Question: Can we create a sidechain coin for better POS transaction?

[drawingthesun]

Is it possible to have a sidechain with the following four properties:

1 - Faster confirmations (1 minute to 30 seconds perhaps?)
2 - Higher ratio of coins for the common man (1 bitcoin becomes 10,000 CommonCoins?) that can be converted back into bitcoin (obviously you'd need to save up to 10,000 for the 2 way peg.)
3 - The sidechain has checkpoints (Every bitcoin block forces a checkpoint for the sidechain for more security.)
4 - CommonCoin pruning. After perhaps 1000 blocks all transactions that are now longer needed (Because a certain amount of CommonCoin has been pegged back into bitcoin) are deleted fully to make the sidechain very efficient.

Are these possible? And regardless to whether they are possible, would they be worth it? I really think we need 1 and 2 for bitcoin to compete with creditcard point of sale, although 3 and 4 might not actually make the sidechain better as it's just my ramblings.

[greenlion]

Is it possible to have a sidechain with the following four properties:

1 - Faster confirmations (1 minute to 30 seconds perhaps?)
2 - Higher ratio of coins for the common man (1 bitcoin becomes 10,000 CommonCoins?) that can be converted back into bitcoin (obviously you'd need to save up to 10,000 for the 2 way peg.)
3 - The sidechain has checkpoints (Every bitcoin block forces a checkpoint for the sidechain for more security.)
4 - CommonCoin pruning. After perhaps 1000 blocks all transactions that are now longer needed (Because a certain amount of CommonCoin has been pegged back into bitcoin) are deleted fully to make the sidechain very efficient.

Are these possible? And regardless to whether they are possible, would they be worth it? I really think we need 1 and 2 for bitcoin to compete with creditcard point of sale, although 3 and 4 might not actually make the sidechain better as it's just my ramblings.

Yes, except #2 is irrelevant, that's a user experience / interface issue, and #4 is not what pruning actually means.

[iluvpie60]

Is it possible to have a sidechain with the following four properties:

1 - Faster confirmations (1 minute to 30 seconds perhaps?)
2 - Higher ratio of coins for the common man (1 bitcoin becomes 10,000 CommonCoins?) that can be converted back into bitcoin (obviously you'd need to save up to 10,000 for the 2 way peg.)
3 - The sidechain has checkpoints (Every bitcoin block forces a checkpoint for the sidechain for more security.)
4 - CommonCoin pruning. After perhaps 1000 blocks all transactions that are now longer needed (Because a certain amount of CommonCoin has been pegged back into bitcoin) are deleted fully to make the sidechain very efficient.

Are these possible? And regardless to whether they are possible, would they be worth it? I really think we need 1 and 2 for bitcoin to compete with creditcard point of sale, although 3 and 4 might not actually make the sidechain better as it's just my ramblings.

Yes, except #2 is irrelevant, that's a user experience / interface issue, and #4 is not what pruning actually means.

How is that use of pruning incorrect in the way of "what it actually means". I see no issue with it.

If #2 can be done without incurring any extra cost that helps. If you have to pay a conversion fee and wait awhile to send coins and things like that then it is the same as trading BTC into another altcoin.

[greenlion]

Is it possible to have a sidechain with the following four properties:

1 - Faster confirmations (1 minute to 30 seconds perhaps?)
2 - Higher ratio of coins for the common man (1 bitcoin becomes 10,000 CommonCoins?) that can be converted back into bitcoin (obviously you'd need to save up to 10,000 for the 2 way peg.)
3 - The sidechain has checkpoints (Every bitcoin block forces a checkpoint for the sidechain for more security.)
4 - CommonCoin pruning. After perhaps 1000 blocks all transactions that are now longer needed (Because a certain amount of CommonCoin has been pegged back into bitcoin) are deleted fully to make the sidechain very efficient.

Are these possible? And regardless to whether they are possible, would they be worth it? I really think we need 1 and 2 for bitcoin to compete with creditcard point of sale, although 3 and 4 might not actually make the sidechain better as it's just my ramblings.

Yes, except #2 is irrelevant, that's a user experience / interface issue, and #4 is not what pruning actually means.

How is that use of pruning incorrect in the way of "what it actually means". I see no issue with it.

If #2 can be done without incurring any extra cost that helps. If you have to pay a conversion fee and wait awhile to send coins and things like that then it is the same as trading BTC into another altcoin.

#2 completely defeats the purpose of sidechains in the first place and the kind of decimal point representation that he's talking about has nothing to do with the underlying monetary unit itself, it's simply naming convention at the user level.

#4 is just one narrow example of a kind of possible pruning, but the criteria for pruning stated is not really a mainstream pruning idea. There are reasons that allow pruning a chain that have absolutely nothing to do with pegging.

[drawingthesun]

I put '2' in there because transactions denominated in at most two decimals is far better than transacting many steps down from the decimal.

I figure if someone made '1' they might as well kill two birds at the same time and make it all round more userfriendly.

Anyway, point '1' was the main concern. I wonder if this is possible and can solve some of Bitcoin's transaction time issues.

Over here in Australia we use 'Paywave' and 'Paypass', you take your debit card, hold it on or near the point of sale and in about 2 seconds you're done and paid for. No pin, no swipe, no identity, no signing, no waiting.

I am trying to imagine how a native Bitcoin could work in regards to competing with the banks here in Australia. Let's put it this way, this Paypass system is faster and easier than even cash transactions and I see no future where Bitcoin could even hope to compete.

[drawingthesun]

#2 completely defeats the purpose of sidechains in the first place and the kind of decimal point representation that he's talking about has nothing to do with the underlying monetary unit itself, it's simply naming convention at the user level.

#4 is just one narrow example of a kind of possible pruning, but it only makes sense if you assume #2 is a meaningful design feature, which it isn't.

Fair points, what about the main point '1'? Can this be done?

I am trying to imagine how Bitcoin can actually be as fast as cash transactions. The banks in Australia already have a system that is faster than cash called Paypass and I can't see Bitcoin competing.

[greenlion]

I put '2' in there because transactions denominated in at most two decimals is far better than transacting many steps down from the decimal.

This is not something that is a property of the chain itself, this is something that is a property of user interfaces.

[drawingthesun]

I put '2' in there because transactions denominated in at most two decimals is far better than transacting many steps down from the decimal.

This is not something that is a property of the chain itself, this is something that is a property of user interfaces.

No worries. Good point.

[greenlion]

I am trying to imagine how Bitcoin can actually be as fast as cash transactions. The banks in Australia already have a system that is faster than cash called Paypass and I can't see Bitcoin competing.

Bitcoin wins overwhelmingly already because the zero confirmation adequately propagated transaction itself has orders of magnitude less reversal risk than any existing pull-style instrument. The 10-minute block targeting time is irrelevant to ordinary point of sale transactions.

Paypass is just a frontend for normal credit card backend systems and has all the counterparty and fraud risk of any other system of that
nature. These systems "verify" quickly, but the merchant does not actually securely have the money until a lot longer than ten minutes!

[drawingthesun]

I am trying to imagine how Bitcoin can actually be as fast as cash transactions. The banks in Australia already have a system that is faster than cash called Paypass and I can't see Bitcoin competing.

Bitcoin wins overwhelmingly already because the zero confirmation adequately propagated transaction itself has orders of magnitude less reversal risk than any existing pull-style instrument. The 10-minute block targeting time is irrelevant to ordinary point of sale transactions.

Paypass is just a frontend for normal credit card backend systems and has all the counterparty and fraud risk of any other system of that
nature. These systems "verify" quickly, but the merchant does not actually securely have the money until a lot longer than ten minutes!

The thing is then, we need to somehow make 0-confimation the norm. I remember reading how even BitPay allow their merchants to wait for several confirmations, the waitress staff don't understand it's a setting and it makes Bitcoin look like rubbish.

Also there is a lot of fear towards 0-confirmation at the moment, some guy on reddit says he can double spend a 0-confirmation at will with no issues.