Topic: [ANN] ChipMixer.com - Bitcoin mixer / Bitcoin tumbler - mixing reinvented - page 122. (Read 92462 times)

You can always grab the private keys and sweep the bitcoin addresses yourself manually. This way you could easily control how much you want to pay for the transaction and don't have to go through anyone else's system to do it. That being said, it would definitely be nice if you could choose what fee you wanted to send yourself. It would also be interesting if you could choose to pool multiple transactions together from people sweeping from ChipMixer, albeit that would admittedly make it fairly obvious where the coins are coming from and that they went through a mixer. On the other hand, maybe you can consider this as being privacy through sheer number of addresses? So that there are so many addresses being sent to that nobody can really trace anything back to you. The chip idea would probably go out the window then, however.

Yes I use the sweep function to sent the coins to a wallet. I do this often before  without any problem. Confirmation was done in max 30 min.

This time not. The fee is set to 0.00001326 BTC (0.00006942 BTC/kb)
The fee is set automatic by Chipmixer. There is no way to change this.
With this low fee I dont think it will be confirmed.

Do you mean that when you impored the chip's private keys they were funded with unconfirmed transactions, or did you try to sweep the private keys but had to wait a long time while sweeping?
In the second case, you do have to realise you always have the option to import the private keys into a decent wallet and pick your own fee (so it's up to you wether you give a sufficient fee or not)

Maybe I was a bit to euphoric

Today I mixed some more BTC. First all ok.

With the last 8 chips I got after waiting for hours to be confirmed a marker LOW FEE on every.

Has anyone the same problem?

Now waiting and waiting and not sure the coins come in.

Contact again ChipMixer.

My vote would be for B ahead of A because due to traffic which is not likely to stop, then the colours will be coming out too often and when that happens, clients begin to lose confidence which we all know is bad for business.

The option B will be great, because I am sure clients wont mind paying some fees to get their chips delivered to them as soon as they need it than to donate only to come to the thread to announce how they have not been able to receive their coins and the likes.

Opening it up to others to invest, is something I would want to be part of but the modalities for that will need to equally set out in clear terms and this needs to be done fast to address several challenges faced by clients.

When I enter something random as voucher, I get the exact same message: "This voucher is invalid or already redeemed."

Option a should be easy an fast to implement, so I'd say: do it now.
Option b might work for future growth, but it requires all chips to be stored in a hot wallet. ChipMixer already has quite a considerable amount of Bitcoins on a hot wallet, which means it can lose quite a considerable amount if it ever gets hacked.
If you're willing to risk many coins on a hot wallet anyway, may I suggestion option c:
c - automate chip creation, convert deposits into new chips instantly, and add them to the tail of the chip pool: first in first out.

Everything ok and I get my coins.

Thanks for the info. Now I understand more. If running out of the chips we get a voucher. The voucher we can use later if new chips are available.

The ideas are good.

a, its very recommended.
b, will be interesting. You should make this. I will invest some.

Using ChipMixer today without any problems 
 

I have successfully redeemed the coupon as the chips have been refilled. Unfortunately, the merge option wasn't available which left me with a bunch of smaller chip values. In regards to what to follow as example, looking at how bitmixer used to do everything was how people were liking it. Instead of a flat fee, allow people to manually set a fee ranging from 0.5-2%. If you let people to adjust their fees in the way of 0.8356%, 1.0346%, etc, people will never end up with the same fee.

I would support option A and B, however, B with some restrictions. I assume the motivations of people to use your mixer are:

1.) The very innovative way of mixing with chips. This is a very good thing compared to all those flow-in  flow-out mixers that are just handing over other "dirty" coins to you and users consider them mixed what they basically aren't. Just there is no trace back to your OWN coins anymore.
Chipmixer is a great innovation and a logical further step in crypto mixing. Thumbs up there!

2.) We should not lie on this one - people are using your mixer primarily because of the basically non-existing fees. Seriously, I wouldnt call 0.0005 BTC or something a fee at all if considered people are mixing hundreds of coins there every day. Although I want to make clear: I believe, if you would "drastically" increase your fees onto a level of cryptomixer.io (or ex-monopolist bitmixer.io), speaking of something like 0.5-3% what is ridiculous  at some point (especially 2-3%), you would loose a significant user base.

My advise for you here: Search for investors to increase your chip reserve. Implement a "traffic light" to show how many chips are left (brilliant idea, the sooner that would come the better actually ) + forced fee of something like 0.2%. I am very sure you wont loose any traffic or users then. People must be willing to pay this amount for your service or they should use anonymous coins like Monero instead. You spend a lot of your time and efforts into your project and I highly appreciate that and think users should show some kind of support to keep this thing alive.

My two cents here. Good job folks I love your site

If you go "flat fee"... I would suggest that you implement it as a "random" fee in a "range"... ie. 0.0005 to 0.001 for example (or a range of percentages or whatever)... a simple flat fee would negate some of the benefits of mixing as it would be easier to trace if "money out" was always equal to "money in - fixed fee".

I am sure that you would find there is no shortage of folk who would be interested in investing

Honestly, I would introduce a flat fee instead of using donations.

The truth is that a lot of your users will only use your services instead of the other competitors to avoid paying their 1% to 3% fee. And this isn't as good as it should be. There will be more users, but this won't increase your profit ratio, since they are not paying for the mixing service. Instead, your chip pool will run out faster and you will need to spend more with the Bitcoin transaction fees to produce more chips.

I strongly recommend introducing a fee-based system as that would make your mixing business a profitable one. Even if, say, one assumes profit is a secondary motivation (which is a difficult one if one wants to keep any kind of business sustainable and gainful) keeping a business model alive and afloat by relying on donations alone might not provide healthy revenues. If the bulk of mixing are being transacted by certain stingy users (the Chinese are notorious penny pinchers) you might see the service used as a free bridge to cleaning cryptomoney.

Creating all these chips requires time and effort. As an advertiser of your mixer, I am happy to spread the word on this platform but also writing this out of concern that all your time and effort in keeping the mixer operational is not being given the fair and rightful reward you deserve.

I believe it is the shutting down of bitmixer, the effect of it to the market will be felt not right after the shutdown but rather a week or more since regular client of that service would be hesitant to use other services.  It takes time and a few little transaction for this big client to incline their trust to chipmixer and it does happen this past days.  Though I am considering the fact about the current FUD to Bitcoin and people wanted to play in safe zone by removing the trace of them holding an amount of Bitcoin is another reason.

Allowing people to invest is the only proper way of dealing with demand surges, but a chip pool status should be mandatory.

If you're able to offer potential investors a decent return, basically in the same way bitmixer used to do it, you'll build up a +1000BTC reserve in a fairly short period of time ~ this will also help attracting high volume users.

With high volume users I am referring to people mixing like 10-20BTC per time, and that in a frequent manner ~ these people are basically accounting for a decent chunk of the longer term profits you as service will make.

Volume spike was before JC morgan "bitcoin is a scam".

We have run out of chips again. New chips are being prepared. We need to find a better solution.

Our current ideas are:
a - kind-of traffic light that will show when chip level is too low - green ok, yellow under 50 BTC, red under 10 BTC
b - massive chip pool increase - that would require to open up for investing and that would require to set flat fee instead of donations

What do you think about both ideas?

My educated guess would be the latter. There are probably quite a lot of people that either want to lock in their profits or hedge against currency risk, just in case that the bull market is over.

I will keep waiting patiently as there is no real hurry for me at this point. I saved everything needed to restore my session. There must be a huge load of demand for a trustworthy mixing service after the shutdown of Bitmixer. I have used Chipmixer before and I am a great fan of the chips with each a different face value. It allows me to enjoy more privacy than at the time I was still mixing coins through Bitmixer.

After using chipmixer in the past without any problem, today we run in some trouble.

After successfull deposit to the given wallet address from the chipmixer site, I see nothing....to withdraw. The website says withdraw was  already done. But it was not possible to do so. There was no buttons shown for this. Just goes to this message. I contact the guys from chipmixer now with proofs and we will see. Hope the best that its only a little problem.

Maybe the high demand can be explained by the recent price drop/JC morgan interview/china's ICO ban => people getting scared, wanting to hide the fact that they own BTC, or maybe wanting to mix their BTC before withdrawing?