Bitcoin Forum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfeA94BedQI

Apparently it's the bitcoin-killer :P

Riiiight

The unending supply of fools who want to comment on a technology without actually investigating it at all is clearly going to be the most exhausting thing about Bitcoin making it big. It's not even people that don't understand, it's people who aggressively do not wish to understand, while spouting crazy nonsense. These people deserve their fiat system.

I agree with you totaly, but what can you tell us about this issue in the video? can you explain your point of view and how this will not affect in the future the BTC?

Regards

Ohhhhh , the blockchain killer.
Do people even bother to ask themselves if this is indeed a problem?

1)
At very high transaction rates each block can be over half a gigabyte in size.
It is not required for most fully validating nodes to store the entire chain. In Satoshi's paper he describes "pruning", a way to delete unnecessary data about transactions that are fully spent. This reduces the amount of data that is needed for a fully validating node to be only the size of the current unspent output size, plus some additional data that is needed to handle re-orgs. As of October 2012 (block 203258) there have been 7,979,231 transactions, however the size of the unspent output set is less than 100MiB, which is small enough to easily fit in RAM for even quite old computers.

2) We don't need all the transactions is the blockchain to stay there forever do we?

Off-chain transactions, block headers-only and/or trimming (only needing the latest blocks) could solve this. Then again, I am not an expert so I don't know. Also, work being done with some of the alt-coins could shed light on this. Either way, no fear.

"Not being told"? It has only been discusses about a 1,000 times on this forum alone :-\

Stop spreading FUD.

This is one of many things which has been discussed extensively (I bet there are over a hundred forum topics just here, in the last year or two), and will probably continue to be asked because as much as we'd like newcomers to be tech-literate and patient and do a lot of reading... well, that's just not 99% of the population.

But my style remains to refer you to the resources -- simply because I cannot do anything in a forum post other than insisting it isn't a problem, without writing something that rivals the length of the previous discussions and studies anyway. But I'll tell you one thing: It was discussed briefly in the bloody whitepaper itself before Bitcoin was even a released thing. The assertion that this is the dirty secret of Bitcoin is patently absurd.

Anyway, There's no secret that you can find to go "aaaahhh, so the hundreds of engineers and thousands of technically-minded enthusiasts for the last 4 1/2 years weren't all bonkers after all!" You just have to either read and understand, or believe in those who have.

I like this response by David Schwartz (to the question of whether we'll just get to the point where the sheer size of the blockchain ends the Great Bitcoin Experiment):

"No. If a car is heading North on a highway that ends in five miles, will it run off the end of the road? Of course not.
A car going North on a highway now will not go North on a highway forever. The driver will turn the steering wheel before it runs off the end.
To get a "yes" answer, you have to assume the car has no driver. But then you're asking a question about an absurd hypothetical where a car speeds down a highway with no driver."

• https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
• http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/10333/blockchain-long-run-issue
• http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/7381/is-the-blockchain-ever-increasing-forever
• http://www.bitfreak.info/files/pp2p-ccmbc-rev1.pdf

Yeah but it's only real if it's on youtube.

People don't read anymore remember!

Well , with a bad newspaper you can always wipe your ass , what do you do with a bad video on youtube?

Share it and watch a video of kittens instead?

Annoy your wife.

;D

Sorry if I've offended; I really wanted some insight from people highly knowledgeable about the bitcoin protocol to combat this video.  I know it's not true, but the like-bar is way too big, which would indicate that people are being misled.

I do think it's good that you've posted this here. Maybe even link to this thread in the video's comments so people can get their facts straight?

This is trivially shown to be untrue. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability

Reasons-
1) Ignores the fact many options on the table as even discussed in Satoshi's original whitepaper like pruning unnecessary data about transactions that are fully spent-
bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
using a merkel tree -  http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/10333/blockchain-long-run-issue
2) An audited decentralized Payment Verification network of nodes can also be used that isn't dependent upon trusting any source. The data could also be spread out evenly accross the miner network much like bit-torrent uses to store much higher amounts of data.
3) This ignores the scalability of memory storage and the drastic reduction in both price and size that is expected with a whole new set of technologies in the future
4) Another solution - http://www.bitfreak.info/files/pp2p-ccmbc-rev1.pdf

More data -
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=88208.0

I am really disappointing in the lack of research by some journalists with something that was anticipated and has been discussed repeatedly all the way back to the original white paper and can be realized with a 5 minute google search.

Such a shame...This stormcloudgathering fella seemed just as foolish in his debate with Stefan months ago...

I watched this crap and wanted to post here, but I see you've done it already. Good job - nothing bad would happen if this video was voted down into oblivion and obliterated in comments. I am not a specialist and I have never read white paper, but I figured out "pruning" and ever increasing efficiency of systems in the future in few seconds. My mate figured the same thing right away and laughed this video off. So it seems obvious for a complete layman. This video is a bunch of nonsense but probably something close to million people will see it now

I hope that the threshold for defining "layman" will be sufficient that most people will either conclude the same, or not care because they only do what is popular anyway, in which case even the most damning and accurate of technical analyses would not affect them. :)