What is Reddit's opinion of
Blockchair?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
➔ Blockchair website
By popularity on Reddit, this Service is:
100 reviews of this app found across Reddit:
There is no 31 TB of data. McAfee said he had 31 TB, but the only thing that "materialized" was the Eth transactions, which can't store much data. For reference, the entire Ethereum ledger (as in, every transaction to date) is ~250GB, or well under 1% of the data McAfee said he had ^source.
E: I misread your comment. No, we have no way to prove that the 31 TB that was uploaded to some torrent site was from McAfee. It's entirely likely that it's just junk/corrupted data that someone stuck up there to create a stir.
Do you know about the Bitcoin Cash fork? It looks like you have about ~$5,000 of Bitcoin Cash in that address on top of the $53,000 in Bitcoin.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/address/3MWibkwK2G4XJoJJrCHNVJ2SD1UVnTBrxq
yeah I read that it was over $93k. What a brilliant way to get $$ if you can hack Elon and safely get away with it.
edit: also if they lowered the price on Elon's from $1k to like $100 I bet they would've made a lot more. $57.4k was the peak I saw the account at. Now at $49k so assuming hackers are moving BTC now.
edit 2: NVM they are hacking a LOT more accounts. Uber and Kanye just got hit. Account up to $90k
can i ask why you chose to use non-segwitt addresses for this ? looks like the confirm time was just under a 20m average to be spendable.
https://blockexplorer.com/address/19zJMGCRQRkD9DggaWW1KUL59QyLLmXtAH . this recent 5 dollar tx cost .45 cents with one side being legacy and the other side being segwitt. https://twitter.com/whalecalls/status/936768494338760704 from segwit to segwit its far cheaper.
Your bch transaction https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/address/18yLtgmmA7Afn49oszEZQmLL18vLyaDJMV shows under penny transaction which is good but it wsnt spendable for 30 minutes.
Message included in the coinbase of the last 12.5 btc block ever mined:
"NYTimes 09/Apr/2020 with $2.3T injection, feds plan far exceeds 2008 rescue"
Amazing, love the nod to satoshi
EDIT: for everyone wondering: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/629999
It was manually added by the miner.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transactions?q=block_id(577628)&s=id(asc)#
Just check the 2nd transaction (first after coinbase) in that block. The fee is less than 1% than those of all the other transactions in that block.
Miner forgot to claim the reward, output is 0
Two blocks already minted on top.
;) total coin supply just went down for 12.5 coins.
It's kind of sad that the person who found this exploit burned it for $52k (and counting).
Seems like such a small payoff for immediate access to the most influential people's twitter accounts.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/bc1qxy2kgdygjrsqtzq2n0yrf2493p83kkfjhx0wlh
Yeah, this is what I came here to say.
This is the actual fee - Imagine being that guy and accidentally setting his fee.. Ouch.
Kind of reminds me of the guy on QuadrigaCX who accidentally set his BTC sell to $1060 instead of $10600 for 11 coins... got bought up almost instantly.
Missing zeroes or typing in the wrong fees is such a costly mistake :(
No 5150 BTC transactions exist within 3 days of the date posted.
BTC was also $800 each on 2014-01-15, who forgets about $4,120,000?
Trezor supports send-to and spend-from p2sh-segwit and bech32-segwit.
Blockchair has a [bech32 explorer] (not my address, no tipping please) (https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/bc1qk4kr8rnfwqfgjh5e7ljstfz9jzshvg4xsz9en8)
Nope, this is happening exactly as it was supposed to.
One major problem with Bitcoin's difficulty adjustment was that if a lot of miners leave in a short time, the network will run very slowly for weeks or months in extreme cases. BCC fixes this by adjusting difficulty in a different way. So if a lot of hash power leaves quickly the difficulty can shift down rapidly (within a day or two) to get back to an average of 10-minute blocks.
That is what we're seeing now. If you go to here you will see that up until block 478576 the difficulty remains the same- that's the difficulty left over at pre-fork levels. Now after the fork we only have a small % of the hash power as before the fork, so blocks came out very slowly. Starting with 478577 the new difficulty adjustment started to happen, and the difficulty rapidly moves down over the next several blocks, making the blocks more frequent.
Once this process finishes, BCC will be back to about one block every 10 minutes, just like BTC.
This is a bunch of sub- 1sat/byte transactions in the pool.
They don't get propagated to most nodes, but block explorers will show them
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/mempool/transactions?q=fee_per_kb%280..999%29
I had a look at a couple and they are 0.00000001 BCH / KB , i.e. 1 sat total fee transaction, marked with a stresstest OP_RETURN message.
If you don't put the minimum fee of 1sat/byte you may need to wait a while for your transaction to clear as you're clearly hoping for the charity of miners.
Transactions at 1sat/byte are clearing well as usual, as far as I could tell from blockchair queries. This is a good chance for a miner to get publicity by mining the biggest block ever on BCH mainchain though.
Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed are actively fighting back against the State. They deserve all the help they can get. I urge you to donate along with me to help them reach their goal of $400,000. From now until the end of the campaign, I will donate $10 in bch. I do this because my donation is matched 1:1 by bitcoin.com.
I know there is a rift among btc/bch users, but I think it is worth it in this case to donate using bch. Defense Distributed’s goal is high, and I want to see them reach it. But if you can’t donate using bch or are unwilling to, they also accept usd and btc. Your donation is tax deductible.
My first donation. At the time of this donation, $40k total raised, ~$18k worth of bch donated, and I was the 90th bch donation.
My second donation. At the time of this donation, $61k total raised, $22752 worth of bch donated, and I was the 114th bch donation.
Mods if this is considered spam, let me know. But this is a campaign I think we should all support fervently.
Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed are actively fighting back against the State. They deserve all the help they can get. I urge you to donate along with me to help them reach their goal of $400,000 raised. From now until the end of the campaign, I will donate $10 in bch. I do this because my donation is matched 1:1 by bitcoin.com.
I know there is a rift among btc/bch users, but I think it is worth it in this case to donate using bch. Their goal is high, and I want to see them reach it. But if you can’t donate using bch or are unwilling to, they also accept usd and btc. Your donation is tax deductible.
Mods if this is considered spam, let me know. But this is a campaign I think we should all support fervently.
looks to me like a larger player is trying to consolidate their inputs as long as the getting is good: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/mempool/transactions?q=block_id(-1)&s=size(desc)
Mined by ViaBTC
edit: they just mined another one, this one is only 43 KB :D
So what you really mean is:
If El Salvador did some stuff they are not intending to do, and I make some arbitrary assumptions about fees and block-space; then it would take 1.22 years and cost $90 million in fees.
Bitcoin does about 300,000 transactions a day, so you’re spreading a total of about 15 days worth of transactions over 1.22 years.
The median fee is currently around $3.87, so you’re nearly tripling that and still assuming that you’ll only be able to get 5% block space.
You say 5% blockspace would be about 70 transactions per block, which would mean average blocks have 1,400 transactions total. But a quick look shows most BTC blocks have well over 2,000 transactions, some over 3,000.
So if El Salvador was going to open lightning channels for every adult citizen, it would likely cost a lot less and be much quicker than the figures you calculated. But since they’re not planning to do that, this entire post and all the inaccurate numbers are totally irrelevant.
And now coins from the Bitfinex hack are on the move? Well, at least we know it was an inside job as many of us suspected at the time.
Just look at the message that was in the very first block ever mined by Satoshi.
> The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/0
That should give you an indication.
It's far too early to call. Bitcoin Cash is a very long bet on defending the original concept of Bitcoin as described in Satoshi's whitepaper.
But money is a social thing, and people are easily conditioned by what they see (censorship and historical revisionism play a major role here, as opposed to freedom of information).
Good thing that the Bitcoin whitepaper is embedded in the blockchain and mirrored on many sites.
The thought occurred to me yesterday that children growing up now will not even have the same relationship to money - specifically cash - as we did.
This War on Cash is real, and Bitcoin Cash (and public cryptocurrency generally) is firmly in the crosshairs. It is so much harder for authorities to get rid of than fiat.
They tried to keep its scale ridiculously limited. SegWit2x doesn't go far yet in terms of breaking that bond.
Bitcoin Cash has declared War on the War on Cash.
The winning block is 662232, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/662232
No Bitcoin is necessary to be eligible to win, this is just a verifiable way of choosing a winner. As of posting the comment, it will redirect to a 404 page. This is normal.
If you would like to be verify the winner for yourself, make sure the amount of entrants listed in the body of the text matches the number of entrants in the results of the code when the hash releases. However, please do not announce the winner in the event of discrepancies. Thank you all for your support!
We’ve updated Blockchair to show this information as well: https://i.imgur.com/SfKESve.png
By the way, you can search for OP_RETURN data using Blockchair: https://blockchair.com/search?q=bitcoin+cash+for+the+win
If you think there are ways to improve this, we’ll be happy to hear :)
>BTC processes more transactions in one single block than BCH does in 8 hours
That's complete bullshit. Nice fabrication, shill.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/blocks
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/blocks
Bitcoin Core averages around 2000 transactions per block while Bitcoin Cash averages about 200. Saying Bcore has 48x as many transactions is a lie.
And Bitcoin Cash didn't exist until August 1st of this year. Your bank settlement coin's days are numbered. You'll have to go shill for a tobacco company or maybe fracking. I'm sure you'll find work.
Others have pointed out that the tx looks suspicious for several reasons:
- it's the the first transaction in block #577628 (aside from the Coinbase tx), despite the low fee (since the first tx in a block was usually mined at the highest priority)
- it's mined by Slushpool, a mining pool notoriously favorable to Core Trolls and LN
Mining on Bitcoin SegWit and on Bitcoin Cash produces a block every 10 minutes on average.
But there is variance which means that sometimes blocks are found only seconds from each other and sometimes hours.
The last block has been found an hour ago. https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/block/506724
Your tx will be included in the net block that will be mined.
With Bitcoin SegWit you sometimes have to wait days.
I ran the command invalidateblock in the console window in my Bitcoin Unlimited node. Here's the information that was returned to me:
invalidateblock 
invalidateblock "hash"
Permanently marks a block as invalid, as if it violated a consensus rule.
Arguments: 1. hash (string, required) the hash of the block to mark as invalid
Result:
Examples: > bitcoin-cli invalidateblock "blockhash" > curl --user myusername --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "1.0", "id":"curltest", "method": "invalidateblock", "params": ["blockhash"] }' -H 'content-type: text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332/ (code -1)
So, yes, it seems pretty straightforward. I looked at the latest block that has been mined on blockchair.com. It's currently block number 469766. Then I marked the "Hash" under Technical Details" which is:
000000000000000000130b2bd812c6a7ae9c02a74fc111806b1dd11e8975da45
and then I copied and pasted it into this Reddit comment. So let's say this would've been the first block on the Segwit-UASF-chain. Then I would just enter this command into my Bitcoin Unlimited node and my node would never ever follow the Segwit-UASF-chain even in the unlikely event that a reorg would happen sometimes in the future:
invalidateblock 000000000000000000130b2bd812c6a7ae9c02a74fc111806b1dd11e8975da45
Easy peasy lemon squeezy. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
I’m pretty sure this doesn’t/can’t take into account the difference between the real part of a transaction and the change portion.
I.e. the biggest transaction in the last 24 hours was this one. The input is $181,951,000 and one of the outputs is $181,950,000. Realistically it’s much more likely that someone transferred $1,000, rather than someone buying a large island.
If you look at the biggest transactions the top 20 are all for roughly this same $180 million amount. That’s $3.6 billion from one person/exchange sending small amounts from their massive wallet.
Guys...this is fake. 100% guaranteed. Look at the link for proof. He chose an arbitrary number and searched for it on the blockchain. Don't be stupid. OP: well played.
​
Edit: Look guys...I lost 5,000BCH and my wife cheated on me with my best friend. They are taking the money and my dog. I'm on the edge...
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/transactions?q=output_total(500000000000..500000000001)#
​
Another Edit: Who the heck is upvoting OP? People need to learn to stop taking ridiculous information at face value.
Knowing the document with the address balances was fake, I was able to narrow the date it was created to the time-period between: * 2016-04-04 12:08 (3 years ago)
...based on the balance of the address in block 1. Since I did the calculation manually, I appear to have missed a 0.0001 BTC transaction, but the second one I listed pushes the total over 50.0286942.
bcash related post below:
- 19 hrs ago finex opened the gates
- 12 blocks have been mined since then, block 478619
- 20 confirmations/blocks needed
- 8 blocks until the dumpening begins
- that could take another day
Right now there are 3074 unique addresses that deposited to the deposit contract. That’s probably a little higher than the actual number of people validating because some could have used multiple addresses, but it’s a decent enough proxy.
Let’s say the average staker is a 32 year old male. He has a 0.00196 probability of dying within a year.
0.00196 * 3074 * 4/365 = 0.066, which means that only 0.066 of a staker has died since Monday. That happens to be the exact portion of staker soul that has been squeezed out of existence by the drop in ETH price after the successful beacon chain launch.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/whitepaper/
Section 5:
The steps to run the network are as follows:
1) New transactions are broadcast to all nodes.
2) Each node collects new transactions into a block
3) Each node works on finding a difficult proof-of-work for its block.
4) When a node finds a proof-of-work, it broadcasts the block to all nodes.
5) Nodes accept the block only if all transactions in it are valid and not already spent.
6) Nodes express their acceptance of the block by working on creating the next block in the chain, using the hash of the accepted block as the previous hash. Nodes always consider the longest chain to be the correct one and will keep working on extending it.
If two nodes broadcast different versions of the next block simultaneously, some nodes may receive one or the other first. In that case, they work on the first one they received, but save the other branch in case it becomes longer. The tie will be broken when the next proofof-work is found and one branch becomes longer; the nodes that were working on the other branch will then switch to the longer one.
There was another donation of $1K but it is interesting to see the address it came from ...
Of the blocks total 4342 transactions the block contained, 4207 went to one address (At least one of the outputs of the transaction did).
1J5pcKse2bTYvQgMf3ydzm4AEZmbpDNrE1 (blockchain.info can't even show the address ?_?)
77 of the remaining transactions went to 1AFonpy9YNHjDuBzrRdbAXDAc5zizVyQcP
That leaves another 58 transactions, the block kinda looks like the miner paying himself.
I like this view as well: https://member.cash/a/5cf8845001
The amazing thing about Member and Memo is all of this is embedded on the blockchain so it cannot be censored. https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/transaction/bdf93fb9062b82748a36ff439b522ebc4939cac4fc536d8f6eb111e1b1628d3a
Screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/z4c4iuP.png
Peter Todd is a lying piece of shit: did you see what he wrote after the linked tweet:
> Also, as for the actual article itself, while it's a bit of a rant, I do agree that Bitcoin Core has been overly aggressive in performance optimizations. Which is ironic, because they've been driven by a desire to safely raise blocksize... :/
He's saying that the bug is ultimately due to Bitcoin Core's aggressive desire and drive to raise the blocksize!
For those that don't know the history; this is a huge lie and misrepresentation. Just one tiny example of something that Bitcoin Core developers rejected is this:
Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 109 (BIP 109)
It was a proposal created by Gavin Andresen (the 2nd Bitcoin developer after Satoshi) which would safely bump the block size by a very conservative 1MB. Note: Segwit's worst case scenario right now is ~4 MB blocks and there have been a small number of Segwit blocks created that are over 2 MB. Bitcoin Core refused to merge the code and their organisation and their supporters (including the propaganda and trolling groups) fought hard against the Bitcoin implementation (Bitcoin Classic) that implemented BIP 109.
"eCash" has no transparency over use of its developer funds and yet invites governance through its centralization.
Can you explain why the Miner Fund address has spent 0 XEC so far?
It seems the whole argument about ABC developers needing funding, was a pretense.
https://blockchair.com/ecash/address/ecash:pqnqv9lt7e5vjyp0w88zf2af0l92l8rxdg2jj94l5j
Good point! This works provided the block is after November. :)
Interestingly, the nature of the 64 byte attack is that any historical confirmed 64 byte transaction, no matter how old, could be hiding an attack. It would however have to be prepared ahead of time. From what I understand about the proposed attack, the valid attack transaction would have some very obvious telltales: super high fee, a random sequence number, random locktime, and random-ish input or output script.
There have been only five 64-byte transactions on mainnet. And in each case we can see they were just tests of OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY and OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY. As none of the telltales have occurred in the five transactions, it seems impossible that they could have been attacks, so it is safe to remove the Merkle node check altogether.
(BTW I didn't expect my PR to get any attention, this is a very minor thing! :-D)
The winning block is 582067, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/582067
No Bitcoin is necessary to be eligible to win, this is just a verifiable way of choosing a winner. As of posting the comment, it will redirect to a 404 page. This is normal.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/block/556758
1.1 million BCH moved.
EDIT: I like this explorer better- https://explorer.bitcoin.com/bch/block/00000000000000000049a63a0b3addce93e18298786d7936c7f997db2ebb4900
When claiming your BCH from Bitcoin Core wallet don't forget to check your 'change addresses'. When I came to sweep keys into a wallet, the key that I thought had money in it was spent. Initially I thought I had lost that, but then I found I could use 'listaddressgroupings' on the debug console to list the change addresses, and then look those addresses up in https://blockchair.com. I found that some of the change addresses hadn't been spent on the BCH chain, and I was able to dump their respective private keys and sweep them.
It is true - I didn't believe it until i verified it.
Never forget
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4qwugx/blockstream_is_trying_to_change_satoshis/
Also, resource to check the integrity on various sites:
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/whitepaper
NOTE: archive.org was mistakenly flagged when I checked (downloading got the right checksum)
To all the new DOGEcoin people who are saying, "well why can't DOGE be a valid blockchain, it's fast and cheap, and does everything BTC can do."
That's because no one is using it. If people actually tried to start using DOGE for real, the mempool would back up and transaction fees would go through the roof.
Look how much fees have increased just in the past few weeks with light usage.
https://blockchair.com/dogecoin/charts/average-transaction-fee-usd
https://blockchair.com/dogecoin
It's a MEME, a joke! Please don't risk your savings on this coin thinking it will be a serious long term hold.
True, let's look at the graph of transactions BCH vs BTC vs BSV.
Wow, BSV has MASSIVE transaction volume! Wait a second, the pattern looks like crazy spikes generated artifically, and not like the smooth rise which comes from organic adoption and real users (like BTC used to have back in the day, and which BCH is experiencing now).
I also haven't heard anything about merchants accepting BSV. BSV has a huge and rising percentage of non monetary outputs, so whatever it is they're doing on their blockchain it's not building a real community of organic users and a proper currency.
Nearly half of BSVs outputs are non-monetary (i.e. OP_RETURN only), so probably mostly high volume automated machine-written data, while BCH and BTC are at <3%, so mostly used for any kinds of payment and hence more likely to be used by actual human players: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/charts/percentage-of-non-monetary-outputs?compare=bitcoin,bitcoin-sv&interval=3m
Welcome back, Hayden!
BTW, it doesn't look as if ABC would be even viable at all. Have a look at https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-abc/blocks The plan from ABC was fighting against the will of miners, but it seems ABC is way too weak for that. ABC looks like a dead man walking. Maybe miners will finish it for good.
meh... There were quite a few one-cent fees that got into a block just a couple hours after the Slush-Cheat. See https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transactions?q=block_id(577638)&s=fee_per_kb_usd(asc)#
Had they just waited, it would have confirmed in a couple of hours. Looking at May's stats, that bet would have been risky all month, even without Slush-cheating. There were definitely times days went by without penny transactions. But penny transactions have cleared on about 12 of the 24 May days.
Still, it's extreme shit for you to have to wait somewhere between now and a month for your transaction to clear. And that's the game BTC has been playing since December 2017, and nothing has improved since then.
BTC tends to have a seasonal spike in transactions later in the year, so it should be fun and expensive!
Awesome! 🍾
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/block/545958
0.13738904 BCH collected in fees even though mostly 1 sat/byte txs. Not bad, I hope the disgusting fee market never comes to Bitcoin Cash. Once we get unlimited max block size there should never be any need for anything but the absolute minimum in fees.
Yeah, you can use https://blockchair.com to look up an address to see if there is Bitcoin Cash. And you can use https://btgexp.com/ to look up Bitcoin Gold addresses.
If you are just holding bitcoin, it is likely you have both. Bitcoin Cash fork happened on August 1st, and Bitcoin Gold happened only a month or so ago.
Here are the stats for the most recently mined BCH block: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/block/478562
The reported difficulty matches BTC's difficulty. Either:
The software is reporting a different difficulty than is actually being used
There's a LOT more hash power pointed at BCC than anyone anticipated.
The miners just got EXTREMELY (statistically nearly impossibly) lucky.
The winning block is 586395, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/586395
No Bitcoin is necessary to be eligible to win, this is just a verifiable way of choosing a winner. As of posting the comment, it will redirect to a 404 page. This is normal.
Why is it dishonest? There are 1224 transactions <strong>today</strong> (so far) that have had fees over $25. And the day isn't yet half over.
This case is confusing the eff out of me.
First off, any libel claim is going to be pretty damn dubious in the absence of actual public evidence.
If Craig successfully signed a message and posted it publicly, it would reduce possibilities to being: a) either there is a weakness in Elliptic curve, or b) he is Satoshi.
He has not publicly signed a message though. There was a claim by Gavin that a message was signed for his message, but that information never became public so there could be one of many motivations for saying that. It could have been a clever forgery, it could have been a paid statement, it could have been real (although I have strong doubts about that.)
In the absence of proof to a claim to a pseudonym, I think a lot of judges would have a really hard time awarding damages against people stating that claim is not valid.
Further, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when his claims that he owns the addresses because he has the public addresses associated with the first 30 blocks.
Watch this...
I'm going to produce the public address the first block was mined to... Ready?!
qp3wjpa3tjlj042z2wv7hahsldgwhwy0rq9sywjpyy
Woah!!!
I must be Satoshi...
Or maybe the better explanation is, that is publicly available data
Heck... I don't even need to stop at block 70. I can literally give the public addresses to where the first 586906 blocks were mined.
I guess either I own all of the Bitcoin, or that data means nothing.
I'll let you decide.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/address/qr49k67fr3hxtfyx6dzlh9g5qup5r9ds0squ3cc86c
Idk... but that address has had nearly 1.5 million BCH come in and out since yesterday with quite a bit left in the balance.
Apparently it's gfru.it they embedded their domain into OP_RETURN of the transactions https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/address/d-1d89e3a43531f7d72dde643c930874ff
Let them publish their own whitepaper.
If they change the bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf , they fall out of consensus at https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/whitepaper :-)
Or they publish under some other URL and will probably be laughed out of the room - IF anyone reads it.
I'm in my 4th year of crypto. Since day one when I'm talking BTC with non-BTCers I always paraphrase the sentiment from an old Satoshi quote that in 20 years bitcoin will either be worth many times its current value, or nothing.
They almost always ask what could bring it down, and my list is short:
- Undiscovered major bug gets exploited
- Several major superpowers work together (lol) and ban it
- A disaster or war that disrupts the Internet as a whole
- A new crypto emerges that significantly improves on Bitcoin's functionality in a way that Bitcoin can not adopt
Each passing day the first becomes less likely, and the next two are pretty far flung, number four is always a possibility, but I don't see an emerging star yet. Today I'm adding a fifth to my doom list:
- The bitfinex cold wallet gets stolen.
It holds over 1 billion dollars of bitcoin in a single address, I mean what the fuck are they thinking?
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/3D2oetdNuZUqQHPJmcMDDHYoqkyNVsFk9r
Why on earth would they not spread this risk out over multiple addresses or wallets? Is it an ego thing to have the single highest value bitcoin address?
I mean in a pseudonymous system do they really need to advertise over a billion dollars in wealth protected only by a single M-of-N multisig address? Talk about painting a target on your back, just seems insane to me. Bebop and Rocksteady could "hack" that with a couple baseball bats and some bamboo under the fingernails pretty quickly.
Any body else feel the same way?
Actual Satoshi quote: "I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large transaction volume or no volume." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=48.msg329#msg329
Edit: bitfinex was up and running when I wrote this, serendipity can sometimes be a bitch.
I guess it's hard to know the motivations when all the blocks are being mined by the mystery miner. Is BCH only being mined by one person/group? If so, isn't that concerning?
>Timeline (UTC):
>6:17 — The dump begins
>6:59 — 66.163 bitcoins leak from a cold wallet https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/outputs?q=recipient(18f1yugoAJuXcHAbsuRVLQC9TezJ6iVRLp)&s=value(desc)
>10:48 — #BTCe goes offline
A lot of these transactions seem to be $0.01 payments. These transactions mostly follow a pattern in which they send a small amount of money to another address (usually around US$0.01), and loop the balance back to the sending address. Many of the addresses that are doing this seem to be sending one transaction every 5 or 10 minutes.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/address/prffvd07uf80swkw9f0w6jrzthd9zh97eqx0yy257n
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/address/qqhg8dk6nkfmw45k0gs3dajnxgmr9zzjpsfqspq0e8
The balances of the addresses that are sending these transactions seem to follow a bimodal distribution, with one peak at around $7 (0.017 BCH), and another smaller peak at around $40 (0.1 BCH). The uneven distribution of balances makes me believe that these transactions are synthetically generated.
https://explorer.btc.com/bch/block/0000000000000000004f9b860235ad134bf15da73a20cb11e364f95db71e9fc6
I made some scripts to pull directly from the blockchain a few years ago
https://github.com/DaSpawn/bitcoin-whitepaper-direct
The whitepaper was uploaded to blocks a long time ago: https://blockchair.com/search?q=54e48e5f5c656b26c3bca14a8c95aa583d07ebe84dde3b7dd4a78f4e4186e713
The winning block is 666477, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/666477
No Bitcoin is necessary to be eligible to win, this is just a verifiable way of choosing a winner. As of posting the comment, it will redirect to a 404 page. This is normal.
If you would like to be verify the winner for yourself, make sure the amount of entrants listed in the body of the text matches the number of entrants in the results of the code when the hash releases. However, please do not announce the winner in the event of discrepancies. Thank you all for your support!
The "Google for blockchains", Blockchair, is projecting that the deposit goal will be achieved by 2nd December 2020. With all their knowledge and data they are actually using a straight line to fit the deposit projection ... TAish style!
The winning block is 639902, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/639902
No Bitcoin is necessary to be eligible to win, this is just a verifiable way of choosing a winner. As of posting the comment, it will redirect to a 404 page. This is normal.
If you would like to be verify the winner for yourself, make sure the amount of entrants listed in the body of the text matches the number of entrants in the results of the code when the hash releases. Thank you all for your support!
The winning block is 609357, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/609357
No Bitcoin is necessary to be eligible to win, this is just a verifiable way of choosing a winner. As of posting the comment, it will redirect to a 404 page. This is normal.
If you would like to be verify the winner for yourself, make sure the amount of entrants listed in the text of the post matches the number of entrants in the results of the code when the hash releases. Thank you all for your support!
No it didn't. The record is 12,239 transactions in a block, set back in 2015:
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/367853
These transactions were not economically useful. They were "anyone can pay" transactions that were 62 bytes each.
~~THERE WILL NOT BE A STREAM, SOFTWARE WON'T LET ME MUTE MICROPHONE.~~
The winning block is 542711.
You can access this block once it's mined by going to this page: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/542711
~~Can someone else stream the selection? I'll verify this myself, and you get a nifty link to your stream here.~~
^I ^swear ^technology ^hates ^me.
Block 481878 reduced difficulty by 20% as we know. Expect the next blocks to come out very soon, lowering the difficulty 4 times more down to 10.40% (relative to BTC)
Update: Here comes another one! Difficulty is now 20.30%, 3 more reductions to go until 10.40%
Update 2: Instantly just like I expected, ANOTHER one. Difficulty is now 16.24%
Final Update: EDA has done its part and BCH's difficulty is all the way down to 10.40% (A bunch of new blocks were mined in like 5 minutes). Also it is again more profitable to mine BCH, so expect a ton of hashrate switching again (specially since some pools added easy switch options)
See if you can trace this u/chaintip back to my stash
it came from a CashFusion transaction with 34 inputs and 113 outputs and then another before that and yet another before that.....
Good Luck
>I hate you and I hope you get addicted too heroin for being such an abusive individual.
The winning block is 688305, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/688305
No Bitcoin is necessary to be eligible to win, this is just a verifiable way of choosing a winner. As of posting the comment, it will redirect to a 404 page. This is normal.
If you would like to be verify the winner for yourself, make sure the amount of entrants listed in the body of the text matches the number of entrants in the results of the code when the hash releases. However, please do not announce the winner in the event of discrepancies. Thank you all for your support!
Not really otherwise you would be able to tell which inputs belong to which outputs in this transaction.
dude, look at those fees: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/mempool/transactions?q=block_id(-1)
the mempool is filled with $20+ fees transactions, people are mad because they can't move their money without losing a lot to fees.
this is not an attack, its frustation.
I don't think it's spam. It's someone consolidating thousands of small inputs. Transactions like this:
Many of the inputs are unspent on the BTC chain, and possible will always remain unspendable if fees stay this high.
By one central group? Please check who mines the bch blocks at
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/blocks
All blocks are being mined by different pools. Care to elaborate why you spread fud about it being mined by one central group?
Please, can someone really point out where that $0.003 number comes from ?
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/blocks
Here are all the blocks... the fees are even inside that list. (fee/Kb) no chance this data is accurate.
If you're using the electron cash desktop wallet, I think you should be able to make the transaction while connected to taxchain.imaginary.cash (so it gets a locktime matching the height of the shorter chain) and then inspect it to get the raw transaction as hex code, switch to a non-ABC chain (like electrum.imaginary.cash) and then broadcast it there.
It should have gotten broadcasted to both networks then. I haven't done it myself, but if you want to do it this way it might be a good idea to talk with the electron cash devs on telegram or elsewhere.
alternatively, if you just make the transaction on the ABC chain, then find it on an explorer and copy the raw transaction hex, you can broadcast via places like https://blockchair.com/broadcast
4efe9b816bfa5f9768d00d1bda368ec1e5aad671754d12f2d39db7a057396139
(That's from my public cashaddr, not any private CashShuffled holdings which I can neither confirm nor deny the existence of.)
During this bull run there are far less txs being broadcasted to the network than the last one. The number of txs per block is marginally higher this time round, but the number of txs waiting to enter a block is around 100k lower. Once the number of txs waiting to enter the block reaches the same levels as we seen in 2017, you will see similar fees. https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/charts/average-transaction-fee-usd
While we're recommending things to newbies: check out the white paper. It is fairly easy to read.
SHA-256 of the PDF: b1674191a88ec5cdd733e4240a81803105dc412d6c6708d53ab94fc248f4f553 since there has been talk of changing it.
Update:
Two exchange addresses that some of his coins ended up in, if anyone can identify them (check your own exchange deposit, withdrawals, see if it links to either of these) it'll help catch him:
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/address/qqgfa0939987jlhqhwy0up26wac9ppuff52nxrxkqa
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/address/qzys3f38jm07cmq63eckk4sf3xemt0t6suyumzc4nw
Apparently the asshole is still active and about
Last time i used bcash was about 3 weeks ago, it was also my first time. I wanted to use something other than ETH just for the fuck of it. https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/transaction/de7536440bc7b11e7095e940e7283b3ad53b721b15ead80227e9fb8b28fbf664
it took about 2 hours to get the confirmations and get it deposited on my binance account:
https://i.imgur.com/cm62T2F.jpg
And I never used it ever again. I'm not calling you a liar OP, i'm just showing you how networks that rely on global block consensus are highly unpredictable and wildly inconsistent. In my case it wasn't a binance issue, it legit took about an hour to get the first confirmation on the block explorer, THAT IS FUCKING CRAZY. I have never waited more than a few seconds to wait for Nano to be confirmed on the explorer. While you might have had a good experience now, I guarantee you this experience is not consistant. Nano's pure p2p infrastructure guarantees a consistantly near instant speed because the two transacting accounts aren't bogged down by having to wait for every ledger to record them on a public blockchain. That is the inherent difference
> Segwit adoption happened because proponents of Bitcoin Cash left
That's really not accurate. SegWit was planned for a long time despite tons of criticism. If you ask many here they will say it was intentional to allow a smoother transition to unnecessary "off-chain solutions" like lightning or liquid. You're putting so much emphasis on "the consensus mechanism" and it tells me you haven't really read the whitepaper. Do a CTRL+F on the whitepaper for "consensus" and tell me how many times the word appears. It is in reference to the simple function with which mining nodes signal blocks as accepted or rejected - that is it, nothing more or less. There may've been a pre-segwit chain but each day the other chain gets closer to Bitcoin+Segwit+Lightning and that is less "Bitcoin" than ever.
It's because of a single ~$4000 transaction with a $5500 fee that happened a few hours ago. bizarre.
I've recovered the bch from his test wallet and am awaiting the $10k let all here bear witness
Have offered to do the same for his larger wallet and also provided instructions. Will update here is he is true to his word.
Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System
it's right there in the original whitepaper
Integrity check and link to other copies: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/whitepaper
The winning block is 684678, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/684678
No Bitcoin is necessary to be eligible to win, this is just a verifiable way of choosing a winner. As of posting the comment, it will redirect to a 404 page. This is normal.
If you would like to be verify the winner for yourself, make sure the amount of entrants listed in the body of the text matches the number of entrants in the results of the code when the hash releases. However, please do not announce the winner in the event of discrepancies. Thank you all for your support!
Multiple Binance and Coinbase twitter accounts compromised. Be careful on Twitter right now.
edit: :loads more. Looks like a major compromise of some sort.
The scammers btc address: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/bc1qxy2kgdygjrsqtzq2n0yrf2493p83kkfjhx0wlh
> They also had a block on mainnet with more than 400.000 tx previously in the year if I remember correctly.
Yes, they did. In block 563638 they mined 460,400 transactions.
And that block triggered a 6 block reorg. Huge success!
> If blocks are too big to mine they get orphaned.
Not if you have enough hashrate to beat your opponents in an orphan race. Which means that most or all miners on BSV should join together into super-sized pools in order to minimize their orphan rates -- which they did. Which makes BSV no longer decentralized and permissionless.
The winning block is 572710, and when mined, can be accessed here: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/572710
I apologize to everyone who expected the [Draw] to take place at 22:00 UTC. I have messed up my math to the point where, it was 12 o'clock, so all I did was subtract 12 from the UTC clock, and labelled it as the time for the process, under Eastern Time.
The time is now 2:00 UTC due to the misconception. The third block after this time, block number 572710, will be the winner.. This will not happen again. ^^^I ^^^hope...
They created a large block while they're withholding the transactions they're generating. If you check the preceding or following blocks like this one: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-sv/transactions?q=block_id(563639)&s=id(asc)# you would start to see how centralized SV blocks are.
Creating TB blocks on a personal server is not really a big deal as discussed here: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9ynhtf/todays_64_mb_sv_block_took_40_minutes_to/
There is also a miner with the coinbase fb2lzg8bs0 that recently started mining BCH.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/blocks?q=coinbase_data_bin(~fb2lzg8bs0)#
They found 61 blocks so far.
LOL you change the 1MB block limit to a non-witness data limit and remove it from that code page and now call it irrelevant.
No. it's still a 1MB limit no matter what you call it. Let me know when the striped block size in KB exceeds 1MB https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/530788 eg Bitcoin Blocks can never have more than 1MB of nonwitness data.
Basically currently, bch's 8mb blocks are never filled so you could put in a tx fee of 1 sat and it will be the same as a 100sat tx fee. This is not the case with btc, as there are over 200k transactions waiting to be sent so paying a 100 sat tx fee will actually give you priority over a 1sat tx fee. You can see here that there's around 1k transactions in the backlog: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/mempool/transactions and the fees are all around a dollar.
While btc has over 200k in the backlog: https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions
And a better comparison of the fees between the 2: https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactionfees-btc-bch.html#3m
> Can anybody explain WHY there is so many transactions ????
There's not a lot of transactions. Recent block on the BTC chain (see https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/blocks) have had around 3000 transactions per block. Blocks are found every 10 minutes or so, so 3000 tx/block is about 5 transactions per second. For a currency that is used all around the world, that is a really tiny number.
Also check this site which hashes the various whitepapers as served on various sites to check they're authentic. The real whitepaper is also stored in the blockchain.
This address holds 39,000 BCH and this one 35,000 BCH from miners. The average opportunity cost at the time mined is about $550 per BCH with a current price of about $315 (but there is not enough liquidity to exit the trade); so they are underwater by about US$17,000,000 at current price mark to market.
BCH is an awfully expensive 'disposable chain' for these miners that are hodling BCHs.
2X will likely have the same effect because of all the deployed Bitcoin Core nodes. One does not deploy a network on that size and scale in a month or two. Blocks taking a longer time than normal is actually good for hodlers because it decreases the inflation rate and thus devaluation of their hodlings which benefit the miners.
The decrease in block space will just result in transaction fees bidding for space. As transaction fees bid for space it makes BTC more profitable to mine thus incentivizing defectors from any cartel attempting to restrict block size space. Of course, everyone will say they are enforcing a block size quote but it is really easy to cheat and as the transaction fees increase it gets more profitable to do so.
Gotta love game theory and economics. This is really just Subjective Value Theory versus Labor Theory of Value playing out and LToV will fail like always.
It is all fun and games until someone miscalculates economically and loses $20m or $200m.