My understanding is you download the whole blockchain first for verificatio, then delete all but around the last 200 or so blocks. It works off the UTXO set.
In the case of the compute stick, you could use a separate SSD to initialize the blockchain, then disconnect it. Sticking these things in every nook and cranny could be a real problem for those against Bitcoin.
So for basically to allow for p2p tx and block relaying around the globe thru smaller mediums. The main use case I woulda thought is to reduce time for new nodes to sync up.. Since we know the price of hd is falling faster then the need for that space. The pruning stuff does not reduce sync time at all, though the recent headers-first and syncing improvements do. In order to prune syncing you have to relax the idea of independent verification and rely on someone else telling you that the part of the chain you are seeing is valid (as with SPV nodes). That's a major change to the Bitcoin trust model. With spv you only get headers and maybe coinbase tx correct? So you wont be able to import your pvt key and get your txs in spv mode.. No you tell the server the addresses you are interested in and it gives you those tx. However, since you don't see the other tx you can't be sure that the tx you receive actually represent a valid chain of custody back to a coinbase (unless you trust the miners). this is why spv clients will sample several different peers. |
|
|
|
My understanding is you download the whole blockchain first for verificatio, then delete all but around the last 200 or so blocks. It works off the UTXO set.
In the case of the compute stick, you could use a separate SSD to initialize the blockchain, then disconnect it. Sticking these things in every nook and cranny could be a real problem for those against Bitcoin.
So for basically to allow for p2p tx and block relaying around the globe thru smaller mediums. The main use case I woulda thought is to reduce time for new nodes to sync up.. Since we know the price of hd is falling faster then the need for that space. The pruning stuff does not reduce sync time at all, though the recent headers-first and syncing improvements do. In order to prune syncing you have to relax the idea of independent verification and rely on someone else telling you that the part of the chain you are seeing is valid (as with SPV nodes). That's a major change to the Bitcoin trust model. No, you do download the entire block chain at first to independently verify. Only them do you delete all but the last 200 or so blocks. That's exactly what I said cyperdoc. Then I didn't understand this part: "In order to prune syncing you have to relax the idea of independent verification and rely on someone else telling you that the part of the chain you are seeing is valid (as with SPV nodes). That's a major change to the Bitcoin trust model." |
|
|
|
My understanding is you download the whole blockchain first for verificatio, then delete all but around the last 200 or so blocks. It works off the UTXO set.
In the case of the compute stick, you could use a separate SSD to initialize the blockchain, then disconnect it. Sticking these things in every nook and cranny could be a real problem for those against Bitcoin.
So for basically to allow for p2p tx and block relaying around the globe thru smaller mediums. The main use case I woulda thought is to reduce time for new nodes to sync up.. Since we know the price of hd is falling faster then the need for that space. The pruning stuff does not reduce sync time at all, though the recent headers-first and syncing improvements do. In order to prune syncing you have to relax the idea of independent verification and rely on someone else telling you that the part of the chain you are seeing is valid (as with SPV nodes). That's a major change to the Bitcoin trust model. No, you do download the entire block chain at first to independently verify. Only them do you delete all but the last 200 or so blocks. |
|
|
|
|
My understanding is you download the whole blockchain first for verificatio, then delete all but around the last 200 or so blocks. It works off the UTXO set.
In the case of the compute stick, you could use a separate SSD to initialize the blockchain, then disconnect it. Sticking these things in every nook and cranny could be a real problem for those against Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
I don't think 64 GB of storage is gonna cut it. Long term, pruning. |
|
|
|
I don't believe that would be the same if you include the $ value of all the assets listed on the platform. The nxt token is not the most important aspect of the system, it is simply a mechanism of which to pay for access to features on the system. You are looking at the wrong metrics. Getting into to nxt doesn't necxasarily mean to buy the Nxt token. In fact many are unable to hang in to the token as they find better uses for them, which is part of the reason the price is lower.
Very nice. You pump the nxt token one moment, the when you get called out on it you immediately change stories as if nobody will notice. Nope. I am mostly ever only talking about supernet, just so happens nxt is a vital and core component and the two are pretty much becoming one in the same. Nxt doing its job as a platform is what allowed for Supernet's existence, and will allow for many more things to come. Looks like it's time to get in NXT. |
|
|
|
Ya we're in a bear market in case you didn't notice:  not quite the same thing. NXT's troubles are compounded atop the Bitcoin chart, relatively speaking, as the NXT/BTC shows. yet Bitcoin is still, in the big pic, still way up from where it started back in 2009. otoh, NXT is below where it started off in USD terms.  |
|
|
|
Looks like it's time to get in NXT. Isn't it dead yet? And if not, why not? Far from it. http://nxter.org/supernet-newsletter-16/. Extreme amount of talented developers joining. 540+ slack members now from many different circles across crypto. Also, nearing release of first decentralized exchange, with a flat trading fee of a few cents: Hint: Supernet is NXT 2.0 looks like it's dying to me:  |
|
|
|
Looks like it's time to get in NXT. Isn't it dead yet? And if not, why not? |
|
|
|
|
Going to be changing the poll soon so get your votes in.
|
|
|
|
That article is well worth a read. The argument for denying the large cash withdrawal the Pension Fund Association wanted to make goes from International anti-money laundering (AML) guidelines require banks to monitor and report suspicious activity on accounts.
to Banks are completely within their rights to refuse to enact transactions that they believe may be intended to facilitate financial crime or money laundering.
So the argument goes from "required by guidelines to report transactions" to "judge transactions and refuse to enact them". Quite a jump. So essentially the bank is both judge and executor? wow. And the "international guidelines on AML" (which seem to get elevated to law here) are written by who? It'll be interesting to follow this. If the refusal of the cash withdrawal is deemed lawful (which I assume will happen), the mechanism which Hans Peter Konrad doesn't want to admit he understands can continue. The director of the Pension Fund Association ASIP, Hans Peter Konrad, has been angry for weeks about the fact that pension funds suffer from negative interest rates. He says: “We do not understand why the banks are getting involved.”
If on the other hand the bank is forced to allow the cash withdrawal... get out the wheelbarrows? This is a variant of a bank run. |
|
|
|
|
This is where everyone has to dig deep.
|
|
|
|
chart linked by NotHatinJustTrollin:  hm, that's interesting. So USD tx volume is roughly stable but number of transactions skyrockets. This means the average amount of a tx is going down. Any rationale for this? i think it was Bitpay that explained that Bitcoin is continuing to evolve as a payment network (routine everyday tx's). i would also add that it probably also means more everyday tx's happening overseas in developing countries. |
|
|
|
Effectively LTC has returned to the price where it initially started trading against BTC back in the summer of 2013. yes, LTC is not effective. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
