Idea: Blockchain per region

[Skybuck]

Hello,

It's been a while since I checked up on bitcoin and here I am today... and yesterday.

I read about a little problem that might split the community... the blocksize...

Apperently there are two groups: one group wants to keep it small, the other group wants to keep it large.

One size does not fit all they say sometimes.

So here is my idea to fix the situation hopefully easily:

A blockchain per region.

This way every region can have it's own blockchain:

Europe, China, USA, Russia, Africa

Then merchants/traders can choose what blockchain they want to lock their transactions into.

Perhaps this could solve the "current" problem with "China" not wanting a blocksize increase.

Then they could use their own china blockchain... with added benefit that for now nothing needs to change... except multiple blockchains.

The software could have an option to choose a "default" blockchain.

In their case: "china".

Perhaps this could also solve the "scalebility" issue somewhat.

If people in Europe only tend to do bussiness with other europeans or perhaps usa-ers (), they would only need the european blockchain and usa blockchain.

This could cut back enormously on ammount of network bandwidth and storage requirements.

Just an idea, please do share your thoughts on it ! =D

Another adventage could be for customers/buyers, they could tell the merchant what blockchain they would prefer, shifting the burden of supporting multiple blockchains to the merchant instead of the buyer/consumer.

This could cut back hardware requirements for consumers and could make bitcoin more interesting.

Perhaps confirmation time could also be lowered ? One other frustration people seem to have with bitcoin.

Bye,
  Skybuck.

[jonald_fyookball]

Interesting idea.  maybe it relates with side chains.  each region can be on a side chain.

[NyeFe]

It really wouldn't solve anything. The idea is like taking a small problem and strapping x5 rocket engines on its back, which is about to explode, then realising it for public use.

[cakir]

I don't think this idea will solve anything.
Possible scenario to double spends; Trader A uses blockchain Asia, so I'm broadcasting my tx from Asia chain. Trader B uses USA blockchain I do also broadcast my tx from to it.
Both different blockchains accepts my tx as valid.

[Cryptopher]

I think that there would need to be a layer operating above these so called regional chains (don't forget the rest of the Americas, Oceanic region too) to prevent shady behaviour between chains.

I like the idea of breaking large things down to make them more manageable, but that usually comes with its own set of challenges that need to be well-thought out. Perhaps it is not suitable in this application.

[newIndia]

Bogus idea. This is just a BS altcoiners use as a marketing strategy, e.g. AuroraCoin, AsiaCoin etc. The truth is internet can not be devided according to geo-political region. If you want to run a regional coin, you need a regional internet first.

[Cryptopher]

Bogus idea. This is just a BS altcoiners use as a marketing strategy, e.g. AuroraCoin, AsiaCoin etc. The truth is internet can not be devided according to geo-political region. If you want to run a regional coin, you need a regional internet first.

Sometimes web services and often hosting is split in a regional manner, often for performance and reasons of legality.

I think that this idea of having multiple blockchains doesn't make sense because it serves no real purpose within the same coin. It's like as you say, a marketing strategy - just another altcoin.

[newIndia]

Bogus idea. This is just a BS altcoiners use as a marketing strategy, e.g. AuroraCoin, AsiaCoin etc. The truth is internet can not be devided according to geo-political region. If you want to run a regional coin, you need a regional internet first.

Sometimes web services and often hosting is split in a regional manner, often for performance and reasons of legality.

I think that this idea of having multiple blockchains doesn't make sense because it serves no real purpose within the same coin. It's like as you say, a marketing strategy - just another altcoin.

The split you are talking about is possible only for centralized systems. This is done actually by banning IP range. You can not do that in a decentralized system... unless you start behaving like a centralized one, like Mike Hearn is proposing: Fork might ignore the longest chain!

[acoindr]

Yes. This is exactly an idea I've mentioned here before. In fact, I've planned to write up more in depth reasoning for it. I PMed Gavin a while ago with the thought (he didn't comment back).

I do think we'll ultimately see Bitcoin scale relying primarily on technologies like the Lightning Network. However, I don't think there will be any single silver bullet solution. Instead, we're likely to see a mixture, and using more than one blockchain I feel is likely to play a part. As I said I plan to write more extensively at some point.

[countryfree]

I'm afraid this would wreck BTC. There shall be only one blockchain. Some guys are already doing off-chain transactions, and there are sidechains, but they don't come close to the real thing. If you use BTC for business, you want all your transactions on the blockchain, the one and only, not a regional one.

[Amph]

Interesting idea.  maybe it relates with side chains.  each region can be on a side chain.

i do not think there is another way you can do this, unless you start rising altcoin for each region, which is not that ideal

@OP side chains problem could hide a way for new dev to become rich instantly, with big premine or hidden premine, this is a good reason to ignore them for the moment

there should be a good transaparency in those sidechain otherwise it can not be done

[LiteCoinGuy]

Hello,

It's been a while since I checked up on bitcoin and here I am today... and yesterday.

I read about a little problem that might split the community... the blocksize...

Apperently there are two groups: one group wants to keep it small, the other group wants to keep it large.

One size does not fit all they say sometimes.

there is only one group and we want to increase the blocksize.