A person can panic that uses Bitcoin that pays about 0.75 BTC ($ 70,500) to a exchange transaction fee (RBF).
The Transaction The question was sent about 30 minutes after the UTC midnight on April 8. This is the second attempt at the practice of RBF It changed the target transaction address, sending 0.48 Bitcoin ($ 37,770) with 0.2 BTC of change ($ 16,357).
Second transaction to Bitcoin RBF. Source: Mempool.space
Anmol Jain, vice president of the investigation of crypto forensics firm Amlbot, told Cointelegraph that the original transaction featured a “default or conservative” fee. The first RBF raised the fee to almost double the amount and changed the output address.
Both of those transactions are waiting for a confirmation that will not come. This is because the higher RBF transaction fees occurred in the same output as the second RBF transaction – maybe, an attempt to wrap the fee to ensure that RBF was processed rather than the original transaction.
Related: How to fix a stuck transaction with Bitcoin in 2025: a step-by-step guide
An assumed error induced error
The transaction has signs of a panic-induced error, with the user who sends a subsequent transaction quickly to avoid the original transaction to include in a block and become final. Jain suggested some potential explanations:
“Maybe he meant to use 30.5692 Sat but, due to haste or butter fingers, ended with 305,692 Sat.”
The second RBF transaction also added an additional input UNSPENT TRANSACT OUTPUT (UTXO). This UTXO contains about 0.75 Bitcoin (Btc). The change is mistaken as part of the fee, likely because the user failed to update the address change or misconception of the transaction structure.
Another possibility that Jain has raised is that the user is confused between a fee in full terms and a set on Satoshi per virtual byte (transaction size) or that the automatic script behind the transaction contains a bug. The purse allows setting a satoshis fee, which may lead to a scenario where the fee is set low, a warning about low fees and an overcorrection:
“The system reads it as 30 sats total fees, which is too low, so the types of 305000 types think it means 30.5 SAT/VB, and the purse actually applies 305,000 sats/VB, which is not discouraged.”
Related: Bitcoin user pays a $ 3.1M transaction fee for 139 BTC transfer
Replace-by-Fee: a controversial feature
RBF is a widespread dispute and controversial feature of Bitcoin. Transactions to Bitcoin are considered non -final until they are included in a block, with further confirmation of more blocks in the same chain.
Mempool transactions are at the mercy of miners-who are expected to be profit-driven. Bitcoin developers find that in many conflicting bitcoin transactions, the financial incentive is to process the payer of higher charges.
There is no easy way to prevent Bitcoin miners from simple transactions that have been sent first, nor does it go straight to which transaction is submitted first due to the decentralized nature of the network. Consequently, this incentive is recognized in the RBF feature, which allows users to edit unconfirmed transactions by submitting an alternative transaction with a higher charge.
This has led to some controversy over the past, with cash that bitcoin (Bch) proponent hayden otto The claim that RBFs allowed for duplicate Bitcoin Spends Back in 2019. In contrast, Bitcoin Cash deleted the feature and claimed that unconfirmed transactions sent to that network were final and safe to accept.
However, in the way blockchains function, transactions-like RBF confirmed occasional occurring in Bitcoin cash either way. This is because the RBF is an implied possession of only a consensus mechanism such as a feature.
Magazine: I became an ordinals rbf sniper to be rich … but lost most of my bitcoin
