Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 10:09:52 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 [142] 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Blockchain.info - Bitcoin Block explorer & Currency Statistics  (Read 414036 times)
nimda
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784


0xFB0D8D1534241423


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 02:14:32 AM
 #2821

Getting this error every time I send some coins: "An outpoint is already spent [(94024681, 1)]" - using the Firefox extension, v3.1.3.

Doesn't seem to affect the transaction though. Any ideas?

I had an error sending coins where the account balance was told as 0 - "not sufficient funds." Resending again worked fine. I was using custom send.

I recommend asking me for a signature from my GPG key before doing a trade. I will NEVER deny such a request.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480802992
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480802992

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480802992
Reply with quote  #2

1480802992
Report to moderator
1480802992
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480802992

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480802992
Reply with quote  #2

1480802992
Report to moderator
1480802992
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480802992

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480802992
Reply with quote  #2

1480802992
Report to moderator
cardcomm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294



View Profile
November 21, 2013, 04:47:36 AM
 #2822


I'm having a problem with a stuck "shared send" transaction now for more than 24 hours.  I've sent a couple of support requests, and even provided more info that they asked for.

But there is still no resolution. I'm not even sure what happens in a shared send situation if the blockchain eventually gives up on the transactions. BTW, the blockchain.info shared send tool automatically added the transaction fee of 0.0001. That should have been enough, but I guess more may have made it move faster on the blockchain. I wish there were a way to set the fee for shared send.

Anyway, I'm getting stressed here - I need these funds. Does anyone have any suggestions on possible problems or solutions? I thought it was blockchain slowness at first, but now I think it's something more.

Just in case block chain.info support monitors this thread, my support ticket number is 12279. Help Please? Smiley


(This is the second time in a row "shared send" has been delayed for many hours for me. Doh! ) 


This transaction cleared for me finally. The BTC went in at around $640 US and soared above $800 US. By the time they FINALY came out of "shared send" they were worth $580 USD. Not a catastrophe, but a signifigant loss none the less, considering it cost me a business opportunity. 

Anyway, on to my real point:

I'm a newbie at it, but I did my best to track my way BACK through the transactions to find the ONE transaction that held up the long string of shared send transactions after it (mine being one of them).

What I found what that this transaction:
ec9f973b94234ea19812fa02d7edee8e98193d46b826b9597719d500e664f9c7

It had a LOT of inputs, a size of 4373 (bytes), and paid ZERO transaction fee. In other words, it's a terrible prospect for fast propagation through the blockchain.

This transition caused the entire string of transactions dependent on it to get held up for many hours, costing untold amounts of money. It seems that transactions such as this questionable one should be excluded from shared send activity, especially during periods of known high load.

While I welcome all thoughts and responses, I'm hoping for an official blockchain.info take on my observations.

Again, I could be way off as to the cause. I just know the last two of my shared sends have taken a LONG time to complete, to the point where they have been worse than useless. Certainly, other transactions during the same period WERE taking a long time to complete, but most completed far sooner than 30+ hours.

I'd love to see some sort of solution to this issue. Maybe it's simply a matter of adding a feature to check for the likelihood of confirmations before unclipping in a shared transaction.

Thanks for all your hard work. If this post belongs somewhere else, Mods please fell free to re-locate.

Easily see your cgminer status with my cgminerLCDStats app:  http://cardcomm.github.io/cgminerLCDStats/
Did my post help you or make you laugh? Let me know with Bitcoins at: 1CQfpMHQ5zVuZ5i9uxSHSSx4J8ZhehSjn3  Smiley
picobit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 547


Decor in numeris


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 08:14:04 AM
 #2823

This transition caused the entire string of transactions dependent on it to get held up for many hours, costing untold amounts of money. It seems that transactions such as this questionable one should be excluded from shared send activity, especially during periods of known high load.

While I welcome all thoughts and responses, I'm hoping for an official blockchain.info take on my observations.

I agree, such a transaction should be excluded from being reused in shared send.  I have no clue if that is practically possible.  NEVER use shared send or similar for time critical stuff, they do not guarantee that the money come back out quickly (indeed with the old mixed send, they mentioned that it could take a while).  Instead, make an extra wallet, do a shared send to that wallet today, and then use that wallet next time you send.

Also, it is unlikely that blockchain.info see you post, they are badly undermanned compared to the size of their operation (but then apart from shared send it is basically free).  You should contact their support directly, that increase the chance that they see this issue.
coinpr0n
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
November 21, 2013, 03:22:39 PM
 #2824

Getting this error every time I send some coins: "An outpoint is already spent [(94024681, 1)]" - using the Firefox extension, v3.1.3.

Doesn't seem to affect the transaction though. Any ideas?

Same here. Similar problem.

rammy2k2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190



View Profile WWW
November 21, 2013, 05:52:43 PM
 #2825

how can we buy BTC with SMS ? i cant find any option in my wallet  Huh
coinpr0n
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
November 21, 2013, 06:07:05 PM
 #2826

how can we buy BTC with SMS ? i cant find any option in my wallet  Huh

I don't think that's an option. Correct me if I'm wrong.. but you cannot buy BTC on Blockchain.info. It's a wallet service, not an exchange.

LuciferUA
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 09:17:11 PM
 #2827

When using the API to receive payment of certain payments do not reach the destination. They do not go to the primary address. Support is silent and does not respond to tickets. Very bad service!
MessyCoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 421



View Profile
November 22, 2013, 02:03:23 AM
 #2828

When I go into account settings on iphone app it sends me a 2-factor email code and says "2 attempts remaining". But I can then check my account settings just fine. Seems something wrong here!

MessyCoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 421



View Profile
November 22, 2013, 02:14:57 AM
 #2829

Also, I have 2-factor email authentication set for 2 different accounts. They both use the same email address. The authentication code sent for one account enabled me to log into the other! (This is using the website and I double-checked the account identifier in the email vs the account it logged me into - so definitely something wrong here)

cardcomm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294



View Profile
November 22, 2013, 08:42:38 AM
 #2830

This transition caused the entire string of transactions dependent on it to get held up for many hours, costing untold amounts of money. It seems that transactions such as this questionable one should be excluded from shared send activity, especially during periods of known high load.

While I welcome all thoughts and responses, I'm hoping for an official blockchain.info take on my observations.

I agree, such a transaction should be excluded from being reused in shared send.  I have no clue if that is practically possible.  NEVER use shared send or similar for time critical stuff, they do not guarantee that the money come back out quickly (indeed with the old mixed send, they mentioned that it could take a while).  Instead, make an extra wallet, do a shared send to that wallet today, and then use that wallet next time you send.

Also, it is unlikely that blockchain.info see you post, they are badly undermanned compared to the size of their operation (but then apart from shared send it is basically free).  You should contact their support directly, that increase the chance that they see this issue.


Thanks for your response. Yes, I did open a ticket with them, although that was before I was able to fully investigate and articulate the details mentioned above. Adding info to a ticket seldom seems to get a response. Not sure if I should post another ticket or not.

To me, it seems like a bug.

Yes, I agree that in a perfect world one would do all ones BTC transactions well in advance to allow for any amount of variance in shared send or the block chain. However, the brutal reality is that with today's volatile BTC prices one cannot always simply bear risk of holding BTC for extended periods.

Perhaps BTC is a rich man's game after all...

Easily see your cgminer status with my cgminerLCDStats app:  http://cardcomm.github.io/cgminerLCDStats/
Did my post help you or make you laugh? Let me know with Bitcoins at: 1CQfpMHQ5zVuZ5i9uxSHSSx4J8ZhehSjn3  Smiley
piuk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910



View Profile WWW
November 22, 2013, 05:12:39 PM
 #2831

Sorry for not posting for a while, I do monitor this thread daily and read everyone's suggestions (As do Mandrik, Nick and Roger).

Bug, when using android app (last version), it adds a fee of 0.0005 instead of 0.0001 btc.

Fixed in the latest update.

BIP32 support?

Eventually.

I'd like a refresh button in the new blockchain chrome extension.

Added.

Quote
Shared Coin (Coinjoin) is now available for free to all blockchain wallet users. Secure your privacy and say no to CoinValidation!
https://twitter.com/blockchain/status/402224010492006400

Smiley

Looking for feedback from those that have used shared coin. Did you experience any errors? Were you happy with the results?

There's a problem with opening wallets with 20 000 iterations of PBKDF2, couldn't log in at first, got a "syntax error" message, after managing to log in all my BTC addresses were zeroed, and loading one of the previous wallet backup only helped after trying about 10 times (with different backup). My browser is Chrome (newest version).

From some quick testing I couldn't replicate this but will look into the problem further.

[Chrome extension (maybe others?)] Using Custom Send to send a transaction to multiple addresses, one of the addresses was invalid when I clicked Review Payment: the whole interface locks up leaving all buttons useless.

Should be fixed in the chrome extension. The web interface will be fixed next update.

Could you reduce minimum transaction amount for the Receiving API? 0.001 BTC is worth $0.7 now...

It is now 0.0005. I don't really want to lower it any further yet until the network fee is reduced.

I'm having a problem with a stuck "shared send" transaction now for more than 24 hours.  I've sent a couple of support requests, and even provided more info that they asked for.

Sorry for this problem, this issue was your payment into shared send took a long time to confirm. Shared send will not accept zero confirmation transactions unless some very specific conditions are met.

It appears the Firstbits API is broken. Neither of the two API calls return any data.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=339981.0

Getting this error every time I send some coins: "An outpoint is already spent [(94024681, 1)]" - using the Firefox extension, v3.1.3.

Doesn't seem to affect the transaction though. Any ideas?

I believe this is because the request to /pushtx is timing out causing the app to try and re-submit the transaction, then the second submission is seen as a double spend. An update has been submitted to the firefox extension but it could take a while to get approved.

how can we buy BTC with SMS ? i cant find any option in my wallet  Huh

Sorry, this option isn't available anymore.

When using the API to receive payment of certain payments do not reach the destination. They do not go to the primary address. Support is silent and does not respond to tickets. Very bad service!

I think the problem is your payments are below the minimum 0.0005 BTC value. Until the balance of a forwarding address reaches the minimum it will not be forwarded. If it is not due to this then please PM me your ticket number.

-----

- Encrypted paper wallets can now be scanned in the web interface and android app.
 




SebastianJu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


Free Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile


View Profile WWW
November 23, 2013, 12:11:34 AM
 #2832

Why arent the payments sorted according to the timestamps correctly? Its extremely annoying to find a block of payments above another block of payments even though the timestamps say they happened the other way around. I wasted some time now to find out why the balances arent matching since i found that its matching... only the sort order isnt correct.

Example: https://blockchain.info/de/address/115tTroRo3B9ZDQ6ATJGDCHcNEVbjJoZnF
The transaction cc24d5ed29d1810a81764e8dbda13dbe3255c57c3b71648f1e1196de2e9f535d is between other transactions that were done before and after that transaction. Though in fact it was the very first transaction. And the timestamp seems to show this already. Only the sorting is wrong.

Can i change this somehow? Any other solution?

 

██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
 
Get Free Bitcoin Now!
  ¦¯¦¦¯¦    ¦¯¦¦¯¦    ¦¯¦¦¯¦    ¦¯¦¦¯¦   
0.8%-1% House Edge
[/
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974


View Profile
November 23, 2013, 09:36:27 PM
 #2833


The basic search on the front page does not seem to be working for me.  I enter an address or transaction hash, it waits for a bit, then back to a blank search input screen.  I don't see any blocked pop-ups or whatever.  The transaction I was attempting to evaluate went through fine it seems.

I looked back a few pages in this thread and didn't see any similar complaints.  Anyone else notice this?

I'm using and Chromium: Version 25.0.1364.97 (183676)


solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
November 23, 2013, 10:20:32 PM
 #2834

The mining profit and electricity consumption stats are said to be based on electricity consumption of 600 w/gigahash. This is out of date by factor of at least  100 . Can you update? (Block Erupters are about 7.5 w/ghs and some of the newer ASICS are under a watt). Otherwise the false impression is being given that the network is hugely inefficient in terms of electricity consumption, which is unfortunate.

The electricity cost on the existing chart could either be changed a certain date when the first ASICs became available (1st Feb 2013?) or a new chart started for only ASICs . Not sure which would be better.

I have seen a few news articles mention how wasteful Bitcoin is of electricity, and I think they are using this data and not understanding that ASICs are much more efficient.  Could the consumption estimate be reduced by at least 100x commencing from March 1st 2013 when ASICs became a significant fraction of network hashing power?

Great site and good work guys!

Remember remember the 5th of November
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526

Reverse engineer from time to time


View Profile
November 25, 2013, 12:48:36 AM
 #2835

Piuk, does your site have a Windows XP loading bar with the WinXP logo? I just opened your site and for a moment I was seeing the menu of the site and under it a blank page with the animated Windows XP logo and loading bar(when booting up).

BTC:1AiCRMxgf1ptVQwx6hDuKMu4f7F27QmJC2
picobit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 547


Decor in numeris


View Profile
November 25, 2013, 07:27:21 AM
 #2836

Piuk, does your site have a Windows XP loading bar with the WinXP logo? I just opened your site and for a moment I was seeing the menu of the site and under it a blank page with the animated Windows XP logo and loading bar(when booting up).
I think that is a joke - it means the site is down.

Such things were funny back when BTC were essentially worthless, but not any more.  Our sense of humour is inversely proportional to the amount of money we have placed on a web site.  Smiley
ParabelluM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
November 26, 2013, 05:56:57 PM
 #2837

My wallet was emptied by this guy https://blockchain.info/address/1brain7kAZxPagLt2HRLxqyc3VgGSa1GR

My address 19JsLFDRxuTsAjapE79FgoVNdNdB2hNU5M was recently created with a password of 12 characters and encrypted twice, and at the same time i was in my blockchain.info wallet (you can see the IP) that get frozen and not synchronized, then leave and go back inside and I find It took out the funds...
trauf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 6


View Profile
November 27, 2013, 02:31:23 PM
 #2838

Hey,

I love your wallet! Thanks for this great service.
But I also have a question, I have LTC (and other alt-coins) and it would be great if you will support them as well in your wallet, so that we can choose between btc / ltc (and maybe other currencies) in the wallet.
Are there any plans to implement this feature or will you give this request at least a try?
nimda
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784


0xFB0D8D1534241423


View Profile
November 27, 2013, 06:59:06 PM
 #2839

Firstbits is broken? Searching for "1Nimda" and "1nimda" report "Firstbits not found", but the link to my address works just fine.

I recommend asking me for a signature from my GPG key before doing a trade. I will NEVER deny such a request.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974


View Profile
November 27, 2013, 07:48:50 PM
 #2840

Hey,

I love your wallet! Thanks for this great service.
But I also have a question, I have LTC (and other alt-coins) and it would be great if you will support them as well in your wallet, so that we can choose between btc / ltc (and maybe other currencies) in the wallet.
Are there any plans to implement this feature or will you give this request at least a try?

I can see how the various Bitcoin related work that blockchain info may have planned could absorb all of their resources.

If blockchain.info was willing to work with others in formulating UCE methods of wallet management in alternate crypto-currencies at least to the extent that they could generally audit the architecture and form a more close relationship with the principles than I could achieve, I would find it valuable.  At this point, I have more confidence in ~piuk than in almost anyone else in the ecosystem (which, to be fair, isn't saying a lot.)

Relateldy, I think there may be some symbiosis between blockchain.info and mega.co.nz.  I would love to see some relationship between these two entities develop.  They both use data management methods which are right for our time IMHO.

 edit: spelled piuk correctly.

Pages: « 1 ... 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 [142] 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!