 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 »
|
|
I'm leaving bitcoin now.
Reasons are:
1. Pressure on this forum
2. I'm seeing a price drop will occur
3. Whatever reasons
Goodbye everyone and good luck to your BTC holdings!
|
|
|
|
0.002BTC
Winning bid. PMing the winner. |
|
|
|
|
I'm going to leave this campaign after the next payment. Thanks for the campaign!
|
|
|
|
I think it is not burned, i think it was lost by users stupidity. But also how come people can send btc to a specified burn address. When in fact that address is already burned, the address is still active but not accessible? I'm a bit confused on what is really burned addresses. BTCBurn website got some concrete evidence that the address is really burned?
They're really burnt, as generating a private key to any of those addresses will take up more time than it is from the beginning of universe, and spend more energy than the solar system (maybe even the galaxy?). I have just read the article again and found there're misleading information. They said the block mined right after halving can't be spent, but output from block 210000 have spent here. P.S. Why are there 13 BTC as fees in that block  |
|
|
|
Let's start the auction. My bid 0.001 btc
And what about the number of website slots and surf slots ?
Number of website slots: 3 Surf slots: 2 (Specification of regular account) Bid accepted. Auction ends in 12/28 2:17:12 PM forum time. |
|
|
|
|
In fact 2100 of them are burnt for Counterparty... However some of them (like bitcoins sent to address with lowest hash160 value) maybe just used for fun. These would be donations to everyone as if there is less BTC in existence, the price will go up as there's less supply...
|
|
|
|
Is this a autosurf site? for people to get free traffic to their website?
Yes. That is a traffic exchange site. Premium or regular(free)?
That's a free account where users can only get 70% of the minutes spent surfing other's website. But the 70,000 minutes are already credited in the account, i.e. the old owner have spent at least 100,000 minutes autosurfing. |
|
|
|
Originally selling at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1710624.0
Since the item don't sell for a fixed offer price, I'd go for an auction. Starting bid: BTC0.0005 Minimum increment: BTC0.00005 BIN: BTC0.00125 End in 24 hours after 1st bid or 10 minutes after last bid, whichever is later. Escrow or you go first. I can go first if you are Sr. Member or above. If you choose to escrow, you'll have to pay the fees (if any). |
|
|
|
Originally selling at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1720631.0
Since the item don't sell for a fixed offer price, I'd go for an auction. Starting bid: BTC0.001 Minimum increment: BTC0.0001 BIN: BTC0.01 End in 24 hours after 1st bid or 10 minutes after last bid, whichever is later. Escrow or you go first. I can go first if you have 400 activity or above. If you choose to escrow, you'll have to pay the fees (if any). |
|
|
|
Then why not go to their forum and troll them I have signed up there as 'F**K' and "Want BTC', and begging there for BTC (which is supposed to be not allowed) and even f***ed them. Their rules aren't much better, they require 15 minutes (instead of 6) between posts!
(Serious part) Maybe we'll have to add a new rule? Like making a deposit to the forum when making an account, and return them after they have made 1 post and without getting banned (meaning that the post was OK). This will stop the spammers while keeping the real users here. Please remove your link... |
|
|
|
I have never lost any coins in addresses generated on my side. However I have had lost coins on scam sites prior to knowing those HYIP sites are most likely scams. Also I have had my computer infected by ransomware while they demand BTC for ransom. I don't pay them (and I don't even hold any BTC by that time) so I don't lost even a single satoshi. When I was young, I downloaded a "Steam account cracker", which of course was a nasty trojan and not in the good meaning. Fortunately, I haven't lost Bitcoin from the case. Maybe because I didn't have any that time  But my system behaved very strange and after virus removal, I had to change all my passwords. Good luck for you not losing Bitcoins  But yes, you have to inspect every source of any software you're downloading. If the software sounded too good, it's probably a scam. |
|
|
|
1. Yeah so that's why I can send a tx with 1k satoshi as fee and confirmed in 20 hours...
7. If your transaction size is 200bytes and you paid 1000 satoshi, probably in a few days. 4. Then why don't them pay those satoshi as fees... My first transaction made ever consisted 1301xx satoshi inputs and a single 100000 satoshi output. The standard transaction fee was 30000 but it ended up charging me the extra 1xx satoshi without changing to me  8. Depends on the client really. Unfortunately, certain wallet clients do not care and just use the remaining as change. But if I were to enforce the 54600 satoshi rule, everyone would be crying about how the wallet client used ~34600 satoshi as a fee while I am only trying to send $4. 5. Then that's why there're altcoins with lower transaction fees. You may send a cent in the dogecoin network paying only 0.025 cent as fee.
9. Acceptance rate. If I were to be wanting to use micro transactions, sure I can use Dogecoin or some other coin. But the acceptance rate of Dogecoin is so low and I have to undergo the hassle to converting Bitcoin to Dogecoin. Dogecoin is extremely volatile for that matter. 6. I don't trust those services actually, because I can't have control to the keys... That's why I prefer direct payment...
10. Neither do I, but that helps with faucet saving the transaction fees, user saving the transaction fee and ultimately, lower size occupied on the actual chain The ultimate solution could be increasing the block size, however it is not recommended as it will increase the required bandwidth of nodes and the storage space used by the blockchain.
11. Definitely. I have to use my same old argument. The block size increase wouldn't affect most of the user since most of them: 1. Uses SPV client. 2. Have plenty of bandwidth 3. Have plenty of space. 4. Can enable pruning. Blockchain spam can be caused by a variety of things. Faucet is only a small portion of that. This solution wouldn't be the most practical one. 7. That was confirmed in 20 hours while I expect it to confirm within 2 days (that was a payment to an exchange, and by adding those cents a cashout will not be practical as the fees are too high). 8. That was the Bitcoin Wallet for Android. I'm using other android wallets now, as that wallet ran really slow and can't even be started in my old phone... And yes, I was always crying about such high fees for my transactions originated from my faucet payouts. But I'll have to accept them as Bitcoin is primarily used for larger transactions. Even PayPal charges a high fee for a low volume transaction (I have been charged $0.52 for a $5 transaction!). 9. The current dogecoin market spread is about 4%, which would be another 0.04 cents of cost for the 1 cent transaction. 10. 11. |
|
|
|
Well isn't the minimum fee 0.0001/KB Thanks for your information on this part, though. 1. No such thing as minimum fee but the default relay fee is 0.00005BTC/KB. It isn't an issue. Is everyone going to spend it at the same time? Maybe not, but the whole blockchain will be finally spammed by 2MB worth of these transactions (every week) and stored into all computers with full node indefinitely. 2. Not an issue. We get spams that is much bigger than that. If the payment is made every week, the transactions would only occupy a total of 2/168MB. The gambling sites produces spam on a much bigger scale. The withdrawal threshold for most faucet sites is actually quite big enough. Theres a huge problem with increasing the minimum output size to that amount. In a normal transaction, there is likely to be change sent to the change address. Many a times, the change output is very low. Penalising them wouldn't make sense.
Even 54600 satoshi worths only ~0.5 USD now. They may use another input, 3. Wouldn't you be introducing spam instead? pay a slightly less fee (if the change amount would be close to 54600 satoshi), or give the change as fee too. In realistic bitcoin transactions, a change of such low amount would occur rarely.
4. Possible but it isn't that important to reduce the spam from these kind of transactions. Actually, I had people who had change of less than 2730 satoshis and I had to walk them through to solve this. It can happen more if its 54600 satoshis. 5. The reason for the dust limit to be lowered was because of the increasing price. It would be quite dumb if you aren't allowed to send 0.5USD across the network. Segwit would likely help with the block and transaction size and potentially reducing the impact of this issue. 6. Aren't most faucet sending payments through online wallets like Xapo? 1. Yeah so that's why I can send a tx with 1k satoshi as fee and confirmed in 20 hours... 2. That's 1/84 of the whole blockchain's bandwidth from a SINGLE faucet... 3. Ok I'll stop argue on that... The extra input will make the tx ~200 bytes bigger... 4. Then why don't them pay those satoshi as fees... My first transaction made ever consisted 1301xx satoshi inputs and a single 100000 satoshi output. The standard transaction fee was 30000 but it ended up charging me the extra 1xx satoshi without changing to me 5. Then that's why there're altcoins with lower transaction fees. You may send a cent in the dogecoin network paying only 0.025 cent as fee. 6. I don't trust those services actually, because I can't have control to the keys... That's why I prefer direct payment... The ultimate solution could be increasing the block size, however it is not recommended as it will increase the required bandwidth of nodes and the storage space used by the blockchain. |
|
|
|
Well isn't the minimum fee 0.0001/KB Thanks for your information on this part, though. It isn't an issue. Is everyone going to spend it at the same time? Maybe not, but the whole blockchain will be finally spammed by 2MB worth of these transactions (every week) and stored into all computers with full node indefinitely. The withdrawal threshold for most faucet sites is actually quite big enough. Theres a huge problem with increasing the minimum output size to that amount. In a normal transaction, there is likely to be change sent to the change address. Many a times, the change output is very low. Penalising them wouldn't make sense.
Even 54600 satoshi worths only ~0.5 USD now. They may use another input, pay a slightly less fee (if the change amount would be close to 54600 satoshi), or give the change as fee too. In realistic bitcoin transactions, a change of such low amount would occur rarely. |
|
|
|
|
So currently the minimum send amount (to prevent spam) is 5430 or 5460 satoshi (I don't know which is true), while transactions involving outputs lower than that will be required to pay a higher fee, or aren't even allowed to send.
So earlier this week I've got my faucet payout, and realized that the few payout transactions already taken up more than 300KB of a block (more than 10000 outputs), and to spend them, another 2MB of data is needed, which will fill 2 full blocks and making the chain unusable for 20 minutes!
Increasing such minimum output thershold will help decreasing such spams caused by faucet outputs (and they'll need a higher payment thershold, which will spam the blockchain for less), and increasing the space for other transactions within that 1MB block size limit. If a non-standard transaction occurred with outputs less than that amount, then an extra miner fee of at least 54600 satoshi per such output would be required, and full clients should reject transaction not meeting that thershold.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
You may have tagged by the anti-bot system of the faucet (they had wrong detections before, as discussed few pages before this). You may PM OP with your user IDs on that two sites for him to whitelist you. After being whitelisted your account will me much less likely be affected by such problems. |
|
|
|
I was the oldest user of this forum in 2013
First, you are not an user from 2013, you're just registered today. Moreover the oldest user (satoshi) isn't from just 2013, he's from 2009. And your post (about solutions to signature campaign related spams) are brought up here multiple times (e.g. [1] [2]). After those a moderator have made a post (as stated above) for the guidelines of signature campaign. Since your post is unsubstantial, it is deleted. |
|
|
|
|
