When users underpay fees, their transactions gets stuck because miners have more profitable opportunities.
Users are left with 2 options:
a) wait until fee levels drop
b) tell miners they will increase fees
1\ There is an alarming amount of misinformation (fueled by the media) on what exactly happened to Bitcoin yesterday, and whether funds were "double spent"
Here's everything you need to know 👇
When users underpay fees, their transactions gets stuck because miners have more profitable opportunities.
Users are left with 2 options:
a) wait until fee levels drop
b) tell miners they will increase fees
Put simply, RBF is a copy-and-paste of the original transaction with higher fees and an explicit instruction to favor the new transaction instead.
So the user decided to issue an RBF on the 19th with higher fees... but not high enough!
And the transaction was again stuck...
This time around the user paid enough fees.
1) Dec 18th 22:11 UTC (1 sat/b)
2) Dec 19th 21:22 UTC (9.4 sat/b)
3) Dec 20th 00:32 UTC (14.3 sat/b)
And here's where things get a bit more complex
When this happens (1+ times per month), miners need to converge on a single version of events, which often takes around 1 block, or 10 min.
-One miner picked the first (low fee) transaction for their version of the chain
-The other miner picked up the third (highest fee RBF transaction)
In this occasion it might have looked like a malicious "double spend" (inflation), but it is a completely normal event.
The important thing to know is that, yes, there might be different versions of the same transaction, but ONLY 1 will ultimately be accepted.
No reason to freak out. No inflation, no "double-spend" was actually confirmed. Just a ton of loud ignorance and misinformation.
You benefit by serving crypto adds. I urge you to at the very least understand your responsibility and step up your technical game.
How about sponsoring a bitcoin developer?
Their depiction of what happened was accurate. Unfortunately, their post was grossly misrepresented misrepresented for clickbait...
More from Bitcoin
1/ outlook for bitcoin: positive 🚀
in this thread, i'll quickly outline key data points on #bitcoin sentiment, demand, market structure, and macro conditions
disclosure: i own BTC, obvi. this is not investment advice. DYOR. further disclosures at
2/ let's start w sentiment ☺️
first, investor sentiment:
✅ @blackrock filed to add BTC to 2 funds, CIO has 400k price target
✅ @RayDalio's Bridgewater reportedly issuing BTC research report
✅JPM, Goldman, and other bulge brackets initiated research coverage
3/ next, trader sentiment:
🚨 most important indicator is the forward curve
normally BTC futures trade in backwardation after a price drop.
this time, the curve stayed in contango following drop, meaning market makers are bullish 🐂📈 despite funding rate increase!
4/ sentiment drives demand. so DEMAND next.
💸 let's talk fund flows
🤑 our research shows $359M of inflows into crypto products last week alone (https://t.co/6Kky96m3ob)
🤑 our @CoinSharesCo @xbtprovider ETPs saw $200M trading volume on jan
4/ let's talk bitcoin fundamentals
post-halving, 900 BTC mined per day, 312,000 this year.
👀 47M millionaires. 21M bitcoin.
🏆 collectibles selling at all time highs. bitcoin is the ultimate collector's item. (see
in this thread, i'll quickly outline key data points on #bitcoin sentiment, demand, market structure, and macro conditions
disclosure: i own BTC, obvi. this is not investment advice. DYOR. further disclosures at
2/ let's start w sentiment ☺️
first, investor sentiment:
✅ @blackrock filed to add BTC to 2 funds, CIO has 400k price target
✅ @RayDalio's Bridgewater reportedly issuing BTC research report
✅JPM, Goldman, and other bulge brackets initiated research coverage
3/ next, trader sentiment:
🚨 most important indicator is the forward curve
normally BTC futures trade in backwardation after a price drop.
this time, the curve stayed in contango following drop, meaning market makers are bullish 🐂📈 despite funding rate increase!
4/ sentiment drives demand. so DEMAND next.
💸 let's talk fund flows
🤑 our research shows $359M of inflows into crypto products last week alone (https://t.co/6Kky96m3ob)
🤑 our @CoinSharesCo @xbtprovider ETPs saw $200M trading volume on jan
4/ let's talk bitcoin fundamentals
post-halving, 900 BTC mined per day, 312,000 this year.
👀 47M millionaires. 21M bitcoin.
🏆 collectibles selling at all time highs. bitcoin is the ultimate collector's item. (see
$BTC: Two Bitcoin FUDs to address this Thanksgiving weekend:
1. China PlusToken FUD: Old news. Please see linked thread.
2. U.S. Treasury FUD: Read thread below...
1/ These news are much more relevant, as they imply severe trade-offs for people who want to keep their bitcoins undoxxed, with the cost and risks of doing so. I would not disqualify the tweet as mere FUD in the sense that what he posted is false. It should be taken seriously.
2/ For all we know, his decision of making it public before TG weekend may come out of the urgency of informing CT of a poignant anti-Bitcoin move by a Trump administration trying to cut lose ends before leaving office—not just "price manipulation" as I've seen suggested around.
3/ It implies the acceleration of a process already planned for for months in advance, not something he just came up with to "crash the market."
4/ In practicality, assuming this passes, it will have two major consencuences:
a. Armstrong's analysis is correct. And I would go further in saying, this regulation would leave the U.S. severely handicapped to continue to be the leader in the cryptocurrency industry worldwide.
1. China PlusToken FUD: Old news. Please see linked thread.
2. U.S. Treasury FUD: Read thread below...
$BTC:
— David Puell (@kenoshaking) November 27, 2020
1/ So here's the deal with all the PlusToken news we've been seeing recently in the crypto media. Thing is, tho it's just being reported now after the Chinese government put out official balances, @ErgoBTC blew this story open for the on-chain community over a year ago... https://t.co/epNjZaNcJ1
1/ These news are much more relevant, as they imply severe trade-offs for people who want to keep their bitcoins undoxxed, with the cost and risks of doing so. I would not disqualify the tweet as mere FUD in the sense that what he posted is false. It should be taken seriously.
2/ For all we know, his decision of making it public before TG weekend may come out of the urgency of informing CT of a poignant anti-Bitcoin move by a Trump administration trying to cut lose ends before leaving office—not just "price manipulation" as I've seen suggested around.
3/ It implies the acceleration of a process already planned for for months in advance, not something he just came up with to "crash the market."
4/ In practicality, assuming this passes, it will have two major consencuences:
a. Armstrong's analysis is correct. And I would go further in saying, this regulation would leave the U.S. severely handicapped to continue to be the leader in the cryptocurrency industry worldwide.
I will be a buyer under 13800 levels, but depending upon the reversal on smaller timeframe.
#BITCOIN
— Mayank Narula (@Mayank_Narula1) March 5, 2022
Pending RSI divergence on monthly chart which requires a dip under 13805 to get resolved.
But monthly RSI divergences can go on for years before the resolution.
Best case scenario will be panic dump over next few months. pic.twitter.com/hi67hMg9sZ
You May Also Like
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
