6

The hourly average fee when this question was posted was between 9 and 10 Satoshi per Byte (sat/B). The latest TX's that I just randomly checked all had 10.03 sat/B fee which is higher than the 4.5 sat/B that you sent. Transactions are at a hourly peak right now. Wait it out and it'll probably go through in the next couple of hours as the mempool empties. ...


5

A transaction could go unconfirmed indefinitely. The order in which transactions are confirmed is decided by miners, and generally they will be incentivized to include only the highest fee-rate transactions, to maximize their revenue. Even a low fee-rate transaction may eventually confirm, once the mempool clears out. But there is no guarantee of this, ...


5

Your transaction paid a fee of 1674 satoshis for 372 bytes, or a fee rate of 4.5 satoshis per byte, which was a reasonable estimate in the past hour (via https://mempool.space/tv): There was just a slow block with #600,283 taking 37 minutes to be found (via https://blockchair.com) and it looks like your transaction would have been exactly in that little ...


5

Yes, miners can censor transactions. A mining pool (or solo miner) can choose to not add a transaction to any blocks that they create. And, of course, this can be done dynamically so that transactions that match whatever arbitrary rules they want can be disallowed. However this only effects one mining pool or miner. Other miners will not necessarily follow ...


4

No, bitcoin transactions that stop being valid after a certain point in time are not possible


2

Let's distinguish a couple cases: Cooperative close In the case of a cooperative close, the two channel partner can agree on any transaction they want. Thus, they can pick the fee rate on the spot. As the two outputs would likely not have any timelocks, either party could use child-pays-for-parent (CPFP) to bump the initial closing transaction. They could ...


2

Descriptions are a feature of the electrum wallet, and do not appear on the Bitcoin chain - someone using another wallet (or even you restoring the keys into another electrum wallet) will not see the description.


2

I think that the answer to your question is no, a transaction which makes every block it is included in invalid does not exist. An important core property of a cryptographic hash function is that there is no discernable relationship between the input data, and output data. If such a relationship existed, then miners could 'cheat' by only creating blocks (...


2

A search for definitive information turned up literally nothing, so, what happens when transaction bandwidth is exceeded for an extended period? The same thing as always happens: miners decide, at their own discretion, which transactions to include in their blocks. Most likely they will choose those that have the highest fees. Transactions that don't go ...


1

The coinbase transaction is created when the miner creates the template for the block which they attempt to mine. Unlike regular transactions, it does not have regular inputs. The miner simply specifies the outputs to spend the coins, where the sum of the output amounts must be less than or equal to the total amount of fees in the block plus the subsidy. The ...


1

What you are describing is essentially a majority attack. A miner (or group of colluding miners) with a majority of hashpower can censor arbitrary transactions, and blocks that include them. This question has more info about what an attacker can do. Crucially: a majority of hashpower can create blocks at a faster rate (on average) than the minority. So if ...


1

We don't know for sure, but I doubt it. It's generally believed that the stakeholders of bitcoin (those who pay the miners) consider censorship resistant extremely important, perhaps the main reason for bitcoin to exist. If this is true, they won't pay for mining if it stops producing the censorship resistance the stakeholders want. Stakeholders could ...


1

What did you actually import in Electrum? A master privatekey, or a list of private keys? In the first case, it could be that your gap limit (i.e. the addresses actively monitored by Electrum) is set too low, so it doesn't see some of your UTXOs. You can check this out : wallet.gap_limit Then increase the number you will see, for example if it tells you "...


1

In any case, receiver (Coinbase) can't do much to make your transaction confirm faster. Except CPFP, but you can do the same with your change output, if you have it. But, as mentioned above, if tx fee really is 0, it will not be relayed by the network, as default relay fee is 1 satoshi per vbyte. Also, in 7 days it should have been confirmed, as mempool ...


1

When you add a very small fee or no fee at all, as in your case, you'll need to ask for a special favor from a mining pool in order to get your TX in. It is possible to request, on exceptional basis, for a mining pool to include your transaction into one of their less busy blocks. They call this service "transaction accelerators". For instance, ViaBTC ...


1

There is currently a Phishing attack going on with electrum. Did you make sure you downloaded electrum from the official site? Also with wich electrum servers did your electrum wallet connect? Maybe one spreading false information to trick you into their fishing attack


1

New to BTC world Be very very careful about who you trust. Do your own independent research. Reading old questions on this website is a good start. what can I do with newly generated coins People often ask this sort of question after downloading a mining game to their phone and "mining Bitcoin" on their phone. Unfortunately those are not real. If you ...


1

Kind of. There is no "the pool" or "the mempool" (which is what I assume you are talking about when you say "the pool"). Rather each node maintains its own mempool which may be different from another node's mempool. Because each node receives a given transaction at different times, the amount of time a transaction spends in the mempool will also vary from ...


1

How does a miner proceed in this scenario - dropping the 200 and adding 200 others from the mempool and trying to mine a block? If the miner is trying to build on top of the block that was received, then he will have to drop the 200 transactions that were included in the other block. He will also not be able to include the other transactions in the next ...


1

Fundamentally, this is why nobody should be accepting zero confirmations, until the payment has confirmations it’s not really a payment made. This is generally referred to as double spending, as clearly only a single payment can confirm in your scenario. If stores want to accept payments in an unsafe fashion, that’s their risk to bear and insure for. ...


1

The question was originally referring to unilateral channel closes, I could have made that clearer. Sighash single does not work since it can only sign in/outs at the same index. An idea proposed by lightning developers has been to add output hooks (spendable by each counter-party) with no/low amounts which are spendable by child transactions which lift ...


1

Are out-of-band fee payments to confirm a lightning closing transaction the only way to manage a situation where the sat/kw of a previously signed commitment tx are simply below market? Yes, you will have to do it out-of-band, as you would not be able to use fee rate that is higher than the last signed commitment transaction within the framework of the ...


1

You sent $10 to an exchange, instructing them to send BTC 0.0016 to an address. If you look up your transaction 3f624c15d2479ac6aa696b7357fcb650bf29d442f1a980a65488da3bd9501a48 in any "blockchain explorer", for example here, you'll see this transaction had 2 inputs and 20 outputs. I guess this was an exchange from whom you purchased $10 of BTC and asked ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible