 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2]
|
The pool fees are so low anyway that they're negligible for anyone that need a pool to be able to mine. I don't think this idea would benefit miners at all. The upside would be a theoretically higher update time for transactions (unless I'm misunderstanding something about how the system work) but I don't think that would make up for have 10 times more blocks.
Unless I misunderstad block = header + transactions + footer. Transactions would be 1/10th the size so it wouldn't be 10 times the files size but it would be more. With respect I think your view of what bitcoin is for is a bit topsy turvy. If bitcoin is to succeed it will driven 99.9% by users who have no interest in mining. If we don't have those users there's nothing to give BTCs value and therefore no reason to mine. So benefitting miners really isn't the point. Benefiting users is. The only problem i have with this logic is that even when there are no more BTC to find there will still need to be miners to verify the payments and the network will reward them with the transactions fees that will eventually be enforced If miners = happy, users = happy (fast transactions and verifications) otherwise the system goes down the drain. |
|
|
|
Except they wouldn't be 1/10th the size.... Just look at the length of these strings as a somewhat silly example:
"Congratulations you solved a block and have now been awarded 50 BTC!"
"Congratulations you solved a block and have now been awarded 5 BTC!"
Not exactly what's written to the block chain, but you can see what I mean that it won't make each block 1/10th of the size by dropping to 5btc. I get what your going for but for the most part chains work by having a small header to say "hey this is me" and a very small footer to say "im done =P" then the rest is just the data to be solved, which can be any length because it's specified by the header. Revamp of your example: Gratz = Header BTC! = Footer "Gratz you account has been given the sum of 50 BTC!" "Gratz you won 5 BTC!" |
|
|
|
I don't know the specifics, but the 10 minute window was chosen to make it less likely that an attacker can take over the block chain (Because they'd need far more processing power to do so).
Someone else will surely be able to explain it better than me.
the probibility for this would stay the same because the chain would be smaller so therefore the damage done if it is taken over is smaller. So if 10 small chains were taken over it would equate to 1 large 50BTC chain  Now that you mention it, if we're talking about the file size of the block chain, it'd be much much bigger if we switched to a 1-minute window. well wouldn't it just be 10x the # of chains at /10 the size? |
|
|
|
It's the same deal as torrenting, my friend. No one can shut down peer to peer... Without essentially shutting down the internet.
especially since they let it spread this far  |
|
|
|
I don't know the specifics, but the 10 minute window was chosen to make it less likely that an attacker can take over the block chain (Because they'd need far more processing power to do so).
Someone else will surely be able to explain it better than me.
the probibility for this would stay the same because the chain would be smaller so therefore the damage done if it is taken over is smaller. So if 10 small chains were taken over it would equate to 1 large 50BTC chain |
|
|
|
it is because later on in the chain the reward will go from 50 to 25BTC and even further on it will be 12.5BTC and so on till we got the 21m or so BTC, so it is def possible for the values to change
doesn't really alter the proposition though, just divide the expected time and the expected reward by the same number. If you divided by ten then for the miners it would have the same net effect as forming a pool with 10 identcal machines, but for the end users (who really drive bitcoin) it means 9 mins less delay to get a confirmation. srry i was directing that towards fascistmuffin with the protocol change post |
|
|
|
|
give the network a day or two to stabilize, it goes crazy after a difficulty increase
|
|
|
|
i heard in another forum that namecoin just went through a massive difficulty increase and it is basically no longer profitable to mine them, you can look into it further but i like bitcoin atm  |
|
|
|
|
it is because later on in the chain the reward will go from 50 to 25BTC and even further on it will be 12.5BTC and so on till we got the 21m or so BTC, so it is def possible for the values to change
|
|
|
|
Hey just FYI you should change your sites favicon, still got the default blue host one |
|
|
|
|
not gunna lie i like this idea, i would love not to have to rely on a pool with all its fees and garbage and just solo mine if i knew that the chance to get a block was 10x and i would get 5BTC, Great Idea!
|
|
|
|
|
