Another mistake in Bitcoin fees?

[crwth]

Just like what pooya87 said, there could be another reason for it. It's what I was thinking about when I read the article. I mean, how can you be so careless with your coins? Manual fees will be verified before sending the transaction, and I doubt that it's just an "honest" mistake towards it. Unless it's what Blockstream suggests, it's a self-transfer? There would probably no more follow-up on this in the future, and I hope no one gets to make an expensive mistake like that.

It does put the transaction on the radar already when there's a ridiculously high fee. So if some authorities look, they might find a way to launder it or something.

[pooya87]

~
I was thinking that too. Although, if I wanted to launder money, I wouldn't go through that way no matter my equipment. Maybe they didn't use a simple wallet. Could they possibly do a mistake through the command line?

yes, if it was an automated system that was doing something like consolidating the inputs automatically without any human intervention it could be possible to have some sort of bug that led to setting the fees this high.

[davis196]

how do you know that this is a mistake and not intentional?

i am always skeptical about these cases being a "mistake". all wallets that i have seen already have a good way of warning the user of "absurdly high fees" to prevent mistakes like this one. they look more like bribes to miners or possibly even a money laundry case although a pretty bad one at that.

I kinda agree with that.The cryptocurrency exchanges are working with the coins deposited by their customers so they wouldn't care that much about high transaction fees,since all those coins aren't a property of the crypto exchange owner.However,the crypto exchange owner should "refund" such losses caused by picking a higher transaction fee.
I'm not sure that this is a way to "bribe the miners".What's the benefit for the crypto exchange to bribe some miners?Higher transaction speed?Probably,but I still can't believe this.

[meanwords]

This guy is probably trying to hurry up to trade in a exchange, especially that Bitcoin is so volatile right now. Probably trying to catch something and swap transaction fee to transaction amount.

OR maybe it's like pooya87 said, it's probably money laundering too. Bribing doesn't make sense to me, so he's probably trying pay something from that miner (probably for drugs?).

[aesma]

Bribery or money laundering doesn't make sense to me because of the inputs. 750 inputs means 750 ways to track who is doing that. It's an unnecessary risk, when you could first mix these inputs one way or another (mixer, or through an exchange) to get a more reasonable number of inputs, then do the high fee thing. Even then, I don't really see the advantage of doing it that way, just send the inputs to a mixer, give the output (or voucher, even better) to the person you're paying, and that's it.

I stick to my idea that this is a script, probably used by an exchange, that had a bug/isn't coded properly.

edit : OK my bad the laundering part, with exclusive mining, to pass illegal money as mining revenue, is possible. I'm not sure authorities looking at it would really be fooled, though.

[Lordhermes]

This guy is probably trying to hurry up to trade in a exchange, especially that Bitcoin is so volatile right now. Probably trying to catch something and swap transaction fee to transaction amount.

But someone can't set transaction fees on exchange, its only automatic, so basically the sender is not in a rush, it would have been the senders mistake if actually in a ruch to set transaction fee in some noncustodial wallets.
Regarding refund, it can only happen if the sender knows any miner to discuss that with.

[catur123]

wow $ 47K !!
This is so scary.
This is a human error. Maybe the person making the transaction is too nervous or maybe sleepy. 
because in my opinion this is purely the person's own fault, I hope that you can be patient in dealing with this.

[oktana]

I don't think so too.

But that's just too much. Though the owner is to blame for not having looked well, I'd still consider it cruel if the miner takes all the money. Like that's just too much for a human's conscience to me.

[Lizzylove1]

This is unmeticulous on the side of.the sender. It appears maybe there was a glitch in the wallet and he didn't check fee but just hit send button. This is frequent in ethereum network when interacting with DAPP. What I do is either customise or just logout and come back again.

[stomachgrowls]

This guy is probably trying to hurry up to trade in a exchange, especially that Bitcoin is so volatile right now. Probably trying to catch something and swap transaction fee to transaction amount.

OR maybe it's like pooya87 said, it's probably money laundering too. Bribing doesn't make sense to me, so he's probably trying pay something from that miner (probably for drugs?).

Not really much on minding about money laundering on this part where i do saw that it is way too far off to presume with this situation but i cant deny that this is plausible or could really be a reason

but i do highly doubt that this was indeed a mistake by the sender and i do agree into the point that he might made up some swap of transaction amount and the fees that had been set.

Instead of sending 47k he accidentally set it up on the fees which is really a very costly mistake yet we cant be sure if the said miner who do pushed up that transaction would really return those funds
or would be completely lost forever.

[abderrazak belkhir]

The bitcoin fees are high in the curent time but 47 is not a logic amount and its surly a mistake
Its better to double cheek everything before making a transaction because the mistakes cannot be fixed in the crypto transactions

[GeorgeJohn]

i don't think it will be returned. even solo miner will not return it. not even a pool.

they wasted energy to keep mining transactions, they continue to do so when BTC price submerge that they hardly can't pay bills. this is just one instance that miners will have to breath good air that they at least get an amount they like. feel sorry for whoever made that mistake though.

So does it mean that if such mistake happen irrespective the amount or values of the btc the person transacting such can't retrieve he or her btc,so what should be advice to a novice in these type of transactions in case if things of this nature is about to occur via further transactions, i think they should be possible ways to make it to return if it happened.

[pooya87]

So does it mean that if such mistake happen irrespective the amount or values of the btc the person transacting such can't retrieve he or her btc,

yes, bitcoin transactions will always remain irreversible. however, the person making the mistake could contact the mining pool and ask if they would be willing to pay him back the fee that was paid by mistake. but that is still a new transaction coming out of the pocket of the pool owner.

so what should be advice to a novice in these type of transactions in case if things of this nature is about to occur via further transactions,

use wallets and tools that don't have silly bugs, pay attention to what you do and double check your transactions before broadcasting them.

i think they should be possible ways to make it to return if it happened.

no there really shouldn't be. anything else would be against immutability of bitcoin.

[TedMosby]

i don't think it will be returned. even solo miner will not return it. not even a pool.

-snip-

There is still a chance. At least to split the loss.
Just like what this ethereum user did last year.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/ethereum-user-who-accidentally-paid-365-000-fee-splits-loss-with-mining-pool-sparkpool

how do you know that this is a mistake and not intentional?

i am always skeptical about these cases being a "mistake". all wallets that i have seen already have a good way of warning the user of "absurdly high fees" to prevent mistakes like this one. they look more like bribes to miners or possibly even a money laundry case although a pretty bad one at that.

Or it was a clue of something? Or they did it for marketing purpose? Maybe.
All speculations are possible about this kind of situation.
The transaction was real, but we won’t know the story behind it.

[stompix]

Of course, it's not funny for the person or company indeed made a mistake but...

https://blockstream.info/tx/3ba0c9eaf3185898164518cda7e3433d1d2049188d737f2b2a7e188aaeb8b4de


you have to admit this can make one smile considering what happened.

how do you know that this is a mistake and not intentional?

Pretty suspicious indeed, those outputs were each funded with different transactions but same patterns, I got bored following the funding which took at least two weeks prior to this, at least 30-40 hops for each of them, either money laundering or a tumbling script that went wrong?

[asche]

Fee per byte is high but not that high enough but since there are a lot of inputs, the fee got increased significantly as you can see the size of the tx is 111713 bytes in total. However, I think it was a wrong fee estimation by the client they used.

I'm not 100 % clear how some wallets are choosing the fee they advise you to take for slow / standard / fast transfer.
But imagine you can "hack" the provider these wallets use for these propositions. At some point users are going to forget checking, and I guess some exchanges probably make this choice automated instead of having manual limits set.

Hard lesson learned for someone.

i am always skeptical about these cases being a "mistake". all wallets that i have seen already have a good way of warning the user of "absurdly high fees" to prevent mistakes like this one. they look more like bribes to miners or possibly even a money laundry case although a pretty bad one at that.

I'm too. I'd suppose we are going to know soon enough if someone kindly asks the miner to return those fees. At least on the some occasions they were mistakes on eth since people asked to return the payout...


He might just be wanting to consolidate inputs...

I'm not all to familiar with how fees are setup in clients, and I usually don't care setting a higher fee, but on this size would it be possible the user was trying to put a decimal fee and confuses the . and , in his client?

If anyone knows here if setting a decimal fee is even possible? (I obviously know you can't divide a sat, but if your tx is 10 vbyte, and you set a 2,5 sat/vbyte fee, that would make a 25 sat fee, of course for it to work there needs to be some rounding somewhere).

[Globb0]

There is something hooky in these transactions.

Some kind of laundering trick or something.

They are years old repetitive but what s the trick?

[slapper]

Damn. This is a huge mistake which can make a person desperate. $47k is a tremendous amount which can not easily be collected. And there is no way miner will refund those money. Which wallet is the prepetrator? Or he just simply mistype?

I have never made any such mistake like that. Be responsible for your money

[dimonstration]

We can't deny sometimes we just keep clicking yes or okay when we do transactions that cause sometime this mistake or loss whenever we don't read or check the inputs given by the system, the were times I only noticed the fees once the transaction is done, luckily its not that big as $47.

[asche]

They are years old repetitive but what s the trick?

1- Block rewards & fees are "clean money".
2- you can "privately" mine any transaction, including your own that you wouldn't have broadcasted. Once you are first on a block you publish it with your transaction and you "keep" the fees, and have a lot of "clean" bitcoin