Topic: 0.2 FEE!!!! ? am i missing something? - page 10. (Read 12016 times)

Just contact bitfury and ask them

For those that don't read the damn thread:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7535958

Is the post that references another post, as yet not found, where someone said it is Bitfury.

It was from a thread i googled here and one user that claimed it's bitfury address saying that someone other pointed it out in another thread. That's how i got it.

Man! That's very kind.  Miners will appreciate that.

I appreciate your help, but that does not help me get his contact info. and if it does i don't know how to find it

I am not sure how that was determined. You should ask DubFX how he got that information.

In another thread someone claimed that address was owned by Bitfury.  Here is the reference to a the original post, still not finding the original post:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7535958

ok look i help you.

This is the transaction https://blockchain.info/tx/eb4dfa9e3f091b550701784b7bd7945a7344d99bf0ab20c7bac19239af034f67
this is the block https://blockchain.info/de/block-index/454469
this is the guy that mined it: https://blockchain.info/de/blocks/Unknown%20with%201AcAj9p%20Address
now you need to google for this address  https://blockchain.info/de/address/1AcAj9p6zJn4xLXdvmdiuPCtY7YkBPTAJo

i dont understand how to find the block, the miner, and then contacting them assuming i acquire all this info

Well, in that case it seems the software has been 'forced', or told to include those outputs by setting the transaction fee to such a high level. The BTC aren't lost though, they only belong to someone else Or rather a group of miners, I guess...

Since there's an apparent dichotomy forming in this thread, let me say that I think that, *yes*, users should be responsible with their money and should research the heck out of BTC before using it, but I also think that, *yes*, it's an obvious problem that there isn't an idiot-proof wallet (figuratively speaking; I'm not calling the OP an idiot).

Bitcoin and its philosophical goodness won't make a bit of difference if it isn't adopted, and marketing to a mass audience obviously makes the chances of adoption more likely.  It also doesn't really matter in the context of marketing that Bitcoin is decentralized.  Individuals and teams of BTC entrepreneurs need to advertise the products and services they create if they don't want to go bankrupt quickly, and among these products and services are both native and hosted wallets.  If you want people using your wallets, those people need to know how to use them or they're going to get frustrated and lose interest quickly.

It doesn't do a lot of good to advertise Bitcoin as the greatest thing ever when users can't intuitively use even a basic BTC wallet.  I'm actually surprised that in 5 years there hasn't really been a user friendly wallet -- the closest I've found is the Blockchain phone app and it's integrated QR scanner, but it's slightly annoying going around copying and pasting BTC addresses with a smartphone if they aren't already in my address book.  Some extinct BTC services like Flexcoin tried addressing some of the basic issues (e.g. it's been five years and BTC addresses still look insane).  Of course, Flexcoin sucked in that it was hosted and eventually hacked or something, but at least you could create a simple address name like 'the joint' and people would be able to send you money based upon that.

On the other hand, Bitcoin is still a beta project.   Didn't Gavin say something a long time ago about not releasing an alpha version until grandma could use it and recover her BTC in the event that her PC caught on fire...or something?  In any case, Bitcoin is in a weird spot, and I think the current market infrastructure (which is still very immature) is being tested by the adoption rate.  More mature infrastructure will come with time, and there will be eventually be wallets that can instantly be used and understood by anyone who has ever used online banking.  But really, I hope devs start focusing more on building a wallet that coddles its users.  It seems like a priority.

Just so I won't be accused of complaining without contributing anything useful, here's a possible feature I thought of which could be integrated into a wallet to help ensure its users know how to operate it:

Create a short tutorial for the user the first time a client is run.  This tutorial would force the user into completing a series of common tasks on a virtual client with a fake BTC balance before they are allowed free reign to send and receive BTC with a real client.  These tasks could include things like sending some of that fake BTC to a fake BTC address, creating receiving addresses and labeling them, adding send addresses and labeling them, changing transaction fees, and maybe even more advanced things like retrieving and adding to your address book the full string of a BTC address when provided with only the firstbits of said address.  Once the user has successfully navigated through each task, the real client could be unlocked and the user now has little choice but to blame himself in the event of an error.

To do that he would have to mark all those input addresses so that BCI would make such a transaction, then put a "New" address as change.

I just noticed something else: https://blockchain.info/tx/eb4dfa9e3f091b550701784b7bd7945a7344d99bf0ab20c7bac19239af034f67

Total Output   0.20575408 BTC

Why are there 6 inputs for a single 0.0001 BTC output? ANY of the inputs had enough to send this sum and the fee!

Why did the transaction include ALL inputs, especially since the older inputs had sufficient funds.

If the fee needed to be paid, still that requires the 0.20040716 BTC input and another one. Lets assume that OP borked up the transaction and switched the fee with the send. You need to use inputs worth 0.2001 BTC. That means the 0.20040716 input and absolutely any other except the spam dust one. Why are all inputs included in this transaction if they are not needed? Also the change is sent to one of the input addresses...

  not a real problem ... you loose already 50 USD per year for a plastic credit card  

This is not proper use of bitcoin. I actually listed 3 reasons (web wallet, spam tx control, transaction speed) why it was not a normal thing to do (plus it seems that the user may have been at fault somehow).

And yes, it appears that because of experimental software and lack of research and experience from the regular user, 120 USD have been lost. We feel bad about that, but if everyone wants control of their money then they have to learn how to do it cheaper than a bank.

damnit there goes .2 btc

Yeah sure, but 0.2 BTC aren't exactly enough to get on the front page of /r/bitcoin for example. The guy who send 800 BTC to Gox got there of course, and when Gox's attorneys actually returned those BTC it made another round. But 0.2 BTC... meh...

I agree with you,users need to learn how to use bitcoin.I think there are guides on internet,google is your friend.  

Well,if they would return the 0.2 back they would get some good PR for sure.

Truth is, no bitcoin wallet is truly noobproof. While some exchanges make buying a bitcoin really easy, I can't think of a single wallet that explains to it's users how to use it.