UPDATE

[kaselit]

UPDATE

[1715342032]

1715342032

[1715342032]

1715342032

[1715342032]

1715342032

[1715342032]

1715342032

[pedrog]

Already done, although you cannot yet use the wallet with that, just the node:

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/37496/how-can-i-run-bitcoind-in-pruning-mode

Read Storage:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability

[franky1]

blockchain size is not a problem

6 years of the blockchain can fit on your fingernail


plus even after the block limit goes to 20mb a block.. that is POTENTIAL capacity, not actual usage..
but even if every block of 20mb was filled.. the cost of storage is under £100/$150(5tb hard drive) for 5 years POTENTIAL storage

so its no big deal.

these days people buying the entire series of World of Warcraft uses more data than bitcoin
these days people buying the entire series of Call of Duty uses more data than bitcoin

[hexafraction]

Thank you for the answer. Maybe in a few years, when decentralized network will take more space, the actual "modem router" we use to connect to internet will have a integrated server where we can install:
web server,
bitcoin node,
openbazaar,
etc.. etc..

This sounds like an AWFUL idea. Manufacturers can't keep normal routers/modems/NATs patched, let alone ones that run Bitcoin nodes and wallets.

[gentlemand]

I don't think the size of the blockchain will ever really be an issue. The bandwidth required to download it and perhaps the processing grunt needed to index it are. Progress for both of those are pretty static compared to storage unless you live next door to Google.

[maokoto]

I do think it is an issue. Right now, I cannot afford to have core installed, would need a new HD for that.

Yes, storage is quite cheap, but functionality should be better. It does not make much sense in my opinion to store years of transactions I do not need to have. There should be something like "checkpoints" and it would be great if wallets had the option to only get info from those checkpoints onwards.

It is a waste of storage for many IMO. Sort of like those people who store hundreds of photos in their HD which will never watch again. LOl

[Meuh6879]

now, we have SSD with 1To (less than a new "cheap" PC) ... for a 55Go of blockchain ?
no problem here.

[Mickeyb]

Yes, like others have already answered above, the blockchain size isn't a problem. Much bigger problem is a bandwidth, especially the bandwidth of China.

I guess that these guys out there have a really, really slow Internet if they can't handle more than 8MB blocks. I would hate to surf a Web in China. I bet this is completely different experience.

[franky1]

Yes, like others have already answered above, the blockchain size isn't a problem. Much bigger problem is a bandwidth, especially the bandwidth of China.

I guess that these guys out there have a really, really slow Internet if they can't handle more than 8MB blocks. I would hate to surf a Web in China. I bet this is completely different experience.

even internet speeds is not an issue
its not like the world is using 2mb internet anymore.

http://www.internetsociety.org/map/global-internet-report/?gclid=CPyw8-vG_8gCFWnkwgodVwEKmw#download-speed-fixed
china for instance is between 40-90mb/s

technology moves fast.. it was only 15 years ago people were using dialup.. see how much has changed.
technology moves fast.. it was only 15 years ago people were using only 4gigabyte hard drives .. see how much has changed.
technology moves fast.. it was only 15 years ago people were using only 256mb ram.. see how much has changed.

[gentlemand]

even internet speeds is not an issue
its not like the world is using 2mb internet anymore.

I'm not massively out in the sticks in the UK, maybe a little, but my bandwidth has been unchanged for 11 years at about 4mb and shows no sign of changing soon. Uploading one crappy vid to youtube seizes my internet and takes all night. I'm sure other countries are further ahead but there's nothing the average citizen can do to change it.

[eleuthria]

these days people buying the entire series of World of Warcraft uses more data than bitcoin

This one isn't valid anymore, just FYI.  A full Bitcoin node uses much more space than World of Warcraft's installation.  Almost double actually.

[franky1]

these days people buying the entire series of World of Warcraft uses more data than bitcoin

This one isn't valid anymore, just FYI.  A full Bitcoin node uses much more space than World of Warcraft's installation.  Almost double actually.

5 years of WOW with all the updates has many game fans saying its 50gb plus, im not talking about single installation. im talking about constant use.

same for call of duty fans, constantly updating.. again way over 50gb

even GTA series is getting big... but they are not complaining about gaming, yet when it comes to international currency and secureing their valuable assets people want to cry and say its too much after it peaked passed 20gb..

seriously a 64gb is a micro sd card, which is smaller than your finger and cheaper than a 12inch pizza, is seriously not really something people should be arguing about in the year 2015..

[ranochigo]

Currently, using Bitcoin Core with pruning mode would disable the wallet function and you would not be able to relay blocks to your peers, only transactions. This may change in the future however.

Bitcoin Core will still need to verify the blocks from the start when you first download it hence there isn't any change in bandwidth usage. Why don't you try to use SPV clients? They are good enough for an average joe.

[Amph]

now, we have SSD with 1To (less than a new "cheap" PC) ... for a 55Go of blockchain ?
no problem here.

we have something also that will sync the chain in not time like the 950 pro with m.2 tech

even 256giga are neough actually, i'm not installing many thing i my desktop

and with a usb 3.0 of 128 giga you can store your whole chain and do a copy paste when needed, not even synching would be need