I saw lately many discussion on the blockchain. That is a revolution, and everyone seems to point to the bitcoin. I make a search on google, and I found a document that explains well the concept and his usage on Wikipedia. I invite you to check the first 3 paragraphs of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain_(database)thats just simply showing a working example of a successful use of a blockchain as part of its many mechanisms. EG someone asks what is a database. someone shows mysql that does not mean MSAccess is not a database or LevelDB is not a database because it does not emulate mysqls programmability features.. its just an example on one example of real world 'product' that uses the underlying item that is being asked about |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a new THING but an idea to use the already available technology like never before.
technology is where man has found a new way of doing things that is not found naturally. simply. a man made tool. if something later comes out that is even faster, better, easier. the previous tool gets de prioritied and treated as low-tech and the new tool is deemed hi-tech if i created a technique(method/concept/way) to do something better faster easier compared to nature/past methods. its a technology. yes it has to actually succeed in doing it. meaning its more then just an idea by actually achieving something. EG the ball point pen was new tech in the last few hundred years. although now time has passed we laugh and call it lo-tech compared to hi-tech computers.. a pen is still technology made to make life easier compared to anything naturally available |
|
|
|
The purpose for creating the "blockchain" is what determines what it is: Satoshi's Whitepaper description of what we call the blockchain today: The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing the proof-of-work. To prevent the doublespending issue, the answer was chained proof of work: We have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust. We started with the usual framework of coins made from digital signatures, which provides strong control of ownership, but is incomplete without a way to prevent double-spending. To solve this, we proposed a peer-to-peer network using proof-of-work to record a public history of transactionsthat quickly becomes computationally impractical for an attacker to change if honest nodes control a majority of CPU power. Since Satoshi needed something more than a simple ledger in order to facilitate Bitcoin and make it successful over prior attempts, it can not just be a simple chaining of blocks. The "blockchain" as it is known today, is really a decentralized, majority agreed upon historical work with the purpose of preventing edits and revisions without ease and universal agreement. no whats said above bitcoins preferred settings of blockchain. take a look at the 1000+ altcoins. they use PoS, PoA, etc the question/logic bomb to ask yourself is.. if its using PoS instead of PoW, does that violate the discriptor of 'blockchain' to then suggest a altcoin is not using 'blockchain' due to not having PoW. if its still technically using a 'blockchain' without PoW. then logically and technically 'blockchain' does not require PoW as a minimal requirement. and the decision for PoW/PoW is an 'optional extra' layer/decision outside the term 'blockchain' another logic bomb to think about does an altcoin have to emulate bitcoins security choices 100% just to be a 'blockchain'. thus making the difference between 'blockchain' and 'bitcoin' a grey area, due to refusing to deny the differences between the two terms/requirements |
|
|
|
People who understand Bitcoin realise that "blockchain" isn't really a technology, it's just a simple sequential file with linking between adjacent records. However, the word seems to have captured the imagination of the public, and there are many who have jumped on an expanded concept to push their own products. There seem to be a lot of people who assume that "The Blockchain" is synonymous with Bitcoin, and this is far from the truth. We constantly see products being publicised with major omissions from the Bitcoin concept. - no proof of work, no cryptography, no distributed ledger, centralised control, no public blockchain access, no significant peer community and many others.
It would appear that "The Blockchain" is here to stay as a descriptive phrase, so how can we get some consensus as to the elements that are basic to the "technology"?
those that know databases. know the old terms of DBMS and later RDBMS. for blockchain lets just go with BRDBMS then when talking about bitcoin (yes im going extreme now) bitcoin= PDP2PECDSASHA256POW BRDBMS publicly distributed peer2peer ecdsa encrypted signatures sha256 cryptographically secured proof of work blockswhere hyperledger CSHA512POA BRDBMS centralised sha512 cryptographically secured proof of authorityyea my examples are not accurate. but there are a million and one ways to try explaining it. to those that need to know. as for the laymens terminology.. blockchain is simply and only CHAINing BLOCKs of data together. as for: HOW its chained EG via sha, or md5 or other hashing. is not required as thats subjective and optional HOW the chain is secured. EG PoW PoS PoA. is not required as thats subjective and optional WHAT type of data is stored in the blocks, EG financial, medical, DNS, Identity. is not required as thats subjective and optional WHAT rate data the data grows at. is not required as thats subjective and optional WHERE the data is stored. eg on one system, private network or public network. . is not required as thats subjective and optional these things are outside the scope of blockchain and are extra layers ontop |
|
|
|
No, it's not happening as they just consider to digitalize their physical currency.
Because the problem is privacy freedom of people who have the money.
However, another problem that arises when failing to anonymize a currency is the inevitable outrage from the Danish people who expect to be provided with financial freedom and privacy. Rohde hasn’t decided yet if the central bank should monitor and track the transactions of its people.
Not happening because they still far away to make any decisions of it, they need go through a long way discussion and consideration.
The Danish central bank is still far from figuring out the technical aspects of their digital currency
that was stuff discussed in 2015 and again in i think march. from what i have searched. they have played around with a few concepts. and done a few aplpha tests.. they are further along then you think |
|
|
|
SegWit - user experience not much will change, its been oversold/overhyped to the extreme Big-blocks - good - if done using consensus and dynamically, without dev spoonfeeding Changing the way micro-transactions are handled - good aslong as it doesnt require 'buy in services with chargeback features' Introducing side chains - good if merge mining using bitcoin mining, and not diverting hash power over to the altcoins Removing bloat - good Reducing the number of under-utiling blocks - bad if that means lowering limits to "fill" arbitrary numbers Trying to stop beneficial enhancements - bad Getting on with improvements and implementing them - good Using Bitcoin through full nodes - good Just my unsophisticated opinin.  edited while sticking to rational expectations of each of your opinions |
|
|
|
|
already posted.
and not really a "farm"
more like 12 individuals at 12 locations with an average of less thab 84 ASICS each.
if using the farm analogy of say antpools 32,000 units. one guy with 50 units is considered a home gardener, hobbyest.
i dont expect this to be big news. i bet i can find thousands of people stealing electric/internet in america to do all sorts of things.
this is just a puff piece to exaggerate reality and make things sound massive. when really its small
|
|
|
|
|
its not new
its not related to bitcoin
its just a more efficient way for the bank to manage and secure its CLOSED network.
dont expect customers to mine it or see the transparency of it.
infact it wont change much for customers in the way they do banking.
its not exciting for citizens.
its all just behind the scenes stuff.
dansmark bank has been talking about it since last year
|
|
|
|
I dont really get the question. Are you saying it is just an imaginary thing that is created by belief?  Blockchain is real. I dont think someone can just create something like that and make it this popular. i think the OP is asking more in the manner of is blockchain a real 'final product' or just hyping a tool without understanding the final product the tool can make. EG "house bricks" they are going to solve homelessness =hype. because land, mortar, basic utilities, planning permission, and labour, are all extra layers needed to solve homelessness. a brick is just a tool bricks are just a single layer tool. not a final product |
|
|
|
Franky I have liked your previous posts just want to get that out of the way.
OP clearly as many posters are not able to articulate their points well in white paper English but yes I think I also can empathise with the issues inferred.
We can agree the code is open source, but not in the complete spirit of btc's core principles.
I have noticed as well on the sometimes elitist and auto-defensive attitudes of some who completely disregard any kind of idea that questions or criticises.
And that English is invariably brought into question is also another excluding factor.
Adoption, openness, inclusiveness and all that? *shrug*
i think if the OP wrote this topic as 'is bitcoin truly an open concept, open minded,' then people wouldnt attack the OP for the literal meaning of 'open source' bitcoin has become very band-campy/boysclub. where it requires a hop, skip and a jump just to get a dev to not ignore you. it then takes a few twerking/lapdances to convince the devs to try something different. and if you tried to go at it alone. your slapped in the face and called an altcoin even if your code actually works on the mainnet though the code is 'publicly available' the openness for contribution and allowing positive critisism to help bitcoin grow. seems to be equally met with doors shutting in your face. and rdirected through their maze of hops, skips and jumps. let alone the publicly available source not being clearly laid out. its much like saying court transcripts are publicly available. but what they hand you is wrote in short-hand. lacking human commenting/documentation bitcoin is not really open community minded. unless your in the boysclub |
|
|
|
looks more like the reddit thread OP is just busking/begging for $4.2k drug money per hour. didnt really see any large amount of praise or desire to DDoS bitcoin. apart from the topic creator who says this in summary right now, we could fill the block completely for an hour with $4.2k
would you pitch in to kill bitcoin?
im acting alone and have posted on the r/btc before i posted here
all i see is a poor money grabber. that said. if bitcoin network could be threatened by one person.. then maybe bitcoin devs need to get their heads out of the sand and stop holding bitcoin back, by letting blocks get filled so easily.. |
|
|
|
This is typical Franky. You post as your evidence the singlemost dense square kilometer of activity. How do the other 2.1 million square km look? Fucking dumbass.
well we know you are over patriotic to america, so if you think that americans dont live in tents.. guess what i can show you proof americans do. (google: americas tent cities) i'll then presume you could show new york as a counter.. and i can recounter and show you a hill-billy trailerpark to show america is not that well off i really do suggest you go travelling one day. its eye opening instead of crying that other countries are doing things better than america. how about you do something. it doesnt have to be starting a factory in america for american branded ASICS. it can be simply using your words to contact people like elon musk to make solar panels for bitcoin specific devices. get him to sell cars, electric, insurance, etc priced in bitcoin. stop acting the victim because someone not in your reach is doing something. and stop blaming a whole quarter of the planet for actions of a few men. especially when there are more then a few men in another place closer to home that are far worse |
|
|
|
|
so you want to run a cluster of full nodes so that litenode users can have what you deem as a whitelist of trustable full nodes the litenodes connect to.
like a next gen multibit. by just removing random node connection and replacing it with whitelist cluster of fullnodes.
interesting. but as soon as you put a pricetag on it.. you'll start to see alot of community resentment and lack of desire for it.
for instance multibit is free. but the number of users using it is limited so expect maybe 20x less people using a paid for service compared to a free service of similar concept.
i think your concept would only work if its not just a litenode. but does lots of other fancy things not found in any 'free' lite/web/full node available today.
im not sure what niche that can be(im sure your going to integrate your 'enterprise level services and support on a couple of apps'). whatever that may be.. so i hope you add in some services/features not available elsewhere.. or it wont take off.
simply reinventing multibit but with a usage charge wont really take off, lets hope thats not all your conception is
|
|
|
|
Only way out of this dead lock:
Combine core & BU solutions (I 'd recommend) and try again
|
|
|
|
Blockchain is massive hype at the moment. A blockchain is just a simple sequential file with a couple of fields to maintain the sequence. I don't believe that it's even relational, the inter-record relationships are established by the Core software and the wallet as I understand it. SegWit and side chains create some other interesting relationships, but those are Bitcoin specific, and not a basic component of a blockchain.
I suggest we stop calling it the blockchain, and call it a blocktrain. It's a whole load of carriages pulled by an engine ( the Bitcoin Core).
bitcoin vs blockchain are different things. bitcoin uses relational data within blocks. to link inputs and outputs. as you say "established by the Core software and the wallet as I understand it. SegWit and side chains create some other interesting relationships, but those are Bitcoin specific" HOW bitcoin uses relational data is more important then saying relational data is possible but here is the thing. if you forget bitcoin. and just think about databases how the relational part is utilised is not defined. it does not need to be about inputs or outputs. it could be social security numbers linking medical records to bank records. just because RDBMS has relational ability and BRDBMS (blockchain) has the same with a little extra programmability.. does not define how/what/why it is used. it is just an empty tool. like Microsoft Access version 20xx.. its real.. but not important until you build it the data and add features and create things.. then the final end product becomes important i personally dont care when i see people talk about 'blockchain' as thats like a housebuilder talking about a single brick. i prefer to look for the architecture, what they propose as a final design once they have added lots of different materials and bricks together. so far hyperledger is the concern for bitcoin.. not 'blockchain' |
|
|
|
If the OP meant about the different forums related to bitcoin, then it doesn't need any identity to be verified. As mentioned for online web wallet creation sign up is needed but not your life story. and for getting into FIAT trade most of the time verification is a must when using licenced fiat-bitcoin exchanges
edited other persons post for a bit of clarity |
|
|
|
|
the only places you need to register government documements is if you want to wire transfer FIAT to the service.
however you should see if there are any local bitcoin meetups and trade with like minded people face to face.
though others have said dont expect 100% anonymity
after all if you actually cared about your financial anonymity you would not have publicly announced your username and bitcoin address in a way that makes it easy to find
Dr. Blythe™:
1N37gu7pNdkLXCYVjLzY4ND6WKjgrP2onV
nothing is anonymous if you happily hand out your life story publicly without being demanded to
|
|
|
|
|
its real
but blockchain. is just a stepping stone.
blockchain is just an extra layer ontop of relational databases.
what should be hyped is the end product once they add several programmable features ONTOP of blockchain.
EG bitcoin is atleast 10 layers ontop of 'blockchain'
hyperledger is about 4-6 layers ontop of 'blockchain'
the way i see it. although people think of blockchain as equivalent of the invention of the [financial] wheel.. i personally get excited when that wheel is then used as part of a motorcycle. and see just the wheel as something that is immovable and useless without any musclepower/mechanics behind it.
if your into programming.
its like getting excited back in the day you have been programming in basic. and then see visual basic is released. yea it adds an extra layer of possibility. but until you have programmed something on it. and made a kick ass program.. visual basic just ends up being a tool, and nothing more
|
|
|
|
You call someone with 50 one thousand plus dollar specialty computers a hobbiest? There are companies with 10 million dollar annual revenue that don't own 50 grand in computer equipment.
the point is scale. using a 'farm' concept.. having 50 veg growing in a back garden vs 32000 veg growing in a field.. you start to see my point about not exaggerating the lil guys as being anywhere close to a "farm" if the expectation is farms have 10's of thousands of units. EG antpool with 32,000 units.. and then put it against someone with 50 units.. the small guy with 50 units is not really in any comparison to a FARMER. |
|
|
|
though this is not addressing the OP's question. as that seems to have been answered. i must address meuh's misconceptions of other more realistic risks that malicious users can do, not to fill mempools. but to perform chargebacks BIP65 :
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0065.mediawiki#freezing-fundsFreezing Funds In addition to using cold storage, hardware wallets, and P2SH multisig outputs to control funds, now funds can be frozen in UTXOs directly on the blockchain. With the following scriptPubKey, nobody will be able to spend the encumbered output until the provided expiry time. This ability to freeze funds reliably may be useful in scenarios where reducing duress or confiscation risk is desired. <expiry time> CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY DROP DUP HASH160 <pubKeyHash> EQUALVERIFY CHECKSIG above is how it can add the "maturity" feature to stop people spending a confirmed output until a certain time ONCHAIN (similar concept to rreward maturity) CLTV and nlocktime are 2 separate things nlocktime stops a tx being confirmed until a certain point(locking out). CLTV stops a confirmed output being spent until a certain point(locking in). then added in CSV, you can add a revoke code to chargeback.
now to address the double spend offtopic part watching out for RBF CPFP is the same as watching out for malleability.. in short wait for a confirm if unsure |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
