Bitcoin is slowly shit.

[johny1976]

Litecoin is 1000 times faster that fuckin bitcoin.

Transaction alredy took 26 hours and still "0 confirmations".

Fuck Bitcoin. The slowliest thing on whole world.

Crap

[1714177748]

1714177748

[Kluge]

Transaction alredy took 26 hours and still "0 confirmations".

What's the txID?

[johny1976]

https://blockchain.info/tx/52f39c4b03240a845d7b1160f6ac4d37ceb0c65c534af39dc0096871d29b21b3?show_adv=false

I'm so upset :/

[mccorvic]

I'm so upset :/

What's that little exclamation mark that says "Fee is lower than recommended amount" when you hover over it mean?

[americandesi]

https://blockchain.info/tx/52f39c4b03240a845d7b1160f6ac4d37ceb0c65c534af39dc0096871d29b21b3?show_adv=false

I'm so upset :/

Look at the fee that you have opted to pay. Is this transfer from mtgox to your wallet.? mtgox usually does that or allows you to choose not to pay the network fee / miners fee.

If you don't pay the normal network fee 0.005, then you will have to wait anywhere from few hours to a couple of days.

I transferred close to 30 btc 3 hours ago and it has already received 38 confirmations (as of this writing).
I always pay the normal network / miners fee.

[johny1976]

https://blockchain.info/tx/52f39c4b03240a845d7b1160f6ac4d37ceb0c65c534af39dc0096871d29b21b3?show_adv=false

I'm so upset :/

Look the fee that you have opted to pay.

If you don't pay the normal network fee 0.005, then you will have to wait anywhere from few hours to a couple of days.

I transferred close to 30 btc 3 hours ago and it has already received 38 confirmations (as of this writing).
I always pay the normal network / miners fee.

Thank you. But I sent this as winning from casino and i checked the (instant payment - include 0.005 fee).

Oh, never mind. Maybe my children gets it after I die. Or their children.

[mccorvic]

https://blockchain.info/tx/52f39c4b03240a845d7b1160f6ac4d37ceb0c65c534af39dc0096871d29b21b3?show_adv=false

I'm so upset :/

Look the fee that you have opted to pay.

If you don't pay the normal network fee 0.005, then you will have to wait anywhere from few hours to a couple of days.

I transferred close to 30 btc 3 hours ago and it has already received 38 confirmations (as of this writing).
I always pay the normal network / miners fee.

Thank you. But I sent this as winning from casino and i checked the (instant payment - include 0.005 fee).

Oh, never mind. Maybe my children gets it after I die. Or their children.

Sounds like your problem is with the casino then. Maybe they took the difference of the fee for themselves and hoped you wouldn't notice.

That, or maybe you didn't actually check the box.

[Kluge]

There are four (possibly more, depending on if there's an even longer chain than I can quickly see displayed) unconfirmed inputs with below-recommended fees. That transaction will probably disappear from the queue before it ever goes through.

[EFS]

That happens sometimes. I got some unconfirmed/pending payments too, even fees were paid.  I reset blockchain but they are still stuck on my multibit account. I don't know why.

[cryptoanarchist]

Pretty lame if you ask me - especially when bitcoin touts itself as being "free of transaction fees". Sooo, you don't have to pay a fee, but it will take over a day for confirmation - gay.

I'm definitely holding onto my litecoins.

[will1982]

Most likely an anomaly. This has happened to me before.

[phillipsjk]

I have heard you can add a fee after the fact by using the coin as an input in a fee-paying transaction. This would likely require manual coin manipulation though.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Pretty lame if you ask me - especially when bitcoin touts itself as being "free of transaction fees". Sooo, you don't have to pay a fee, but it will take over a day for confirmation - gay.

I'm definitely holding onto my litecoins.

You do understand LTC uses the same model.  If you have a low priority tx and don't pay a fee the tx might not be relayed.  Even if it is relayed if LTC ever has anywhere near the volume that BTC does miners will prioritize tx based on fees with predictable results.

Of course in this case the OP was sent a tx which had as its inputs tx which are unconfirmed because they also are seen as spam by the network.   It would be kinda like paying for a candy bar in with a $20 bill and the cashier punches you in the nuts and burns your change.  Somehow you would reach the conclusion that fiat sucks and you are sticking with barter.

[Singlebyte]

Litecoin is 1000 times faster that fuckin bitcoin.

Transaction alredy took 26 hours and still "0 confirmations".

Fuck Bitcoin. The slowliest thing on whole world.

Crap

Wow...Sounds like someone is a little cranky this morning.  Maybe you should just stick to fiat.

[mccorvic]

Pretty lame if you ask me - especially when bitcoin touts itself as being "free of transaction fees". Sooo, you don't have to pay a fee, but it will take over a day for confirmation - gay.

I'm definitely holding onto my litecoins.

You do understand LTC uses the same model.  If you have a low priority tx and don't pay a fee the tx might not be relayed.  Even if it is relayed if LTC ever has anywhere near the volume that BTC does miners will prioritize tx based on fees with predictable results.

If he understood what LTC is he wouldn't be using it

[CoinDiver]

...bitcoin touts itself...

Bitcoin is not, and will not ever be capable of touting itself.

[Kazimir]

Litecoin is 1000 times faster that fuckin bitcoin.

Transaction alredy took 26 hours and still "0 confirmations".

You either didn't pay a transaction fee, or you trusted some crappy casino and they decided not to pay a transaction fee. Or they decided not to transfer your money at all, and just screw you over instead.

Either way, it's your and/or their fault. Not Bitcoin's.

[Kazimir]

Pretty lame if you ask me - especially when bitcoin touts itself as being "free of transaction fees".

Nobody says that. In the widespread info videos about Bitcoin, it explicitly says "the fees are much lower" (comparing to traditional wire transfers or other online payment systems). And to put that in the right perspective: the default Bitcoin transaction fee (I think that's 0.0005 BTC or 0.0001 BTC nowadays, but you can adjust that as you see fit) is in fact almost free.

I'm definitely holding onto my litecoins.

Good luck, as Litecoin uses the exact same approach. Only difference between LTC and BTC is LTC uses a higher block mining frequency (more blocks are mined per hour). Which ain't gonna help sh*t if your transaction doesn't get relayed because you didn't include a fee.

[Stephen Gornick]

I have heard you can add a fee after the fact by using the coin as an input in a fee-paying transaction. This would likely require manual coin manipulation though.

That "child pays for parent" patch was not ever released in the client and I'm not aware of any miners using it.

[Pokerfan]

Failed attempt to promote litecoin. Nothing to see, please move along.

[Kouye]

Sounds like your problem is with the casino then.

Go gamble give money in to "real" casinos and leave bitcoin alone.

Sincerly (hoping you are so broke you cannot gamble for a cent ever, anymore),
Thanks.

[bbit]

ya ya cry me a river

[faiza1990]

Sounds like your problem is with the casino then.

Go gamble give money in to "real" casinos and leave bitcoin alone.

Sincerly (hoping you are so broke you cannot gamble for a cent ever, anymore),
Thanks.

good tip for this guy which just want some support for LTC

[johny1976]

Sounds like your problem is with the casino then.

Go gamble give money in to "real" casinos and leave bitcoin alone.

Sincerly (hoping you are so broke you cannot gamble for a cent ever, anymore),
Thanks.

good tip for this guy which just want some support for LTC

My payment didn't come yet. Still 0 confirmations. I'm very angry. But YES, I'm just doing advertisement for Litecoin here... Stupid iditots. Do you think I want to promote Litecoin? Yes. You're right, but I'm doing this from this moment. Because Bitcoin is the most slowly shit I ever seen. So yes, Litecoin is 1000000 times better.

Fuck off

[johny1976]

I hate Bitcoin from this moment. Fuck Bitcoin Blockchain.

[faiza1990]

I hate Bitcoin from this moment. Fuck Bitcoin Blockchain.

why are you going to be more rude what happen to you from Bitcoin and Blockchain

[johny1976]

I hate Bitcoin from this moment. Fuck Bitcoin Blockchain.

why are you going to be more rude what happen to you from Bitcoin and Blockchain

It dissapeard. Bitcoin network stole my 3 BTCs
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=293554.0

[faiza1990]

I hate Bitcoin from this moment. Fuck Bitcoin Blockchain.

why are you going to be more rude what happen to you from Bitcoin and Blockchain

It dissapeard. Bitcoin network stole my 3 BTCs
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=293554.0

sorry for you cannot say anything right now you check may have something wrong or contact them just cany say this right now

[Itcher]

No reason to become ugly about bitcoin.

But for real we have two problems:

- you have to pay fees. MultuBit / electrum give you no option not to pay fees. The dream of bitcoin as feeless money-transmitter is dead
- even if you pay fees the transaction is annoyingly slow. I had to wait one or two hour, and I payed fees.

This is really bad for bitcoin

[will1982]

No reason to become ugly about bitcoin.

But for real we have two problems:

- you have to pay fees. MultuBit / electrum give you no option not to pay fees. The dream of bitcoin as feeless money-transmitter is dead
- even if you pay fees the transaction is annoyingly slow. I had to wait one or two hour, and I payed fees.

This is really bad for bitcoin

The fee right now is 0.0005 BTC. That's 6 cents USD. First off:
-Bitcoin still is the cheapest way to move money internationally or long distance
-There has always been a fee. When did you dream about "feeless" money transfer?

[johny1976]

No reason to become ugly about bitcoin.

But for real we have two problems:

- you have to pay fees. MultuBit / electrum give you no option not to pay fees. The dream of bitcoin as feeless money-transmitter is dead
- even if you pay fees the transaction is annoyingly slow. I had to wait one or two hour, and I payed fees.

This is really bad for bitcoin

No reason? ae u kidding me?

i just lost ~ 370 USD

[Itcher]

No reason to become ugly about bitcoin.

But for real we have two problems:

- you have to pay fees. MultuBit / electrum give you no option not to pay fees. The dream of bitcoin as feeless money-transmitter is dead
- even if you pay fees the transaction is annoyingly slow. I had to wait one or two hour, and I payed fees.

This is really bad for bitcoin

The fee right now is 0.0005 BTC. That's 6 cents USD. First off:
-Bitcoin still is the cheapest way to move money internationally or long distance
-There has always been a fee. When did you dream about "feeless" money transfer?

6 cent are 6 cent more than I have to pay when using my bank account.

[Ephebus]

OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?

[johny1976]

OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?

Good question. Anybody knows an answer?

[Mitchell]

No reason to become ugly about bitcoin.

But for real we have two problems:

- you have to pay fees. MultuBit / electrum give you no option not to pay fees. The dream of bitcoin as feeless money-transmitter is dead
- even if you pay fees the transaction is annoyingly slow. I had to wait one or two hour, and I payed fees.

This is really bad for bitcoin

The fee right now is 0.0005 BTC. That's 6 cents USD. First off:
-Bitcoin still is the cheapest way to move money internationally or long distance
-There has always been a fee. When did you dream about "feeless" money transfer?

6 cent are 6 cent more than I have to pay when using my bank account.

Lol, have fun sending money to a place outside your country. From USA to Europa for example. I really like BitCoin and if you aren't dumb enough to add enough fees (which costs almost nothing) you will have a great time using it. Also, taking a day to confirm isn't bad at all. If I send money to another bank in my own country it can take up to 1 day before it's processed. If I want to send it to the country next to me this increases significant (and would cost me a lot more). So I prefer BitCoin above all.

OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?

As far as I know, yes.

[Liquid]

correct if wrong but they are always sent to the destination address, when miners get around to processing it if it lacks the fees it might take a few days.

[EFS]

OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?

Good question. Anybody knows an answer?

I wonder the answer of this question too. Is there a chance them to lost in space or something? How to recover long-time pending payments?

[Liquid]

http://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

[greyhawk]

Lol, have fun sending money to a place outside your country.

That.... might actually be an American thing. I have never paid anything for anything at my bank. Then again my monthly influx on that account is high enough I qualify for the Never-Pay-Anything-For-Anything type account. So maybe this is a problem specifically only affecting poors.

[Itcher]

No reason to become ugly about bitcoin.

But for real we have two problems:

- you have to pay fees. MultuBit / electrum give you no option not to pay fees. The dream of bitcoin as feeless money-transmitter is dead
- even if you pay fees the transaction is annoyingly slow. I had to wait one or two hour, and I payed fees.

This is really bad for bitcoin

The fee right now is 0.0005 BTC. That's 6 cents USD. First off:
-Bitcoin still is the cheapest way to move money internationally or long distance
-There has always been a fee. When did you dream about "feeless" money transfer?

6 cent are 6 cent more than I have to pay when using my bank account.

Lol, have fun sending money to a place outside your country. From USA to Europa for example. I really like BitCoin and if you aren't dumb enough to add enough fees (which costs almost nothing) you will have a great time using it. Also, taking a day to confirm isn't bad at all. If I send money to another bank in my own country it can take up to 1 day before it's processed. If I want to send it to the country next to me this increases significant (and would cost me a lot more). So I prefer BitCoin above all.

Lol, I have a great time using my bank-account to spend money without paying any fee. Even if every shop accepts bitcoin it would be the worse option.

International transaction are not the issue here. If widely used bitcoin could be an improvement for real.

[Ephebus]

First, congratulations to the trolls who have bank accounts that charge no fees because they're very wealthy or whatever other reason. Second, a "please get lost" to the other trolls bashing the OP because he was playing at whatever casino he wanted to play at.

Now let's get back to the problem in question: the OP's transaction disappeared from blockchain.info, and he hasn't received his Bitcoins. Did they return to the casino's address they were sent from? With the transaction information gone, how do we know for sure what happened to the Bitcoins?

[Birdy]

OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?

Good question. Anybody knows an answer?

They were never sent in the first place then and are still on the old address.
(might only be that some clients don't show them, because they are marked as "reserved to be sent")
Bitcoins are never "lost in cyberspace" they are always on a Bitcoin address.

[Itcher]

First, congratulations to the trolls who have bank accounts that charge no fees because they're very wealthy or whatever other reason. Second, a "please get lost" to the other trolls bashing the OP because he was playing at whatever casino he wanted to play at.

Now let's get back to the problem in question: the OP's transaction disappeared from blockchain.info, and he hasn't received his Bitcoins. Did they return to the casino's address they were sent from? With the transaction information gone, how do we know for sure what happened to the Bitcoins?

OPs title was "Bitcoin is slowly shit." not "my transaction disappeared from blockchain.info". Who are you to call people troll who complain about slowliness and fees of bitcoin?

Sorry, if you are not willing to hear this. But both - slowliness and fees - are problems.

[marcovaldo]

Slow is fine, as long as it confirms.
I am still waiting for 10 days for 0.02 btc to confirm (just moving from one wallet to an other)....

[Ephebus]

OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?

Good question. Anybody knows an answer?

They were never sent in the first place then and are still on the old address.
(might only be that some clients don't show them, because they are marked as "reserved to be sent")
Bitcoins are never "lost in cyberspace" they are always on a Bitcoin address.

That makes a lot of sense. But isn't it kind of pointless for a client to generate a transaction number for a transaction that is never going to occur? That's what's confusing me. And from what the OP said, it seems that at some point the transaction was showing on blockchain.info.

[Birdy]

That makes a lot of sense. But isn't it kind of pointless for a client to generate a transaction number for a transaction that is never going to occur? That's what's confusing me. And from what the OP said, it seems that at some point the transaction was showing up on blockchain.info.

The client creates a transaction number and broadcasts the transaction, so that miners can grab and include them (and blockchain can show the transaction), but until it's included in a block the Bitcoins didn't move.

You see the blockchain points to an address x and says "the 3 Bitcoins are there" and including the transaction in a block moves the pointer "the 3 bitcoins are there at address y"
The Bitcoins are never really "sent", so they cannot be lost. They are either on address x or y.

[greyhawk]

OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?

Good question. Anybody knows an answer?

They were never sent in the first place then and are still on the old address.
(might only be that some clients don't show them, because they are marked as "reserved to be sent")
Bitcoins are never "lost in cyberspace" they are always on a Bitcoin address.

That makes a lot of sense. But isn't it kind of pointless for a client to generate a transaction number for a transaction that is never going to occur? That's what's confusing me. And from what the OP said, it seems that at some point the transaction was showing on blockchain.info.

If you look in the other thread, you'll see what happened that a transaction was sent out that relied on a previous unconfirmed transaction. The second transaction was rejected and removed from the network.

[nicholasd]

I had the same issue transfering a few bitcents from my MtGox account, That little pesky checkbox doesn't look checked even when it is when I'm on my Ubuntu box

[nildram]

There are four (possibly more, depending on if there's an even longer chain than I can quickly see displayed) unconfirmed inputs with below-recommended fees. That transaction will probably disappear from the queue before it ever goes through.

Do you mean that it might never actually go through?

[greyhawk]

There are four (possibly more, depending on if there's an even longer chain than I can quickly see displayed) unconfirmed inputs with below-recommended fees. That transaction will probably disappear from the queue before it ever goes through.

Do you mean that it might never actually go through?

No, it has already been rejected completely. See also the other thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=293554.0

[Ephebus]

OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?

Good question. Anybody knows an answer?

They were never sent in the first place then and are still on the old address.
(might only be that some clients don't show them, because they are marked as "reserved to be sent")
Bitcoins are never "lost in cyberspace" they are always on a Bitcoin address.

That makes a lot of sense. But isn't it kind of pointless for a client to generate a transaction number for a transaction that is never going to occur? That's what's confusing me. And from what the OP said, it seems that at some point the transaction was showing on blockchain.info.

If you look in the other thread, you'll see what happened that a transaction was sent out that relied on a previous unconfirmed transaction. The second transaction was rejected and removed from the network.

The client creates a transaction number and broadcasts the transaction, so that miners can grab and include them (and blockchain can show the transaction), but until it's included in a block the Bitcoins didn't move.

So, in a nutshell: the Bitcoins were sent from an address belonging to the casino and blockchain.info showed the transaction until it was rejected by the network because of insufficient fees. That way, the Bitcoins remain in the casino's original wallet. Now it's up to the casino operators to verify that and, if they're honest, correct the OP's balance on their site or send the Bitcoins again with enough fees. Correct?

[Birdy]

So, in a nutshell: the Bitcoins were sent from an address belonging to the casino and blockchain.info showed the transaction until it was rejected by the network because of insufficient fees.

Edit: see post below ^^

That way, the Bitcoins remain in the casino's original wallet. Now it's up to the casino operators to verify that and, if they're honest, correct the OP's balance on their site or send the Bitcoins again with enough fees. Correct?

Yes, that's correct.

[greyhawk]

So, in a nutshell: the Bitcoins were sent from an address belonging to the casino and blockchain.info showed the transaction until it was rejected by the network because of insufficient fees. That way, the Bitcoins remain in the casino's original wallet.

No, it has nothing to do with fees. The input to the transaction was taken from previous unconfirmed transactions. The network couldn't verify the input as existing as it is unconfirmed so the transaction was rejected. The casino will have to update their routines to handle building transactions correctly.

Now it's up to the casino operators to verify that and, if they're honest, correct the OP's balance on their site or send the Bitcoins again with enough fees. Correct?

That's correct.

[Ephebus]

No, it has nothing to do with fees. The input to the transaction was taken from previous unconfirmed transactions. The network couldn't verify the input as existing as it is unconfirmed so the transaction was rejected. The casino will have to update their routines to handle building transactions correctly.

That's great information. Do you know if something like that could happen if someone sent Bitcoins from the standard Bitcoin client with -paytxfee=0 ?

[greyhawk]

No, it has nothing to do with fees. The input to the transaction was taken from previous unconfirmed transactions. The network couldn't verify the input as existing as it is unconfirmed so the transaction was rejected. The casino will have to update their routines to handle building transactions correctly.

That's great information. Do you know if something like that could happen if someone sent Bitcoins from the standard Bitcoin client with -paytxfee=0 ?

I'm pretty sure the standard client will not let you send a transaction from unconfirmed inputs. But then again I have not tried.

[Birdy]

No, it has nothing to do with fees. The input to the transaction was taken from previous unconfirmed transactions. The network couldn't verify the input as existing as it is unconfirmed so the transaction was rejected. The casino will have to update their routines to handle building transactions correctly.

That's great information. Do you know if something like that could happen if someone sent Bitcoins from the standard Bitcoin client with -paytxfee=0 ?

Without basing it in unconfirmed inputs:
As far as I know the wallet would keep on broadcasting the transaction and try to get it through (and you wouldn't see the Bitcoins in there as they are marked as reserved for transaction). So you would have to screw around the wallet a bit to get rid of that.
That's more of a guess than knowing though ^^

I'm pretty sure the standard client will not let you send a transaction from unconfirmed inputs. But then again I have not tried.

When you do a transaction to an address within your wallet, you can send those Bitcoins again before the transaction is confirmed.

[Ephebus]

No, it has nothing to do with fees. The input to the transaction was taken from previous unconfirmed transactions. The network couldn't verify the input as existing as it is unconfirmed so the transaction was rejected. The casino will have to update their routines to handle building transactions correctly.

That's great information. Do you know if something like that could happen if someone sent Bitcoins from the standard Bitcoin client with -paytxfee=0 ?

Without basing it in unconfirmed inputs:
As far as I know the wallet would keep on broadcasting the transaction and try to get it through (and you wouldn't see the Bitcoins in there as they are marked as reserved for transaction). So you would have to screw around the wallet a bit to get rid of that.
That's more of a guess than knowing though ^^

That raises another interesting question: how to make that broadcasting stop in case the sender realizes he has set the transaction fee too low and wants to correct it?

[memvola]

i just lost ~ 370 USD

The casino has the coins. You need to contact them, give the transaction number and explain the situation. They have your money, and they have the obligation to re-initiate the transfer.

Edit: Also, as others have said, ALL blockchain based coins have the same mechanism, so it's not a Bitcoin specific thing. They made a bad transaction and the money never actually arrived.

[crazy_rabbit]

This should be moved to service discussion for the whatever Casino he was dealing with. This isn't a Bitcoin problem, it's user error on the part of the end user or the casino.

[Ephebus]

This should be moved to service discussion for the whatever Casino he was dealing with. This isn't a Bitcoin problem, it's user error on the part of the end user or the casino.

Yes, but on the other hand, the thread turned out very informative on a few aspects of the whole process of transactions and fees that many people have lots of doubts about, so I'd leave it here if it were up to me to decide.

[LiteCoinGuy]

Litecoin is 1000 times faster that fuckin bitcoin.

Transaction alredy took 26 hours and still "0 confirmations".

Fuck Bitcoin. The slowliest thing on whole world.

Crap

you right, and soon litecoin will be much faster then today.

[memvola]

Litecoin is 1000 times faster that fuckin bitcoin.

Transaction alredy took 26 hours and still "0 confirmations".

Fuck Bitcoin. The slowliest thing on whole world.

Crap

you right, and soon litecoin will be much faster then today.

And it will accept any and all transactions without fees even if the inputs are unconfirmed! Because all this talk is on-topic! /sarcasm

[Birdy]

Litecoin is 1000 times faster that fuckin bitcoin.

Transaction alredy took 26 hours and still "0 confirmations".

Fuck Bitcoin. The slowliest thing on whole world.

Crap

you right, and soon litecoin will be much faster then today.

Would you stop that, please? You are acting like a door-to-door salesman that desperately tries to sell his stuff.

That raises another interesting question: how to make that broadcasting stop in case the sender realizes he has set the transaction fee too low and wants to correct it?

Sadly I cannot answer this.
I'm pretty sure it's possible and I remember reading something about pywallet.
The folks in the tech section surely can help with such a problem, if it should ever arrive.

[crazy_rabbit]

Litecoin is 1000 times faster that fuckin bitcoin.

Transaction alredy took 26 hours and still "0 confirmations".

Fuck Bitcoin. The slowliest thing on whole world.

Crap

you right, and soon litecoin will be much faster then today.

You're totally missing the point that litecoin is functionally identical to bitcoin, right? Works the same, so the same problems with Bitcoin confirms can happen with litecoin.

Anyway- another thing to think about it is that it's not the Bitcoin protocol itself that is causing the problem, it's more that miners have formed a cartel to enforce requiring network fees. (Which is how they are supposed to be paid after mining is finished) Miners basically agree that it's in their best interest to get everyone to by default pay a generous mining fee, because it's their money. They all know it, so they all do it, they don't really have an incentive to include transactions with no mining fee. At this point everyones out to make money. It would be the same with litecoin and will be the same once it gets far enough along. Part of the payment for mining is you earn the transaction fees. Hence, they aren't about to let people get comfortable with using it for free.

[xxjs]

Litecoin is 1000 times faster that fuckin bitcoin.

It in the name - fast as lite 3*10**8 m/s. Ask Einstein.

[greyhawk]

brb announcing fasterererercoin

[DeathAndTaxes]

That raises another interesting question: how to make that broadcasting stop in case the sender realizes he has set the transaction fee too low and wants to correct it?

It can be done but it should be considered a hack as a last resort.  You will need to use the pywallet tool and delete the transaction from your wallet.  You will want to make separate backups BEFORE and AFTER the update.  Then you will need to ensure you node stays offline until other nodes forget about it.  If your node immediately goes online there is a chance another node will relay your tx back to you and your wallet will happily include it in its history (essentially undoing your erase so that is why I said make a post edit backup).  Still it can be done.  Eventually the entire network will drop your old tx and without your node to "remind them" by rebroadcasting it will be like the original tx never existed.  You can then create a new tx.  

You may wonder why doesn't the client just allow you to cancel.  Due to the way Bitcoin works you have no control over what other nodes do so while you can trivially "undoing" a tx locally you can force other nodes to also perform that undo.  This means your node will be out of sync with the rest of the network.  It is a common abstraction to think of "the network" as this unified system but really it is more like a sea of independent nodes which speak the same language.  So what kind of weird problems could occur if there was a "cancel" button in the client.

a) You can cancel a tx locally but it still end being confirmed in a block.
b) You can cancel a tx locally but your peers reject your modified tx because they still see the original as valid and thus the replacement is a fraudulent double spend attempt.
c) You can cancel a tx locally and create a new one but it happens to use different coins.  Both tx end up being included in a block and you double paid.
d) You can cancel a tx locally and pay a different person with those coins but the original tx confirms and now to the second person it looks like you performed a double spend.
Starting to see while you can technically cancel a tx locally (just delete it and stop broadcasting it) allowing users to do that is likely going to create a huge amount of confusion and chaos.

Still this entire issues has less to do with fees and more to do with the person running the casino has no clue what they are doing.  Not only did they send low priority tx w/ no fees (which means many nodes won't even relay them due to "spam" prevention) but the tx had NO CHANCE of being included in a block even with a massive fee.  The reason is that the inputs for the tx (all inputs are outputs of prior txs) are from txs (parents) which aren't confirmed either and one of those has the same issue (grandparent tx is unconfirmed).  The operator is utterly incompetent.  Worse the default client prevents you from making these types of mistakes.  You can't spend unconfirmed outputs and you can't bypass the min mandatory fee on low priority txs.  So the operator is using raw txs.  Raw txs plus incompetence is a good way to lose Bitcoins forever.  You can create raw tx which result in the permanent loss of Bitcoins.  It is a tool for experts only, experts who have done extensive testing.

As for "I want to hack my client because I don't want to pay fees" mentality.  Really this is cutting off your nose to spite your face.  The "min mandatory fee" ONLY applies to low priority txs and (post v0.8.2) is 0.1 mBTC or about $0.01.  It exists as an anti-DOS mechanism so even if you bypass it by hacking the client (or using raw txs) there is a good chance not all tx wil be relayed by all nodes. 

The simpler longer term solution for unconfirmed txs is for something which has been proposed called the "child pays parent" patch.   It doesn't need to change the protocol just how miners pick txs.  Currently miners will only include txs in a block if the inputs are already confirmed.  So you can't confirm a tx (tx A) which won't confirmed by spending it (tx B) because even if tx B has a fee no miner will include it until tx A has been confirmed.   With "child pays parent".  Miners will look backwards to find the unconfirmed inputs and include them as well.  So if miner accepts tx B (which has a fee) and tx B has tx A (unconfirmed) as an input then the miner would include both in the block.  Of course that still won't solve general incompetence which is the larger issue not the network.

[BeepBeep2]

Pretty lame if you ask me - especially when bitcoin touts itself as being "free of transaction fees". Sooo, you don't have to pay a fee, but it will take over a day for confirmation - gay.

I'm definitely holding onto my litecoins.

Like USD Bank Transfers and Money Orders are quicker 

[DeathAndTaxes]

Pretty lame if you ask me - especially when bitcoin touts itself as being "free of transaction fees". Sooo, you don't have to pay a fee, but it will take over a day for confirmation - gay.

LTC has minimum mandatory fees (mmf) on low priority txs just like Bitcoin does.  The irony of your statement is that the mmf for LTC is about double that of BTC.

Minimum mandatory fee for low priority txs (high priority tx have no required fees on either network)
LTC: 0.01 LTC  (10 mLTC) = 2.5 US cents per KB
BTC: 0.0001 BTC (0.1 mBTC) =  1.3 US cents per KB

Facts.  I know they can be annoying.

[Rampion]

Pretty lame if you ask me - especially when bitcoin touts itself as being "free of transaction fees". Sooo, you don't have to pay a fee, but it will take over a day for confirmation - gay.

I'm definitely holding onto my litecoins.

So... You registered in here in May 24th 2011 and you still do not understand LTC is a CLONE of BTC, which means that as soon as LTC has the same transaction volume as BTC you will need to pay fees to get your transactions in a block?

Really?

Seriously?

Wow. Just wow.

[BeepBeep2]

To sum things up, the OP is just a dumbass.

He had another thread in a different section about this and just recently reported that the issue was solved, the casino simply resent the BTC.
I've even had my mobile litecoin client get stuck in lingo sending payments before, no big deal, reset blockchain and resend.

Whoever tries to send without any fees is simply a dumbass. Fees have been necessary for quick transactions since I can remember, idiots were complaining that their transactions were lost back in 2011 even, because they didn't pay the fee.

As mining rewards shrink, and transaction activity increases, the TX fees will step in to cover paying the miners.

[CurbsideProphet]

This is bullshit, I mailed a letter with no stamp and the postal service didn't deliver.

Fuck the USPS.

[Kouye]

This is bullshit, I mailed a letter with no stamp and the postal service didn't deliver.

Fuck the USPS.

Not sure for other countries, but last time I checked, in france, when you send an unstamped letter, it is delivered, but recipient has to pay the stamp price to get the letter.
I'm wondering if that could be transposed to bitcoin, and I least think it's worth considering.

[crazy_rabbit]

So can this thread be locked and moved to the graveyard already?

[johny1976]

So can this thread be locked and moved to the graveyard already?

yes.

[Singlebyte]

So can this thread be locked and moved to the graveyard already?

I vote yes!