Topic: Someone just paid 83BTC for transaction fee, (Read 713 times)

A transaction fee of 83 BTC (Bitcoin) is an extraordinarily high amount and raise eyebrow within the cryptocurrency community . Such an exorbitant fee could be the result of a mistake or a technical error, commonly referred to as a "fat-finger error," where the user accidentally inputs an incorrect value..

It could be that case or maybe the hackers was in a hurry to get it confirmed, and so he doesn't care about how much he will be paying for the fees, it's a huge hack for him and so he needed to clear this one out very fast and get that bitcoin in his own wallet that he has total control. As for the individual that has been hack, yeah, he created his own mnemonic phrase or at least add some (that's one I understand it), unfortunately it was not strong enough as the hackers was able to break it and steal everything from him.

New information:


So apparently, the 83.5 BTC transaction fee was a programming error (albeit a part of a malware that swept the person's wallet, so I don't think anyone will necessarily feel bad for the hacker).

It makes me wonder how can people screw up their code this badly to spend a large amount of bitcoin on fees, though.

If I were the hacker I would send all of the coins to my address and not donate it to the miner who mine the block, sorry I didn't mean to say I'm a bad guy (or maybe yes since I can't prove it), but I feel like why the black hat want to hack the wallet and send the coins if he don't have any intention to steal it.

Because people think when they not get hacked or suffer something bad, they think they've done it properly and think their wallet are safe.

It seems the owner's cold wallet was rather a hot one when it could be swept by a hacker immediately as the owner claimed. I probably won't ever understand why there are people who fiddle around with such huge amounts of BTCBTCBTC and likely have infected systems or use some very unsafe or even completely malicious tools to create what they think is a cold wallet. This is insane beyond comprehension.

A decent hardware wallet, properly used, could've prevented this (check addresses and transaction details to be signed carefully and solely on the independent display of your hardware wallet; sign a transaction with your hardware wallet only when you have fully checked every detail of it).

The sad part is the even if you make such mistake and you immediately notice it, you can’t be able to revert the decision because even the RBF option only allow one to increase the fee I don’t think decreasing the fee will actually work. Probably the the wallet wouldn’t allow it to progress since the RBF is basically just replacing that transaction with a new one with higher fee. So one needs to be careful setting this fees

Also with the information there by hosseinimr93 which indicates that the wallet might be hacked I would suggest Antpool to keep the excess than handing it over to the scammer

I dont, but if you deal with centralized services and try to deposit "tainted" coins you might run into a bunch of issues. Unfortunately, thats the world we live in now.

---

Read a few posts before replying in the thread. It has already been confirmed that this was a hack and not a sender error.

How's a 83 BTC transaction fee considered "dirty"? And why's that and not my 5000 sat fee? What is the difference?

Is it just me or is this taint shit escalating rapidly into everything? Criminal money? Tainted. Mixed with criminal money? Tainted. Mixed in general with other people's money? Tainted. Do the money originate from a non-regulated exchange? Tainted. Suspicion that the transaction fee was to launder money? Tainted.

What the hell. Stop buying taint.

You're right. I've experienced this first hand and it still hurts me till date. Mine was $20 at a time when I felt I had set it at something around $2. I can't be too sure if it was the app that reverted it to that high or me who didn't crosscheck properly. Yes, I used a closed wallet and there wasn't an option of RBF. So, I couldn't do anything once I noticed my error immediately I had triggered the transaction. It's crazy how we get to find out our mistake once we press the trigger. I just had to quietly rue my loss. Anyway, I hope the over 80btc transaction fee was also done in error and hopefully the antpool that processed it will be able to return the excess to the originating wallet.

Wow! and that's what I call to be in a hurry he even RBFed the transaction, just in case it wasn't getting into the next block.

Well, jokes apart, we are seeing many cases like this one in the recent past. I guess that, as more and more actors enter in play, chances for this kind of things to happen also increase. I hope that, if he spent such an awesome capital that easy (or addressed by hackers if that's what eventually happened) is because he has many more Bitcoins, because nobody deserves to be insta-ruined like that.

Yes. Looks like this really was a hack job. 

Someone noticed another interesting detail - the transaction fee taken was precisely 60% of the total transferred.  So it seems some pre-programmed script was just waiting for any incoming deposits to automatically siphon off everything to another wallet.  Sure, the hacker made off with 55 BTC, but because of his stupidity he was left without a potentially much bigger loot.


https://twitter.com/mononautical/status/1729045556662792283

We cannot determine exactly who signed the message. It could be both the owner of the wallet and a hacker who hacked the account and, accordingly, has access to this wallet to sign the message. But of course, it is more likely that the wallet was hacked and a high commission was paid in order for the stolen bitcoins to be instantly transferred to the fraudster's wallet.

Someone claimed that the wallet which the transaction in question was made from had been hacked.


https://twitter.com/83_5BTC/status/1727996658758058120


And here is the message signed from the same address posted by the same twitter account.


https://twitter.com/83_5BTC/status/1728873072349069352

And here I am trying my bitcoin transfer next day to save 10 cents fee.

Yes, from the taxman's perspective, nothing much changes. But from an AML/CFT perspective, you are basically turning "dirty" money into a seemingly legitimate and clean financial transaction (revenue generated from a business activity).  Of course, its pure speculation that there is indeed some form of money laundering occurring here. It doesnt have to be the case at all.

This is a really huge sum if converted to Naira here in Nigeria trust me and at this current hard time in the country 😭😭 people still have such money to spend on a transaction menhn am weak. Like ehh this one really weak me 83BTC. Ahh it is well ❤️‍🩹❤️‍🩹

What can you do, this is how bitcoin and its network are designed. This must be taken into account when sending transactions.

Personally, I don't believe it was a mistake. Now is not the time when you could make a mistake of 83 bitcoins this way. I wouldn’t believe it if this commission was even 8 bitcoins or 0.8 bitcoins.

Unless this person has hundreds of thousands of bitcoins on his balance sheet and for him it’s mere pennies.

In this case, the sender had to be blind or make the transaction on the roof of a high-speed train, which is why he was in a hurry.

Antpool has the right not to return anything. A deal is a deal.

This advice applies to all bitcoin (crypto) users.

Why does that matter? Whether you intentionally or "accidentally" sent a transaction, it is very much considered a payment from a taxman perspective.

Not if that was really intentional as they say. That person could communicate with Antpool and give them their transaction in private, so the rest of the pools couldn't be aware of it. (Even though one can confirm whether that happened or not if they're logging which transactions they enter their mempool)

What was the chance that ANTpool would be the one to mine the block? Isn't it possible that someone else would mine the block and thus, they would lose this huge sum of money?

firstly i have to agree with you that money laundering will be absurd because with this high fee it will raise suspicion that will require looking into any associated addresses if it was it the sender will have maybe used even a mixer/tumbler.

now concerning that fee i am suprise now because the 83 bitcoin as fee wasn't the first transaction but the new transaction, the first one actually had a fee of 70 bitcoin which i showed in the thread which was why many people thought it wasn't a mistake. at first the replaced transaction id was displaying on the block explorer but now it is not showing probably because every node has dropped it.

It could be money laundering, though I doubt that because on-chain transactions are all public. There are no names attached to Bitcoin addresses, but you can always follow the flow of coins.

If this was deliberate then this obfuscates the history of the coins that turned into transaction fee. Doesn't really sound reasonable to me, too.

To me this looks more like a mistake of someone acting in a rush for whatever reasons because the transaction lacks a change output. And if you either don't understand that transaction inputs are always consumed completely and you don't want to send all of your inputs (minus a reasonable transaction fee) to your output(s), then you always need a change output that returns the excess of your inputs back into your wallet.

This transaction was also the final one of a small chain of CPFP transactions where the two ancestors had a bit too low transaction fee rate (64 and 119 sat/vB where the lowest fee rate of transactions in block 818087 appears to be 129 sat/vB; previous block 818086 had a fee span starting at 112 sat/vB, so 64 sat/vB is clearly way too low to start with if you want a timely confirmation). Someone got nervous or lost his mind while block 818087 took roughly 30 minutes to be mined.

Following transactions of the 55.76998378BTC combine some small amounts and peel of a bunch of 6BTC outputs which are further involved in some transactions, all with mostly optimal transaction fees.

I was talking about centralized exchanges. Imagine a user withdraws his money to a specific address from an exchange like Binance, since the user does not have control over the funds, they won't be able to use the RBF feature, and exchanges like Binance or others are unlikely to bump fees to complete the transactions. That's the possibility I pointed.

True. I guess I have picked a wrong word which is "honest". I should have picked "genereous" instead. If they really want to return it to the user who lost it by mistake, they can still refund it. But, if they don't there is nothing wrong.

Not the same. Since it was a transaction fee, it is difficult to prove whether there was intent or an accidental error. Therefore, it becomes legitimately earned money for the mining pool, regardless of where the money originally came from. Much like mobsters used casinos to launder money.

To the people who believe this was done to launder money: what money are you talking about? There is no concealing of financial activity, we can all view the transaction where he pays the miner 83 BTC. I'm not into the law, but isn't this counted the same as if he had sent him 83 BTC in a regular transaction?

- How's RBF related to whether that was an exchange transaction?
- The pool has the right to decide what to do with the money.

Few people can afford such a mistake, since not many people have such a number of Bitcoins in their wallet. For this reason, it is unlikely that any beginner can lose 70 BTC, because he could only see such a figure in a dream. But, since we are dealing with finances, it is necessary to carefully execute the transaction so as not to lose your money by mistake.

The RBF it self wasn’t enable with the transaction but it seems the mining node which is Antpool has the full RBF enable and that is why it was possible or probably it was done using CPFP which was shown by mempool.space.

Mistake will have been what we will consider but to some extent I still find it awkward, because after making mistake the sender still went ahead to bump the fee. Once you make this mistake your wallet balance will change drastically that you will know you made mistake but then why bump it again?

Your point does not make any sense. Who is going to waste 3.1 Million dollars just to spread FUD? Isn't it a too expensive way to spread FUD? Can't you think that the owner probably was using a new wallet GUI and he confused between 83 sat/vB with 83 Bitcoin? I am afraid, I do not agree with your point because it does not make any sense.


If the pool is too honest, can't they send it back to the wallet where the transaction was made? I don't think such transactions are made from any exchanges since it was an RBF transaction. In this case, did Antpool announce anything yet?

Someone with over 83 BTC isn't your everyday Joe, right? Makes you wonder, did they pull off this move while sipping something strong or maybe not in their A-game? What's the scoop? This isn't the first head-scratcher, we've seen blunders before. Even someone like me, not in the "rich club," double-checks transactions. Rich or not, it's baffling how they slip up. Let's snag a lesson from their costly mistakes. Remember, folks, don't dance the same misstep. It's an expensive lesson waiting to be learned. Stay sharp, and let's avoid turning our wallets into a crypto drama!

The current market value of 83 btc is a lot so it seems amazing to me how 83 btc can be spent only in transaction fees. Maybe there is some miscalculation. If I think about it myself no matter how rich I am I will never spend 83 btc to do my bitcoin transaction out of the question I am willing to wait my whole life if need be but never spend 83 btc to do a transaction. Where one investor dreams of owning a bitcoin how come another investor spends 83 BTC just as a transaction fee. It sounds as amazing as it is unbelievable. Currently it costs three to five dollars to make a transaction so we wait for the transaction fees to come down further how can another investor spend that much.

If this was the case, I don’t think it was a mistake. It had RBF enabled and the sender later increased the price again which makes it more likely like a FUD some people have assumed it to be. Also, could be in haste to get the bitcoin moved out from the wallet which may likely not be for the seller, could be; a case of theft, fraud or related activity.


I hope so too, many incidents like this have happened in the past and most of them are given back to the rightful owners that made such costly mistake after proving ownership of the coin. If your guess is actually correct, that means we still have more people that are not literate in bitcoin and own a large amount of bitcoins in their holdings till date.


If it was possible to even set a transaction fee that won’t be above the actual amount that is been sent out, cases like this would have reduced. But in a market where the amount of transactions fees determine how fast your transaction will be approved in most cases, it will not be realistic for this to happen.

38 Bitcoin I dont think this newbie account and software default usually choose the best fee that matches to mempool but this is crazy 83 Bitcoin what a crazyyyy shitt. I think he doing it on purposes but what crazy person put 83 BTc in a single transaction

It is difficult to call what happened an error since it was made twice and the owner could clearly understand what he was doing. One can only guess where he got such a large number of bitcoins that he could just spend them. There is doubt about the honesty of these funds, and the owner was probably in a hurry to complete the transactions as quickly as possible, which means one can guess that some kind of hacking or theft occurred, and the Bitcoins might not belong to the sender.

I agree that transactions are visible and not invisible to other miners. If what he meant is where the transaction is not yet broadcasted in the pool then I will believe because I tried it myself where I make a transaction and have the transaction hash but I didn't see it or no search result when I checked it on the mempool until a few minutes then you can finally see it. Anyway, if it isn't what I explained then I don't believe that it is invisible to other miners and I don't know where he get it or learn it.

Is Antminer going to give that back to the person who did it? Or they are the one who did the transaction and just did it to launder that money..

Like what everyone is thinking, it's possible that they're money laundering with that amount because that's easier for them to go through have it paid to the miners.

Mistakes! That’s the one way this sort of transactions can result, by means of error.
Good enough, we’ve got miners who are reasonable enough to understand what must have been the case and often choose not to punish the error by refunding over paid fees back to the sender address.

People have to be real calculative while making transaction’s especially in times of fee hikes as these. I guess having so much on your alley calls for a little carelessness.

Makes ya scratch your head, dunnit? Payin' 83BTC just for the transaction fee? That's nuts.  Seems like wallet apps oughta have some kinda pop-up or somethin' to keep folks from makin that kinda expensive mistake.  Shouldn't be on users to catch stuff like that - they need a heads up when the fee's about to go through the roof. 

One of the main reasons for the mempool congestion is actually the Inscription/BRC-20 worthless JPEG which the holder will wish they didn't buy in the future.
Although, the current congestion is different from the previous market but the mempool always experiences congestion when the halving market is coming and this is always the moment people pay ridiculous all in the name of making transaction but the miners always love it.

I do not think it is a fat finger mistake, there is a huge difference in size.  It is either a defective software(highly not possible if they download the official software of a known Bitcoin wallet) or just like the early reply is saying, trying to launder a certain amount by making it go through transaction fee, or some people are into a propaganda of making people trust large mining pool since these pool refund any excessive amount of transaction fee as the history of huge transaction fee error stated.


It will never be a fault of a miner since the person who did the transaction is the sender himself.  If we are using electrum, there is always a pop up and notification on how much we are paying for transaction fees so it is really very hard to think that a person will make a mistake in adjusting transaction fee unless the person is high on drugs or intoxicated, I do not know about other non-custodial wallet though.

Millions just to make a mistake? Come on.

Someone who owns that much is aware on how to adjust fees and how to make transactions. Whether we give the benefit of the doubt from this transaction and whoever has done it.

It's very unlikely that someone will assume these adjustments and fees are normal and won't take a second or third look before pressing that send to proceed for the transaction.

Never attribute to malice something you can attribute to stupidity or incompetence.

Could someone be trying to do something wrong? Sure.
Could someone who realized they made a mistake made an even bigger one in a panic trying to fix it? More likely.

Will we find out? No, we will find out what people tell us happened or at least the released public story of what happened. Would that be the truth? Who knows.

-Dave

I never even thought about this, but this is most plausible theory, and i do have to admit it's pretty clever way to launder money.
Although i am guessing that this isn't going to be efficient way for much longer if people are paying attention to this, and watching the money closely.

I am not sure if officials have yet enough resources to learn and track every new way though.

I'll be damned if I ever see that high of a transaction fee in some of my transactions. If possible, I always go for the most economical route that gets the transaction confirmed within the next block. Call it as being frugal or skimping, but that's one of the selling points of crypto: cheap transaction fees. I'm surprised the sender didn't realize that he's putting an absurd amount of money just for fees, and if they're someone who has this amount of crypto, I'm pretty sure they know that something isn't right before they sign and broadcast that tranasaction.

As we already know that based on the high fee rate a lot might have put their coins under a blanket because they don't want to make sure a hug mistake while selling of sending their coins out.
However, it is a good idea if we don't just selling our coins under pressure because most of these mistake are been caused while selling or sending out of pressure just because most of them just want to get profits.
Although, for an investor to have such an amount of BTC on his wallet, that means he or she has enough than what he used for transaction fee, moreover it is a sad story because such a thing is not done out of consciousness rather than a mistake.

This will be a mistake, but for person to hold such amount of Bitcoin, he/she should have enough knowledge to know how to customize transactions fee to avoid such mistakes because this is a costly mistake that no one will want to make.

Nevertheless, it also looks like money laundering, but even if it one, the fee is very high to make it obvious, unless if it is been done intentionally just to give the Bitcoin out to the miners.

I would say it is a kind of mistake and why we see the fee increase 70 btc to 83btc is the user tried RBF soon after acknowledging the mistake but he is not aware that with RBF the fee can be only increased not possible to decrease so while trying to correct the mistake he lost another 13BTCs. But we saw similar incidents and the pool returned the excess amount like in Paxos case so probably we can expect the Antpool to act in the same way.

This is really a one-in-a-lifetime mistake, and if this is not reversed, this person will forever remain to live with this regret. It's obvious the person has more than enough BTC in that wallet, which makes it easier for the transaction to go without warning or insufficient balance.
 
And can this mistake also be linked with the one that happened in the pass, which was not up to two months well, and it was later recorded that the amount was returned back to the sender, which they claim was a mistake from the wallet?
 
But how can someone who has such an amount of money in their wallet make such a big mistake? It now seems as if we who have a lesser amount of money in our wallet seem to be taking some security measures very seriously than the others. If such an amount is sent to the wrong wallet and not used for transaction fees, what else do you think will happen, if not turn an innocent person into a wealthy person?

I also do not think this happened by mistake because the number is too large to be mistakenly identified as a fee.  The sender can ask the mining pool to return the money to him after proving his ownership of the sending address.  Although this is not certain to happen, we should at least hear of an attempt.
The hypothesis that I find most logical is an attempt to launder money since miners can confirm their transactions themselves.  It's a good deal for the miner to launder that huge sum in exchange for only paying a small percentage of it in taxes.

Really that hard to believe that those people who are owning tons of Bitcoin is really considered as a newbie or someone who doesnt even know about basic operations. It is really just that impossible to believe on.

Okay lets say that someone had stored up those coins in electrum, so bumping up fee could be possible but its really that impossible that you cant really be able to read up
that sat/byte thing before you would be sending out your coins but well if this is the case then it is really just that costly mistakes but we've seen similar
situations back in the past about passing up huge amount of fee or making use of it.

Pools that had able to confirm it out or such transaction would really be that basically be returning out those things. As long this one creates too much
noise then community would really be have that normal approach and making reaction then it is normal that they would be returning it out or
even something that ethical on doing so.

I normally will assume transactions like this are not mistakes, cause anyone who holds such amounts will be able to easily navigate making a transaction without losing millions of dollars mistakenly. This will suggest that there is a possible money laundering going on, but money laundering is not meant to be obvious or public, but a ridiculous amount for tx fee will attract lots of attention.

As ridiculous as it is, I will assume that the are mostly mistakes and if they are not, money laundering is not the purpose of the transaction.

While I will love to agree with you on this, I am still surprised that someone could take this bold take and assume it to be a mistake. I think regardless of whatever the aim was, which I will support you in this case, this is marvelously interesting. The thing is, if it was not some sort of deliberate act to FUD the market, how on earth will this wallet holder be careless to make this momentous mistake of pushing out Bitcoin worth of  millions of dollars as a mistake.

I will be interested to read more information about your perspective and what could have really been the reason why such mistake or at least acclaimed mistake was made.

Wow. It's quite a big deal if you cash it in. Yes. We have to be careful and not rush into transactions, especially if the amount is large. I also checked that the transaction seemed safe and the balance received and withdrawn also only reduced the fee slightly.

A similar error occurred in September when Paxos paid around $500,000 transaction fee on a Bitcoin (BTC) transfer. It was an overpayment. Well, they were lucky that the miner who verified the transaction returned it. The best news on the internet will be if we read out the miner who would verify this overpayment return it. It is just some very silly mistake either made in the moment when the sender wasn't paying attention to details. That is why is it good to be in the moment when making transactions as this. Between overpaying transaction fees and sending bitcoin to the wrong bitcoin address, I wonder which is worse.

It can be money laundering if a mining pool return it to the original sender, I don't think so. Because both transaction hashes of the mistakenly transaction (with high fee) and the return transaction are all public on the blockchain. Everyone can see it and it will not be hidden if it's money laundering. Where the bitcoins come from can be easily traced.

Big mining pools can mine two or three blocks consecutively, it's true and you can see it there.
BTC empty blocks (2009 - 5 May 2020): miners, size, daily, monthly,yearly stats.

The untrue is all blocks are public on blockchain and the public ledger. You can see it on block explorers and what do you mean by 'are not visible to other miners"?

Not only other miners but many Bitcoin full nodes can see it too.

Is this actually a mistake or being ignorant, even if he transaction being made is that huge, it shouldn't have occurred that one is paying this huge sum for making payments, I was shocked in the first place when i saw this, thinking that maybe it was $70 that was intended and not in btc, if this was actually true, then i also wonder how the fund in question was acquired, there's more to know about this incident.


If from what you guess is right, then the sender is the one at fault from his mistake, we need to check ad always double check anything we are doing before making a confirmation for that.

Sounds like that to me too.  I doubt it was a mistake TWICE and even more costly.  How in the world do you not notice over 70 Bitcoin is missing from your Wallet.  TWICE!

The only answer is this.  Some sort of scheme.  Or stupidity at its finest.

The question we need to ask is, are there chances of making mistake twice? The transaction came from a segwit address which means that the person is knows everything that has been happening, if it was from a legacy address, I will have assume probably the person doesn't know much update about what has been happening on bitcoin but this person is a pro that paid 119980x of transaction fee, this is not a mistake to be honest. Look at the RBF transaction and see again


Yes, there was this transaction that was done by Paxos company, they paid $500,000 for a transaction of $200 but the miners later return the fees. If you should compare that transaction with this one, you will understand the one that was a mistake and the other that was intentional.

This is a mistake no one will want to make because it is a costly mistake that will take time to be forgotten.
83btc as transaction fee is very high, it is above my comprehension because I will never expect someone to loose such huge amount of bitcoins as transaction fee just to confirm a transaction that is not up to 100BTC.

This should serve as a lesson for newbies like us that are not taking learning serious before starting to do something related to bitcoin and crypto transactions, most of these transactions are irreversible so if we make mistakes with such huge amount, we just have to be patient.

I will assume that the transaction occurred as a mistake; otherwise, I was wondering what the nature of the transaction could be that would make one pay such a volume of BTC as a transaction fee. People are that wealthy, though, but looking at the monetary equivalent of the volume of BTC paid for the transaction, it is too real to be realistic. Such a mistake is very grave to make. Although people would make such mistakes, not in that tone.

what is the state of mind of a person who commits such an unintentional mistake? I forgot a bit, but it seems a similar situation has also happened to Ethereum when transaction fees on the Ethereum network also soared.
The situation again gives us an idea to remain alert and always be careful and also double-check before agreeing to a transaction. not only the nominal but also the destination address.

but has there been a similar case before and the sender received compensation or a refund?

Wow, that's quite a hefty transaction fee! It's unfortunate to see such costly mistakes. It seems like a classic case of a simple error in setting the transaction fee. Fortunately, in my years of making transactions, I haven't made any mistakes in using fees. It's really necessary to double-check and verify the handling of transaction amount fees because if this happens to me, it would be a real headache. We should be resilient.

If this is indeed a genuine mistake, will AntPool recognize it as such and consider refunding the funds? But we know that they are under no obligation to do so; it is the sender's responsibility to ensure that they are setting the correct fee amount.

That's $3M+ if valued in dollars and someone to make this mistake? Yeah, it's suspicious that the person who did it likely did it as honest mistake.

Very possible.

We have seen this not just once but for the other transactions that have set a high fee mistake wasn't in Bitcoin. Let's see if Antpool is going to say something about this.

The fee rate isn't rounded, so I doubt it's really a mistake.

The miner doesn't set the fee, but the wallet is.

Isn't Bitmain responsible for this? AntPool is owned by Bitmain, if it's used for money laundering, I don't think SEC or any other organization not feel suspicious when they see uncommon transactions.

If that's is not money laundering, I don't know what else to call it. I will assume that's a miner transaction because I don't think this is a mistake but a deliberate one. The first time a 70 amount of bitcoin was use as fees and then replace it with a bigger fee, don't you think something is off. If it was a genuine mistake, he would have probably override the transaction to a lower fees the soonest he realized the mistake but bump the fee by +13 bitcoin, that's deliberate action.


I still don't believe this is a mistake, a honest one will be easy to convince but this particular one is not adding up. The person in question will have even paid 1 bitcoin if at all he was trying to be generous but paying millions of bitcoin in a transaction is really crazy. If the person really made a mistake, we will soon hear from him and beg for returning of the rest of the bitcoin.

Yeah, The amount is too much for just a mistake no matter how huge his holding. Also the most shady thing on this news was the fee is originally set high with 70BTC which is too high not to be notice. Also this kind of huge fee surely be immediately included in the block since it’s above average.

Is it possible that this kind of transaction was use by the miner to set the mining fee high for the average? Aside from what you mention, The miner is the other party who can benefit on it.

Initially when I saw the amount of Bitcoin, I thought it was a typo error and you wanted to write $83 BTC. I had to go check the link to confirm the news, lo and behold it's true. I know mistakes like this had been done in the past but that was when the price of Bitcoin was insignificant. I doubt if one would mistakenly set 83 BTC as fee, how much Bitcoin does he has in his wallet? I agree with dzungmobile, that the sender knew exactly what he did and it's not a mistake.

This makes it seems more suspicious and like an intentional acts to me because the sender use RBF to increase the fee which was not supposed to be done, since the 70btc was already a extravagant fee. All I can say is that, dzungmobile claimed about it being FUD to the market is more likely true.

It might be also a part of  money laundering scheme. Pools are free to include into candidate block its own transactions which are "hidden" for other miners till that block is mined.

The pools with  enough  calculation power are even have capability  to mine a few blocks that are not visible to other miners. This is cold a selfish mining.

This is a unique take that I had not thought of, though I think that's a pretty lame and ineffective FUD attempt. Surely people wouldn't shy away from Bitcoin because of someone elses obvious mistake? It doesn't really say much about bitcoin but more about the sender.

Overall, it's a very interesting mistake and the likelihood of it is generally is quite low....it's hard to believe that a wealthy individual holding such large value in Bitcoin could be so ignorant or careless as to not see/incorrectly set the fee amount as a mistake. I feel like there is a reason or purpose for this that only the sender could know.


If the average/approximate fee per vbyte was around this at the time, this could be a pretty good guess.

I heard a few cases like this which is a very costly mistake, I didn't know if this is a newbie or not.
AFAIK, wallets that don't support RBF are those custodial wallets and I found out that the transaction mistakenly put a huge fee doesn't support RBF.

This case wasn't only on Bitcoin but also in altcoins, just like what happened when "Someone paid $2.6 million in fees to move $134".  So we should double-check first our transactions because we know cryptocurrencies are irreversible transactions, it's very lucky if Antpool will refund those amounts.

Wow I’m shocked how much people really have in their hold wallet like 83btc just for transaction fee? Wow I’m moved and this is actually one reason never to give up and to continue hustling because I can’t even imagine how much will be left in his holdings and there might also be possibilities that the error wasn’t noticed immediately but nevertheless I think this mistake was really expensive and I hope this is treated like a mistake and the money be refunded.

This is not a new type of 'mistake' and after many times, I started to think it is not mistake at all.

Those overpaid transaction fee is like a plan from someone to fud the market. It can be used as news like Bitcoin is risky, you can lose money by mistake when broadcasting your transaction and Bitcoin blockchain is irreversible so you will not get your money back. Something like this is in my mind.

There are times mining pools allow senders of those overpaid transactions to provide proof of ownership and claim those bitcoin back.

20 BTC as transaction fee
Bitcoin Miner F2Pool Returns 19.8 BTC to Paxos After Overpaid Fee
80 BTC as transaction fee
Accidentally pay an 80BTC transaction fee? Please contact us for a refund!

As we all know the transaction fee continues to get high as the mempool remains congested for almost a month now due to reoccurring ORDI tokens on the bitcoin blockchain. This has left some people a bit furious and some newbies making costly mistakes of setting high transaction fees.

A transaction that was in block 818087 had actually paid a whopping sum of 83 bitcoins as the transaction fee. I would say this is a costly mistake but for someone having that huge amount of bitcoin in their possession I don’t get it. The transaction was first broadcasted with a fee of 70 bitcoins and then later was replaced with that of 83 bitcoin as fees.

My guess is the sender was probably trying to set is fee as 70 and 83Sats/vbyte and then mistakenly set out that high fee. The block was mined by Antpool, hopefully they would treat it as mistake and return the funds.

1. TXID for the 83 bitcoin fee: b5a2af5845a8d3796308ff9840e567b14cf6bb158ff26c999e6f9a1f5448f9aa

2. The replaced transaction ID: 0c35f3c8a0c38f45629940ee9ab2b1c93d408be113845a735043261ad20f3351

Advice to newbies check properly the amount your setting as fee and make sure you are looking at the right fees estimator, use wallets that allows bumping of fees in case you set a very low one