2
Why would anyone spend $65 in fees to send 500+ outputs for .001BTC to the same address?https://blockchain.info/tx/0270a4af1269b52bf242390076faa460cfcffe2db74bc748163d8de94e9ce875 then clicking through to the input address, it has some really bizarre transactions. Tons of transactions that have undecodeable outputs, and also, blockchain.info shows that only .003 btc was transacted for many of them, when clearly more was transacted. Indeed, clicking through to the transaction itself shows the correct amount. What is going on here?? https://blockchain.info/address/1F89hmmrtonJfAQNAqDmeDadcw7AsZcvXG
1The undecodable outputs appear to be OP_RETURN scripts whose purpose is to insert a short message or data snippet into the block chain. They are not so bizarre. – Nate Eldredge – 2017-05-11T23:11:32.183
The "amount transacted" is based on blockchain.info's guess that some of the outputs are "change" that's being paid back to the sender. So only the part that doesn't appear to be "change" is reported as "amount transacted". It's based on heuristics and can be mistaken or tricked. – Nate Eldredge – 2017-05-11T23:13:23.693
so what about the .001BTC? are all 500 of those to encode data? If so, where is this data? Is there a chance this is an attack to fill up the mempool? – hedgedandlevered – 2017-05-12T13:23:51.297
That I do not know. – Nate Eldredge – 2017-05-12T14:54:52.997