ctrlf5
Went to the address per your signature, ninjacoin.com . No current miners, so have you ended the mining pool, and have you begun another?
You can still mine there, it's all automated, and it's PPS, so you don't have to wait for a block.
Topic: blockchain.info bug? (Read 1028 times)
Went to the address per your signature, ninjacoin.com . No current miners, so have you ended the mining pool, and have you begun another?
You can still mine there, it's all automated, and it's PPS, so you don't have to wait for a block.
ctrlf5
Went to the address per your signature, ninjacoin.com . No current miners, so have you ended the mining pool, and have you begun another?
I think I see the problem. Same prefix as was in the firstbits:
16GJyxTfVkY2VSU4LXnytevgLYYpthFf5A
16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
Looks to me that, because the other address hadn't ever been used, it thought you were doing a search instead.
16GJyxTfVkY2VSU4LXnytevgLYYpthFf5A
16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
Looks to me that, because the other address hadn't ever been used, it thought you were doing a search instead.
I tested this behavior from completely different locations (different ISP's).
Your are right, blockchain.info has analysed a slightly different bitcoin address, than the one I entered (and is stated in the url). I never realized this before, sorry.
I think this is very unhappy when you not get warned that the original bitcoin address could not be found, and you get the transactions of a similar address presented.
However it looks like the behavior of blockchain.info has changed. I hope this will not occur anymore.
Thanks for your help!
I think I see the problem. Same prefix as was in the firstbits:
16GJyxTfVkY2VSU4LXnytevgLYYpthFf5A
16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
Looks to me that, because the other address hadn't ever been used, it thought you were doing a search instead.
16GJyxTfVkY2VSU4LXnytevgLYYpthFf5A
16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
Looks to me that, because the other address hadn't ever been used, it thought you were doing a search instead.
Valid point. He never said different ISPs... please accept my apologies.
I don't seem to be thinking straight, it's 01:30 AM here, goodnight.
I don't seem to be thinking straight, it's 01:30 AM here, goodnight.
ctrlf5
Really? OP reports having tried two different PCs and browsers.might be a proxy cache or something?
ctrlf5
Really? OP reports having tried two different PCs and browsers.
ctrlf5
Even if it has something to do with some browser caching (also my first idea), IMOH this is critical.
Critical is what also came to my mind
There's no guarantees their software is bug-free. Sad but true.
Thanks for the post, I'll be checking one against the other from now on when looking up a transaction or address.
Thanks for your answers.
I don't know why, but now blockchain.info showing the same information like the other servers. Strange.
In my original email to support of blockchain.info I've included two screenshots. Below you will find the screenshot from blockchain.info.
However, I've tested this strange behavior in the last 2 days for a few hours. I don't know the reason why the information at blockchain.info sometime was not correct, but i'm sure that there was this difference.
Even if it has something to do with some browser caching (also my first idea), IMHO this is critical.
I've tested it on different locations, with different PC's and different browsers (Firefox and Chrome).
All I can say is, that it looks that this mismatch only occurs with valid Bitcoin addresses which were never used before.
That it is now not reproducible anymore, looks even more strange to me.
Before getting an answer from blockchain.info, or understanding why this has happend I prefer other blockchain Explorers over blockchain.info.
I don't know why, but now blockchain.info showing the same information like the other servers. Strange.
In my original email to support of blockchain.info I've included two screenshots. Below you will find the screenshot from blockchain.info.
However, I've tested this strange behavior in the last 2 days for a few hours. I don't know the reason why the information at blockchain.info sometime was not correct, but i'm sure that there was this difference.
Even if it has something to do with some browser caching (also my first idea), IMHO this is critical.
I've tested it on different locations, with different PC's and different browsers (Firefox and Chrome).
All I can say is, that it looks that this mismatch only occurs with valid Bitcoin addresses which were never used before.
That it is now not reproducible anymore, looks even more strange to me.
Before getting an answer from blockchain.info, or understanding why this has happend I prefer other blockchain Explorers over blockchain.info.
I beg your pardon, kind sir, but for the life of me I cannot find a difference
If the problem persists, try purging your browser cache...
If the problem persists, try purging your browser cache...
They look the same to me.. 
I'm quite confused about getting sometimes different information from blockchain.info versus e.g. blockexplorer.com
For me it looks like the information from blockchain.info is not always correct because all other servers are showing the same data.
Here is just one example for the bitcoin address 16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
http://blockchain.info/address/16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
http://blockexplorer.com/address/16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
blockexplorer is stating that this address was never used before,
blockchain is showing some transactions and a balance of about 3.08 BTC
I know that websites like blockchain.info are being used by some to verify a successful transaction.
Bruce Wagner even recommend this procedure to newbies.
So if the information is not correct this could be critical.
I've already sent an email to [email protected] but didn't get a feedback up to now.
Does anybody seen such a discrepancy before, or has an explanation for it?
For me it looks like the information from blockchain.info is not always correct because all other servers are showing the same data.
Here is just one example for the bitcoin address 16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
http://blockchain.info/address/16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
http://blockexplorer.com/address/16GJyttY5XjkqBFaPTH4q7D2LUEq4nUzXR
blockexplorer is stating that this address was never used before,
blockchain is showing some transactions and a balance of about 3.08 BTC
I know that websites like blockchain.info are being used by some to verify a successful transaction.
Bruce Wagner even recommend this procedure to newbies.
So if the information is not correct this could be critical.
I've already sent an email to [email protected] but didn't get a feedback up to now.
Does anybody seen such a discrepancy before, or has an explanation for it?
Jump to: