or you will wait to $100K?  Both  , i'll wait untill it reaches 100k, then buy a new car  That being said, i'm a fan of Toyota, so i might have to wait untill they accept BTC payments... |
|
|
|
--snip--
So for me that i ll open a channel for payments (i dont need it right now) i can do it with 12sat , right?
Seems that at this moment, the mempool is not as full anymore... You could even get by with 7 or 8 sat/vbyte i guess. The main thing to remember: opening and closing channels happens trough an on-chain transaction. If there's a fee-bidding-war going on because the mempool is overflowing, you'll pay a lot to open and close a channel. If the mempool is (allmost) empty, you might get by with a 1/2 sat/vbyte tx. This has nothing to do with the lightning network tough, it's because of the current size of the mempool (and the fees of the transactions in said mempool). Once you have an open channel, you should be able to send funds allmost instantly with a very low fee... Even if they are routed trough other nodes. It seems my node usually ends up charging ~1,2 sat to route a payment... Even if your payment gets routed over 10 nodes such as mine, you'll still pay between 10 and 20 sats, which is nothing compared to an on-chain transaction.  Wether it is worth routing payments is something completely different... I don't think i'll ever break even, but that was not my intention |
|
|
|
--snip--
Got it.
Still 1 question. When i open channel in Phoenix wallet i use 0.30 $ for 500 $ inbound/outbound. Is it so expensive like15$ to open a channel on your own LN node?
Opening and closing channels happens trough an on-chain transaction. At this moment, you'll have to pay ~40 sat/vbyte to get into the next couple of blocks... But the fee fluctuates quite a lot... So, yeah, at this moment in time a $15 fee would be possible... |
|
|
|
Buying 1 BTC is like owning 120 cars or even 240 cars, if you know what I mean. Buying 60 cars will give you nothing but mere expenses in the long run while having 1 Bitcoin can give you profits every year depending on the market situation. In short, having Bitcoin is good in the long term as an investment. Don't listen to people who don't have Bitcoin, listen to those who loves Bitcoin and ignore others, their opinions are just garbages.
Well, I think it's important to keep an open mind... Sometimes outsiders will notice flaws insiders don't... If all bitcoin enthusiasts would only listen to other bitcoin enthusiasts, we'd miss a critical view from time to time. But in this case, yeah, it's garbage Article main point sounds completly stupid. However, he is right about btc TPS. It just too low
TPS is low, but defenately not as low as written here... When i read (and i quote) "1,400 transactions per hour" in the OP, i completely stopped reading... It's obvious a person making such statements hasn't done his/her homework, or has the sole intention to spread FUD, and i'm not willing to spend my time disproving anything in case an article is written with such blatant errors and utter ignorance. As for TPS, you have bech32 wallets that increase the TPS, you have offchain sollutions (like LN, or non-custodial services), you have altcoins... I'm pretty sure the TOP-20 blockchains would be able to take over most (if not all) transactions IRL if enough off-chain sollutions were to be used, and the on-chain transactions were spread over 20 blockchains. |
|
|
|
Not sure why you mentioned "registration details" and not a signed message, just in case you think Electrum is like some sort of Coinbase/Blockchain.com, they're not. A non-custodial wallet is not like a company that maintains a database of registered users.
this ^^ is correct, i'm just trying to rephrase what joniboini said in a newbie-friendly way. It's slightly simplified, but i hope i'll do a good job at an ILI5 explanation: Bitcoin is completely decentral. All you need to spend bitcoin is a private key. A public key gets derived from this private key, the public key gets hashed, and the result of this hash is your address.... This address can get funded by unspent outputs (you get payed). So, if you have a private key, that's enough. Now, one step further: nobody needs to know you have this private key... You can create millions of private keys (and derive addresses from them) on your offline pc... All of them will be valid (well, if you didn't mess up the creation process)... If you'd copy an address from this offline machine and give it to somebody else to get payed, the only thing that will be known to anybody else (but you) is said address. You don't need to register anything, you don't need to share anything (except for the address in case you want to be payed). Offcourse, there are online company's that manage those private keys for you... These online company's can have rules (for example, registration or KYC). I'd strongly advise against using said company's, because they controll all your funds (they're the one knowing your private keys, so they take all controll away from you). Instead, i'd advise you to use a decent desktop, hardware, paper or offline wallet... These wallets do a pretty good job at managing your keys, taking away most of the technical details so you don't have to worry about them... But even then, once again: nobody needs to know you own any bitcoins, there is no central authority, no need to register... |
|
|
|
|
bpip also says he/she requested a password change via email on the 16th of march...
To be honest, I have no clue what might have happened to him/her. I hope he/she is OK IRL. But that's about it... If it were me who dropped from the forum, i wouldn't want others to start digging into my life, so i'm not going to dig into somebody else's life either.
|
|
|
|
|
According to bpip, he's not banned and still in DT1. As to why he didn't log in anymore, no idear?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
