Bitcoin Forum

No problem.  16 terabyte.  http://www.fastcompany.com/3049876/fast-feed/samsung-debuts-worlds-largest-hard-drive?position=5&partner=newsletter&campaign_date=08152015&utm_content=buffer85858&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer (http://www.fastcompany.com/3049876/fast-feed/samsung-debuts-worlds-largest-hard-drive?position=5&partner=newsletter&campaign_date=08152015&utm_content=buffer85858&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer)

http://b.fastcompany.net/multisite_files/fastcompany/imagecache/1280/poster/2015/08/3049876-poster-p-1-samsung-debuts-worlds-largest-hard-drive.jpg

Precisely what I've been saying for quite some time: hard drives will be faster, cheaper and bigger with time... Holding the blockchain will be less and less of a problem :)

I have to spent 12 hours to update it is really very very huge

Yes, but at this point the given disk is for enterprise only, $6000, and not sold yet. It's a bit out-of-reach (but since beyond some points cost/GB grows due to density) RAID-based solutions for having more space (and redundancy) will be useful and possibly required (not that I want to see that day).

Post a photo of thy real thing. Or don't.

https://i.imgur.com/kBNaxOK.png

It's not so much a storage problem.

It's the matter of downloading it.

Some of us are not so blessed with fast internet speeds.

Internet speeds will follow the same path as disks and pretty much everything in technology...

Tell that to companies like Time Warner Cable, and Comcast. They're not going to give you fast internet until more people take action.

You have control over which hard disk you buy, but you don't have any control on networking development near your location.

This.  And bigger HD's aren't the (only) solution.  I think off chain transactions will be the norm for BTC in the future.  I was thinking Ripple could be the network to do it, but no...  They sucked and sucked as they went.  Stellar is out of the question.  I wonder what happened to Open Transactions and Hyper Ledger...  Those two looked promising.

Bullshit.

I been in areas where the only internet you can get is dial-up.

And most US ISPs limit their clients alot.

And also, we're moving into the era where KB/s is becoming commoditised; Illinois state recently imposed a "Download" tax. Unlimited data plans are likely to become either increasingly expensive or totally extinct. The revolution will not be over corporate TCP/IP?

Anyone else noticed the picture is fake or irrelevant? A 60GB SSD is not exactly a 16TB HDD or anything.

And SPV wallet work just fine on dialup/cellphone so no, the blockchain being big is a non issue. If someone want to run a node he may one day be interested in a 16TB HDD so sure, this is totally appropriate for a node user.

The picture is the picture Samsung used on their press release.  It is merely supposed to give the impression of a 2.5 hard drive.  Nobody gives a fuck what is printed on the label.  They will finally print a new label for the 16TB. 

You guys are all fucked up. 

storage no problem. bandwidth no problem:

Extracting the figures gives:

#Average download speed in November 2008 was 3.6Mbit
#Average download speed in November 2014 was 22.8Mbit

#Average upload speed in November 2008 to April 2009 was 0.43Mbit/s
#Average upload speed in November 2014 was 2.9Mbit


http://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=551

in average, use HDD and RAID 1 would be the cheapest.
you will need a fast network speed as well to synchronise.
i could not afford the major storage costs.

It seams to me that blockchain size and higher bandwidth demand are only being noted as a problem to justify leaving bitcoin as it is.
The real problem of bitcoin development is lack of consensus and sort of rioting within the community, where many just want to push their way, disregarding the benefits.
It's clear that bitcoin needs to change through time, higher block size is only the beginning.

You don't even need to store the blockchain. You can safely delete it after you have verified it and built the UTXO. All you actually need is the UTXO, which is basically a list of every address that currently has Bitcoins, you don't need to store the historical data of where those Bitcoins were before, you only need verify it once and then you can safely delete it.

The big problem with scalability is bandwidth. Internet speeds vary greatly around the world and don't grow at as fast a rate as hard drives do. However this isn't as big as a problem as most people think. Usenet is a decentralized computer network, yet there are only a handful of usenet servers. Not everyone needs to run a Bitcoin node, if that was the case then Satoshi would have never wrote about SPV wallets. You only need to connect to 1 Bitcoin node that is honest, it doesnt matter if every other node you connect to is malicious. As long as there is 1 honest node then we are fine.


No we don't! we want Google Fiber!

I hope the full Bitcoin client implements a more faulty tolerant database engine before bigger blocks are released otherwise it becomes tedious to maintain.

bandwidth no problem:

Extracting the figures gives:

#Average download speed in November 2008 was 3.6Mbit
#Average download speed in November 2014 was 22.8Mbit

#Average upload speed in November 2008 to April 2009 was 0.43Mbit/s
#Average upload speed in November 2014 was 2.9Mbit


http://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=551


Asia has some good spots too. hundreds of millions of people could run nodes.

OP need to choose a better picture for this post, the Model say 60GB SSD   ;D

Maybe you guys need this to go with the hard drive , you can fill it in 16s with this internet speed   ;D ;D :o :o

'Fastest ever' broadband passes speed test
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-25840502


This is crazy Syfy :o

but for the low connecting  speed location, it is really a problem for them! So SPV wallets are a good replacement for Bitcoin core!

block chain size is not a problem and likely won't be for the foreseeable future.

Hard drive space is dirt cheap compared to how much of it bitcoin blockchain takes up.  :D

Correct me if i'm wrong, but if for example you have mempool at 24 mb, isn't it the same for full wallet users to sync on both accounts? 24x 1mb blocks on one hand, and 3x8mb blocks on another ?
Lightweight wallets should not be affected in any way by block size increase, so either way they do indeed seam like a good choice.

cheers

i hear this bullshit since genesis block. the longer chain the longer sync. it is running out of capabilities of regular PC to handle full chain. and the problem is not particulary in space.

This cracks me up. :D Dude's all-in.

Then take action :) Move operators and make them have cheaper and faster services. That's what happened in my country. people constantly change operators unless they give them cheap and reliable services. I know it's easier said than done... But it's not an impossible task.

I don't see how a country like the US can't update their internet services.


Yes, that's the downside. You can ask you provider to increase coverage on your area though. Not sure if such requests are heard outside Europe.


So I've heard. Areas with dial-up will either have to be upgraded, or satellite internet will take over. It can take years tho, that's for sure...

As for throttling, the contracts normally state that throttling can be enabled. I assume you're talking about the US. Recently AT&T disabled throttling on grandfathered unlimited 4G plans. So I guess people from the states got that going for them ;) And that's something that's not happening in Europe for now.


Bad news. Are there any big businesses that depend on connectivity in Illinois? Such companies will probably depart from there...


My point exactly :) Bandwidth might take long to reach some areas but it eventually will.


Exactly, excellent post. Besides, better pruning support is coming out in near future on Bitcoin Core...

In my country we only want Google Fiber if it's cheaper than current services, fortunately prices drive the market here ;) And then service quality eventually comes. ISP's are constantly smashing each other with promotions. Vodafone now has fiber service here and is making very competitive prices. I said my ISP that they either match their prices to Vodafone or I'd switch services. They ended up matching the price ;) This is the kind of things Americans have to do. They would probably pressure their ISP's more.

In Europe there are laws allowing people to end contracts without having to pay a dime of what's left of their contract term. But that's talks for another topic.


Yes, SPV functionality is definitely useful!! Especially for mobile clients!

Unsurprisingly, Netflix's customers are affected probably more so than any other. I don't know the present state of affairs, but there were hints that Netflix would just stop operating in Illinois.


There are other problems with relying on corporations for your internet access. Other problem trends:

• Apple and Samsung plan to eliminate SIM cards from their mobile devices
• ICANN implement a scheme for cryptographically signed DNS lookups
• FBI seeking access to copies of all civilian cryptographic keys

I share some optimism/enthusiasm for the networking technologies becoming available, but we're unlikely to get there with the help of these incumbent corporations. The freedom is slowly being sucked out of the corporate internet.

If you look at the statistics, that doesn't seem to be the case. I can confirm that in my area the network speed and bandwidth has been lagging behind disk space for a couple of years, only now its getting better.

Speaking from experience here, our bandwidth is already insufficient on an overburdened network, and there aren't any upgrades forthcoming.

1. you werent here when genesis block was created.

2. what is the problem if it isn't hard drive space?

RAM?


please enlighten us all

isn't the blockchain only 40gb, any ssd (especially evo) can do it without the need to put your blockchain in a standard hdd, i usually do not store too much data in my hard disk, if somethign isn't needed is erase

40-50gb weren't a problem even 5 years ago let alone righ now, and like i've said many time there are game nowadays that have a bigger size than that and people play them normally on their ssd without buying xxx tera...

I'm living in a fairly developed location and I can speak from experience that this is not the case for me. Change has occurred, but has stalled indefinitely in the context of my location.

The blockchain was very small in 2015. That's what we'll say in 2025.
The only thing I don't like is that fewer and fewer people will take hassle to download it. I gave it up in early 2014, and I've used clients who don't require to download the blockchain since then. When it will be over 100 To, and that's going to be soon, who will get it?

It won't be too hard to build special download mechanisms and checks to verify it is correct.  Now the process of getting all the blocks sucks.

Thinking this debate is because of storage space is quite ridiculous..

Probably you have good broadband and never have a problem with it! But for the ppl who have low connecting speed, it matters to them!

Huge work and Samsung it is the first to put that in the market. As always Samsung it is not the first time which give the first unique things. The problem is that this is only for the enterprises; so not usable for the privates. The question is: When I will be able to put all my national library within one thing like this?

Then I don't need to go every day there to find after hours and hours the book I need....

This is exactly why I am on their side for not increasing it  ;)