Latest posts of: duchresidences

Show Posts
Pages: [1]

on: May 11, 2017, 01:24:47 PM

thx. i guess its time to either get a new laptop, or most likely switch to using a hardware wallet. quite sad - I have been using armory for the past 4 years and have been so happy with it. cheers and thx for the confirmation Goatpig

on: May 11, 2017, 12:51:06 PM

I am currently using an old air-gapped 32bit laptop on windows 7 to sign armory transactions. It is currently on the highest 0.92.x 32bit version. 1) Would this present future issues by switching "Change Address Type" to "Auto change" (i.e. switching from P2PKH to P2SH) on my watch-only 0.96 version installed on my desktop while my offline signing armory version is still at 0.92.1? (This concern is with respect to future signing of new P2SH change addresses since the info notice mentioned "pre-0.96 armory cannot spend from P2SH addresses" ) 2) Is there possibly a 0.96 version for 32bit PCs installation download available anywhere i can upgrade my airgapped laptop to? I can't seem to find one on the official website. Many thanks in advance for any advice or recommendation. As of now, I am still sticking with P2PKH address type just to play safe.

on: March 07, 2014, 11:13:19 PM

ok, blockchain.info has fixed the issue it seems and the transaction reflects confirmation. Finally! after a week

on: March 05, 2014, 10:00:13 PM

Quote from: picobit on March 05, 2014, 03:23:31 PM Just ignore it. blockchain.info seems to be broken, that has no relevance for your transaction. Blockchain.info is just one of many tools that allows you to examine the state of the "real" bitcoin block chain, and this particular tools seems to have a bug. yes, think enough time spent on this issue, and blockchain.info helpdesk has not responded with any inputs. besides, looks like other addresses subsequent spends have received confirmations as well. so will just move on. thanks for your post picobit

on: March 05, 2014, 12:23:10 PM

Quote from: spin on March 05, 2014, 11:32:43 AM Quote from: duchresidences on March 05, 2014, 08:17:05 AM Til today i.e. T+4, blockchain.info is still reflecting this 4.7 btc as unconfirmed. (https://blockchain.info/address/12vjsMhC7MFyWddenGb7WCc6cEJjdagLg1) Bitstamp who performed the transfer is 'taichi-ing' to say Bitcoin transactions confirmation is dependent on the "Bitcoin Network" and since they have send the BTC bitcoin network is now in control of them and that we should contact them and ask them for assistance. wonder if i should just transfer everything from this address into another address to see how goes. however my best guess is blockchain.info will reflect this new transaction as unconfirmed as well ..... That tx is confirmed with 743 confirmations (at present). blockchain.info is broken it seems. http://blockr.io/tx/info/9b0c8d25d31626cabdd4e5dd6587fb592d67d0d5fd5a85974a9096ef0a99e717 Spin - thanks. yes seems to imply so....

on: March 05, 2014, 08:17:05 AM

Til today i.e. T+4, blockchain.info is still reflecting this 4.7 btc as unconfirmed. (https://blockchain.info/address/12vjsMhC7MFyWddenGb7WCc6cEJjdagLg1) Bitstamp who performed the transfer is 'taichi-ing' to say Bitcoin transactions confirmation is dependent on the "Bitcoin Network" and since they have send the BTC bitcoin network is now in control of them and that we should contact them and ask them for assistance. wonder if i should just transfer everything from this address into another address to see how goes. however my best guess is blockchain.info will reflect this new transaction as unconfirmed as well .....

on: March 03, 2014, 08:32:00 AM

Quote from: picobit on March 03, 2014, 07:24:05 AM I have a BC.i wallet. Unfortunately, it is not at all uncommon for them to lose contact with the rest of the network. The tendenacy for most (or at least me earlier) is to assume blockchain.info to be the definitive window to the blockchain. It could in fact be falliable like any other app tool out there. Lets see ...

on: March 03, 2014, 08:23:40 AM

Quote from: etotheipi on March 03, 2014, 03:26:07 AM I just submitted a ticket to the blockchain.info support desk. I also confirmed with gmaxwell that he sees the transaction confirmed on his blockchain, as well. Definitely a BC.i problem. etotheipi, thanks for this. Rather than opening multiple enquiry tickets with blockchain.info, appreciate if you could share any response back from them on this issue subsequently. Thanks

on: March 03, 2014, 02:59:29 AM

Quote from: etotheipi on March 03, 2014, 02:06:29 AM I suspect this is actually an issue with blockchain.info: (1) blockr.io shows it with 375 confirmations (2) biteasy.com also shows 375 confirmations (3) There's no reason for such a large transaction with a sufficient fee, to not have been mined after 2 days Maybe blockchain.info is on a fork? Or simply, their software is misbehaving? Either way, it seems like Armory is correct Thanks etotheipi for the speedy response. At least my own understanding of this is still ok. If blockchain.info is incorrect or on a fork, whats the implications if i start spending these coins immediately? How do i know for sure subsequent transactions from this address will not have any issues under either blockchain.info or actual blockchain itself?

on: March 03, 2014, 01:37:34 AM

Tried searching for an answer to this without success - Armory shows incoming transaction having 371 confirmations while blockchain shows transaction still as unconfirmed after 2 days. am i reading this wrongly? appreciate any help, inputs https://blockchain.info/address/12vjsMhC7MFyWddenGb7WCc6cEJjdagLg1

Pages: [1]