You'll need to provide some information like transaction IDs and/or wallet addresses if you want anyone to try and investigate what is happening with your transactions...

Also, what wallet software were you using?

For the record, those transactions are actually in the wrong order... they should be:

1st: https://blockchain.info/tx/1b97a0c6e34499fd794d1af6c7ca751e14b80c8756663caae6eea62a84c2787e
2nd: https://blockchain.info/tx/8b5ab314340ad1215e26e4d9a49593101ec43fcc38035ebca7ef28226e63a5b2

Doesn't change the fact that they're both super low fee... and the 2nd one is spending the (unconfirmed) output from the 1st one... so until the 1b97 tx confirms, there is 0% chance of the 8b5a tx confirming...

As neochiny said... blockchain.info "dynamic" fees are completely broken... they are just sending pretty much ALL transactions with a "fixed" 120 sat/byte fee... and then everyone comes here to complain 

Short Answers: Yes, No, No.
and No.

Long Answers:

Yes, given the current state of the network and your low fee, the transaction could be stuck for weeks... especially if your wallet keeps rebroadcasting the transaction.
No, once the transaction is sent to the network, it is up to individual nodes whether or not drop they drop it. Most nodes will drop it after 72 hours... but it seems with the added load, some may be keeping transactions longer to give them a chance to confirm.
No, you won't lose your money (assuming you are the sender). Once the transaction drops from all the nodes, your a rescan of the blockchain by your wallet should result in the transaction no longer showing and the coins being available in your wallet again.
and
No, once you get the "Acceleration Succeeded" message, your transaction is in the queue. It should confirm in the next block or 2 that ViaBTC mine (they average one about every 4 or 5 hours I think), so just be patient.

Your fee was way too low. The current recommended fees are much higher (and have been for a number of days now):


Goto this link: http://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=dbe538ee20790c390de370fa395a8d9167be424de07c2dbae3143b6ccf585284

It has a number of options available to you for getting your transaction confirmed (both free and paid options)

No. You do not. What you're really wanting is to create the encrypted cold storage wallet on your "air gapped" (ie. not networked) computer/OS. In this case, your Ubuntu USB Stick that has all the network stuff disabled. Take note of the public key/address that is generated.

On your normal, everyday computer/OS, you would create a "watching only" wallet... you would do this by importing just the public key/address of your offline storage into a copy of Bitcoin Core on your online PC... This will enable you to see all the deposits/withdrawls into this address, without being able to authorise any withdrawls...

You deposit funds as normal, by receiving or sending funds to that address.

When it comes time to spend the bitcoins from the wallet:

1. You create an unsigned transaction using this "watching only" wallet (on the Online PC), as it would be fully aware of all the UTXOs in the address... (listunspent, createrawtransaction)
2. You then transfer this unsigned transaction (in a text file on a clean USB stick) to your offline PC.
3. You then sign this transaction using the Bitcoin Core on the Offline PC that has the appropriate private keys to do so... (signrawtransaction)
4. You transfer the signed transaction back to your Online PC
5. You use the Bitcoin Core on the Online PC to broadcast the transaction to the network... (sendrawtransaction)

My understanding is that while this is all technically possible with Bitcoin Core, it isn't "easy"... it involves handcrafting transactions etc... whereas Electrum makes this very very easy with a nice GUI implementation: http://docs.electrum.org/en/latest/coldstorage.html

I realise you are not keen on Electrum as you seem to think it may not be as widely peer reviewed as Bitcoin Core. I'd be surprised if it hasn't been thoroughly vetted, given how popular it is and the fact that it is open source. There are a lot of people who use Electrum (and Armory) for creating secure offline wallets. If they were not to be trusted, personally, I think we'd have seen evidence by now.

One last thing, I'd suggest that whatever method your choose... you should "experiment" with some smaller amounts to make sure you're comfortable with setting it, receiving coins and creating/sending transactions... before you set up your "permanent" offline wallet...

Lone Shark... what you need to do is look at your full bet history and import it into a spreadsheet and calculate the total wins and loss amounts with a running total.

Looking at these screenshots, it is impossible for anyone to say what really happened... On your screenshot, the rolls show as losses with a -0.0005. On theirs it shows as a win of +0.00001. What nobody can see, is what actually happened to the balance at this time.

You claim that it "ate your balance"... but we can not see that... and unfortunately, I doubt you can prove it unless you happened to be recording video at the time
They say it was just a "visual bug" and that, while it displayed as a loss on your screen, in the server logs (and now in the new screenshot of your roll history) it shows as a win, so your balance would have been unaffected.

Like I said, dump your ENTIRE roll history... and start creating a running total based on win/loss amounts... you'd need to add/subtract any deposits/withdraws and any faucet claims...

That should at least prove one way or the other whether your account is short by the 0.002 or if in fact it was just a so-called "visual bug"...

the blockchain.info wallet is rubbish... it supposedly uses a dynamic fee system, but it is so far out of touch with reality that it would appear that the devs at blockchain.info are either incompetent or just don't care enough to fix it.  As such, your fee was way too low. The current recommended fees are much higher (and have been for a number of days now):


I suggest you do the following:

1. Hit up the ViaBTC TX Accelerator - submit your transaction within the first minute of a new hour or the 100 slots will be gone
2. STOP using blockchain.info wallet. It is rubbish. Go here: https://bitcoin.org/en/choose-your-wallet pick an app from the Mobile/Desktop section.

If you insist on using blockchain.info... then make sure that you click "Advanced Send" when you are sending out a transaction. Here you can see/set the fee to be used. It still probably won't work very well, as you have no idea what the data size of your transaction is going to be, so calculating a decent fee will still be very difficult... and the "recommended" fee that Blockchain.info calculates is pretty much guaranteed to result in around 120 sats/byte...

Hence the 235683245 threads on here from people with stuck transactions with fee of 120 sats/byte... 

Looks like they've all been confirmed now... all mined by ViaBTC in 2 different blocks...

Yes, the ViaBTC accelerator is free as long as you meet the 0.0001 BTC/KB minimum fee... and your transaction isn't relying on unconfirmed parents and isn't a double spend etc...

The only other issue is that they only accept 100 txes per hour... they reset the submission at the start of every hour and it fills up VERY quickly so you have to be quick.

Yeah... I was going to suggest a similar setup... create a new wallet for each month (201701-wallet, 201702-wallet, 201703-wallet, 201704-wallet etc), then forward the balance from previous month to the current months wallet... and so on and so on...

A bit of a nuisance that you can't store it all in one wallet, but with the added bonus being that you get "monthly statements"

Seriously tho, a "light weight" SPV wallet is probably not what you should be using if you are generating that many transactions... I would have thought that running a full node with Bitcoin Core would be a more robust solution.

The problem seems to be that whomever sent you those coins, was using outputs from unconfirmed transactions... it is further complicated by the fact that a lot of nodes have dropped your transaction (and the ones before them)...

for instance, your transaction: 310fdc1c983ac895fa05dfaef0924c8f21b5ee0060955b01df1efbd2b548656a

is waiting on: b6fc1998eb10dddfa787680ae0293adbf9dc4d714e3dc84493b17384a3afa13d
which is waiting on: 57f43f0570493a609572bcc44b985b910835013ac688826bb7978d3d54b50bd9

If you were receiving these coins as payment for something, I hope you have not sent any goods/products or provided any services. There is a chance you will not receive these coins as the transactions are likely to drop from the network and the coins will be effectively returned to the sender.

My bad... I completely missed the whole "Android" thing...  

Unfortunately, there is no console on Android, so that will limit the amount of troubleshooting you can do. The only things I can suggest at this point is to install Electrum on a desktop (there are Windows/Linux/MacOSX versions available)... restore your wallet using your seed and if it doesn't show the correct transaction, at least you will be able to check for that address.

Also, just to clarify, are you sure you restored your Electrum wallet on your new tablet using the correct seed? Do you see other transactions or was that transaction the only one you had in your wallet? And you're sure you were using an Electrum wallet when you first did the transaction?

Unconfirmed parent? Sounds like your transaction is actually waiting on a previous transaction to confirm... Can you provide a transaction ID so we can investigate further.

Well... I managed to get bbf69880c3464b7c6f316738b0f496580186ff051ebf25396fc6efc7f128f83e accelerated just now using the ViaBTC TX accelerator... hopefully that transaction will then confirm when they mine their next block...

There is no way anyone else can really help you with the CPFP... a person would need access to the private key for the 1Pngc9UQUrhCFJFnYhvY7iE3N3FyrAsWh5 address to be able to send the output from it... and you don't want to give that to ANYONE!

If CPFP is not an option, then hopefully your transaction confirms first... Best of luck... I hope it works out for you!

Your fee was way too low. The current recommended fees are (and have been for a number of days now):


Goto these links:
http://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=e76fbb29aa73910f88f5bb8187c7448750fc49c140f0f3a8abc2b6e5c2169564
http://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=7ccc19190b2ebd2c5ef35e2790eccbb31c74cba075092172fc0c5072d9a72cd4

It has a number of options available to you for getting your 1st and 2nd transactions confirmed (both free and paid options)

Unfortunately, your 3rd transaction has unconfirmed parent transactions (also with low 120 sat/byte fees):
https://blockchain.info/tx/7ccc19190b2ebd2c5ef35e2790eccbb31c74cba075092172fc0c5072d9a72cd4
https://blockchain.info/tx/e76fbb29aa73910f88f5bb8187c7448750fc49c140f0f3a8abc2b6e5c2169564

so until BOTH of those are confirmed, your transaction will never confirm.

Your fee was way too low. The current recommended fees are (and have been for a number of days now):


Additionally it spends from an output of this unconfirmed transaction: 715867955f0cecbe55f43dd63b6f773dc84f6655853acbf9a86ee6cb37faee63

Unless this transaction confirms, your transaction will NEVER confirm. It also uses a low 120 sat/byte fee... 

Goto these links:
http://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=715867955f0cecbe55f43dd63b6f773dc84f6655853acbf9a86ee6cb37faee63
http://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=1c87a8f461978467911bd7610593073dc5580c45302b1c8425f548780d1d347e

It has a number of options available to you for getting both of these transactions confirmed (both free and paid options)

Your fee was way too low. The current recommended fees are (and have been for a number of days now):


Goto this link: http://www.mocacinno.com/feecheck.php?txid=2e28a615f05fb812535a9d60e8adc38d3ca166270bbce4d3bf257e6a46aa94a9

It has a number of options available to you for getting your transaction confirmed (both free and paid options)

Sounds like he got it wrong if he is trying to cheat you... if he really wanted those coins, the other transaction should have had the higher fee!

Unfortunately, none of the transaction accelerators will accept your transaction if it is a double spend. So about your only option would be "Child Pays For Parent"... ie. try and send the unconfirmed output from your transaction to another of your addresses with a MASSIVE fee, such that the average fee for both transactions would be like 300+ sats/byte.

I hope you did not send this guy any money or products or provide any services...You should NEVER do that until the transaction gets at least 1 confirmation.


As for the CPFP... it would go something like this:

- If I'm reading your message right... you were supposed to get 0.1105434 BTC to 1Pngc9UQUrhCFJFnYhvY7iE3N3FyrAsWh5 in the 71a61... TX? (this is your address right?)
- What you'd want to do, is send that output from 1Pngc9UQUrhCFJFnYhvY7iE3N3FyrAsWh5 to another address in your wallet... and use a fee of ~450 sats/byte... so the combined average fee across both "your" transactions was greater than the current recommended fees (~300 sats/byte)

For example, if you sent 0.1096794 from 1Pngc9UQUrhCFJFnYhvY7iE3N3FyrAsWh5 to another address in your wallet and made sure the fee was 0.00086400 btc (0.1096794 + 0.00086400 = 0.1105434)... then you'd have the overall fees as:

Size = 226 bytes (trans you want to push) + 192 (new trans) = 418 bytes
Fees = 0.00047119 BTC + 0.00086400 btc = 0.00133519 btc = 133519 sats

Overall fee = 133519 sats / 418 bytes = ~319 sats/byte... which is a "decent" fee at the moment... so the miners would prioritise both of them into a block


NOTE: you would want to do this AFTER the bbf69880c3464b7c6f316738b0f496580186ff051ebf25396fc6efc7f128f83e transaction gets a confirmation. (Try pushing it using the ViaBTC TX Accelerator)

As long as that BIP39 compatible wallet uses the same derivation path as Jaxx... for the record, from my rather unscientific tests, this appears to be: m/44'/0'/0'/0 (and m/44'/0'/0'/1 for change)... which I believe is BIP44.

I managed to accelerate: https://blockchain.info/tx/72839ff2785b12790c9e460da035ab9eeccdca220cdcd3c8ad8d3b0f91e72c31 using ViaBTC

Keep an eye on that one... when it confirms... you can try the next one in the chain: https://blockchain.info/tx/9b153bf6fc044afc033f4d55a48b1032cad7d7a11df9f8a25a2a150747fc60df
then: https://blockchain.info/tx/e939ad6c32b687fba512362deba8666b4cbeb067e4fa5d9062918202bb1f00cd
then: https://blockchain.info/tx/db9f0c533645b4f54dd2b604fa81ba472c1fa39beee9d8e79edb43589e37857e
then your one: https://blockchain.info/tx/66e6cac89aa1931af7b6aef29bb515909e004b4c58c5e2d520016ed07e528b8d

Maybe your wallet is trying to rebroadcast... https://live.blockcypher.com/btc/tx/12f0ecc32a70cd5c85115a6906d0cc09bef149e1c13c8a0887017fedcd370457/

Says it was received less than 1 minute ago as of 2017-05-19 0850 UTC and was relayed by: 78.106.145.186:8333 which is located in Russia apparently...