I've seen this before and it's almost certainly developer/transaction construction error. One of the things I make sure to teach about Bitcoin transactions is that you have to send the change back to yourself or it ends up as a fee (tx outputs have only two states, spent and unspent). I suspect that's what happened here. That person made a tx without a change output.
It's not uncommon and has happened quite a few times in Bitcoin history.
reply
Painful lesson in this case.
reply
I take it back. I agree with Jameson that it's bad software from what's probably an exchange: https://twitter.com/lopp/status/1700985810714239222?s=20
reply
Pain is the best teacher ๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ’ฏ
reply
Only if you survive it :(
reply
will be interesting to know how this transaction has been done, which wallet has been used ๐Ÿค”
reply
This makes a lot of sense. But wouldn't a wallet at least warn, or show that the fee is way off the charts?
Miner: F2Pool (What a nice piece of luck)
According to mempool.space
Overpaid 479867x on fee
reply
Damn, too bad not Braiins pool
reply
deleted by author
reply
Can probably contact f2pool to recover the funds
reply
deleted by author
reply
510k usd fee
please stop saying that. Is stupid. Over Bitcoin network are paid only fees in sats.
reply
deleted by author
reply
Is about using their (fiat maxis) language. They want you to keep thinking in fiat, to keep you trapped. Get used to use only sats and bitcoins. Forget about fiat. You will thank me later.
reply
deleted by author
reply
deleted by author
reply
only fiat maxis live in a fiat standard. Are you one?
reply
SATs are the standard
reply
I have no more than 3 digits poop Fiat in my bank, and 2 digits in cash. Only the necessary to pay for daily things and stuff. 99% of my wealth is in Bitcoin.
reply
Is not about how much bitcoins or fiat you have. You will learn, you are still green.
reply
I understand your point. However, it's still early. I'm still paid in fiat, so it can be helpful to have a perspective on the value of something in terms of fiat (based on the current exchange rate). Some day i won't have to anymore.
reply
Merry Christmas, random miner.
reply
I'd be interested to know!
reply
deleted by author
reply
Well it could be that the miner paid himself to break the link of utxo
reply
But there a chance that other will mine the block first
reply
Not if it wasn't publicly broadcasted
reply
This is correct, but in this case it appears to have been publicly broadcast, and was globally available before the block was mined.
reply
I've read on Twitter it could be an agreement with a miner, to get rid of tainted Bitcoins (on a blacklist or something).
reply
deleted by author
reply
I didn't think I could find the tweet as I don't follow this account, but I did! Here you go: https://twitter.com/TheVladCostea/status/1700978728409669730
reply
Whatever custodian or exchange this is, be like:
reply
Wow.... โšกโšกโšกโšก
reply
Brian Armstrong brushing off his l33t coding skills and demonatrating to his arsenal of shitcoin devs Coinbase's first LN Channel open transaction?
reply
faulty custom software?
reply
deleted by author
reply
reply
fucking JWW strikes again
reply
Ooh I love a good JWW burn. What's the story?
reply
deleted by author
reply
Could there be a virus that swaps the transaction value and fee on any wallet, just after the user click to sign before transmitting the data?
reply
when you say virus, do you mean the beer one?
reply
if a virus is successful at changing the transaction like that, it would make more sense to change the input address (to the hacker) instead of leaving the funds as fee to a random miner.. probably a buggy low-level script and some dev is really f***ed up right now..
reply