Your bets for 2014

[grondilu]

Allright. The client with DB consisting only with block headers receives the transaction. What next he must do with it?

Store? No. It must be sure transaction is valid to store it, but he can not check its validity as he dont have full chain.
Broadcast? No. Same reason. If trx isnt valid, he will be banned as DoS source by vanilla clients.

If network will consist of huge part of such light clients - it will be paralyzed.

I'm not talking about a header-only version of the client here.  I'm talking about which part of the index it is useful to load in memory.

[pent]

Ah, crunches... All right Lets see where it will go.

I see the future of bitcoin chain in some sort of distributed hash table with good redunancy to avoid information drop.

So I see the main load may be put on network layer, instead of SATA bus.

[lucif]

pent, you always break my pessimism  

But this idea does not exist even on draft for today.

[pent]

I develop DIANNA chain to test DHT chain storage there.

[lucif]

I'm not talking about a header-only version of the client here.  I'm talking about which part of the index it is useful to load in memory.

Each bitcoin node does the whole work for serving system: receive, verify, store and broadcast transactions and blocks. This work not divided between participants, but every one doing the same over-redunant work.

So when bitcoin will grow and serve millions transactions per day, every client will serve all theese transactions.

You consider that common user home computer is able to serve the worldwide payment system? And all that we need is to reduce index size loaded into memory?

You dont know what are you talking about. You all here are full of illusions and disconnected from reality.

And reality is disappointing. Bitcoin will meet huge bottlenecks in not far future while Bitcoin Foundation members kidding with their VIP status.

[grondilu]

You consider that common user home computer is able to serve the worldwide payment system?

Why not?   Computers are quite powerful and humanity is not that large.

[lucif]

Why not what? Why regular home computer resource not enough to handle load of widely used payment system? Should I explain this for you? Do you think Paypal uses only its CEO desktop to handle system load? I think they have some number of full 42U racks of servers. Even not in one DC. And load is balanced between them.

And we have here that every Bitcoin node replays full system load: receive, verify, store, broadcast.

Are you all really so stupid here?

[myself]

the only way for bitcoin to scale up and serve to millions of user is to have dozens of "paypal" services and transaction using blockchain to be just occasional

[Crypt_Current]

the only way for bitcoin to scale up and serve to millions of user is to have dozens of "paypal" services and transaction using blockchain to be just occasional

Bitcoin banks could help.

I don't understand -- what's the major difference between Bitcoin and torrents?  Torrents are distributed, and seem to work just fine...

[lucif]

I don't understand -- what's the major difference between Bitcoin and torrents?  Torrents are distributed, and seem to work just fine...

Torrents distributes load all over all nodes. In Bitcoin, each client carries full network load. This load is database specific. Network consists of thousands of nodes and each one verifies and stores incoming transactions and blocks. Each node repeat the same job of another one.

Verification process require multiple lookups in potentially huge database. I don't think regular client can handle this type of load in not far future.

I am tired to repeat this again and again. You all just stupid and full of stereotypes community slugged into your mind.

Open your fucking eyes. we all go to bottleneck apocalypse. Didn't you mind that vanilla client already makes your computer unusable during sync process? Imagine now that Bitcoin has 10k transactions per block instead of 200. Your PCs will just die.

[gimme_bottles]

Open your fucking eyes. we all go to bottleneck apocalypse. Didn't you mind that vanilla client already makes your computer unusable during sync process? Imagine now that Bitcoin has 10k transactions per block instead of 200. Your PCs will just die.

although lots of you don't want to hear it, i am also very concerned and can confirm lucif's view on the database problems. i think it has top priority for devs to focus on that so we don't have only a couple of servers who own the whole chain in a few years, because that scenario would be worst case for bitcoin, since we want a decentraliced network to prevent abuse/fraud.

[lucif]

Regular user will not run bitcoin client 24/7

It will run it while he needs accept ot send coins. The time between those events may span into days or even weeks. And what? He will wait until his PC is stuck for hours in sync to process transaction?

Well, I'm tired to explain this shit.

[lucif]

All we need now is the open gates for two paths:

1. Ability to store database in distributed hash table. This may shift load from HDD and memory to network, as most participants have enough network connection to handle this.

2. Make walletless client and split wallet-related functionality into RPC commands: inject transaction, query for address transactions, etc. This is to run such stuff as Electrum server. So bitcoind will be able to run without wallet as just passive network node, which just stores full chain, doing transaction relay. this one can be run on powerful servers and accept connection for chainless clients.

If people support this i can make a BIP. But I see, nobody gives a fuck. Allright. Lets just trade and go to tha moooo

[gimme_bottles]

All we need now is the open gates for two paths:

1. Ability to store database in distributed hash table. This may shift load from HDD and memory to network, as most participants have enough network connection to handle this.

2. Make walletless client and split wallet-related functionality into RPC commands: inject transaction, query for address transactions, etc. This is to run such stuff as Electrum server. So bitcoind will be able to run without wallet as just passive network node, which just stores full chain, doing transaction relay. this one can be run on powerful servers and accept connection for chainless clients.

If people support this i can make a BIP. But I see, nobody gives a fuck. Allright. Lets just trade and go to tha moooo

+1

too many folks here (speculators) see bitcoin as a thing that is just there and works, but forget that is is still in heavy development and far from a state where you could call it a "finished project"

[lucif]

Well, in the whole world I like just one thing - clever people who have ears to hear. They are so rare.

[lucif]

Matthew 7:13-14

All other bubble makers - you will be burned in hell. Hehe.

[grondilu]

Imagine now that Bitcoin has 10k transactions per block instead of 200. Your PCs will just die.

All is fine as long as your PC can verify those 10k transactions in less than 10 minutes.

From data on bloc 215475, I can read that a transaction is about 528 bytes long.   So 10k transactions will be about 5.28MB of data.  In ten minutes, that's an average of 8 kB per second.   It might require improvement of existing software, but really it does not seem so difficult.  Especially considering that consumer electronics keeps improving with time.

[gimme_bottles]

Imagine now that Bitcoin has 10k transactions per block instead of 200. Your PCs will just die.

All is fine as long if your PC can verify those 10k transactions in less than 10 minutes.

From data on bloc 215475, I can read that a transaction is about 528 bytes long.   So 10k transactions will be about 5.28MB of data.  In ten minutes, that's an average of 8 kB per second.   It might require improvement of existing software, but really it does not seem so difficult.  Especially considering that consumer electronics keeps improving with time.

yea, but what if average joe uses his client only once a week, he will then have to verify ca. 1000 blocks, what will take quite a lot of time

[grondilu]

Imagine now that Bitcoin has 10k transactions per block instead of 200. Your PCs will just die.

All is fine as long if your PC can verify those 10k transactions in less than 10 minutes.

From data on bloc 215475, I can read that a transaction is about 528 bytes long.   So 10k transactions will be about 5.28MB of data.  In ten minutes, that's an average of 8 kB per second.   It might require improvement of existing software, but really it does not seem so difficult.  Especially considering that consumer electronics keeps improving with time.

yea, but what if average joe uses his client only once a week, he will then have to verify ca. 1000 blocks, what will take quite a lot of time

Well, if bitcoin becomes so popular that it generates 10k transaction per minute, then I guess most users will make bitcoin transactions more often than once a week.  I mean, supposing that bitcoin meets scale difficulties and yet that users use it very sporadically is a bit contradictory, isn't it?  (it's an interesting question, though...)

[gimme_bottles]

Imagine now that Bitcoin has 10k transactions per block instead of 200. Your PCs will just die.

All is fine as long if your PC can verify those 10k transactions in less than 10 minutes.

From data on bloc 215475, I can read that a transaction is about 528 bytes long.   So 10k transactions will be about 5.28MB of data.  In ten minutes, that's an average of 8 kB per second.   It might require improvement of existing software, but really it does not seem so difficult.  Especially considering that consumer electronics keeps improving with time.

yea, but what if average joe uses his client only once a week, he will then have to verify ca. 1000 blocks, what will take quite a lot of time

Well, if bitcoin becomes so popular that it generates 10k transaction per minute, then I guess most users will make bitcoin transactions more often than once a week.  I mean, supposing that bitcoin meets scale difficulties and yet that users use it very sporadically is a bit contradictory, isn't it?

my example of once a week was maybe a bit extreme. but just take a look at average banking use today. i don't know many peolpe who use online banking/paypal/etc more often than 2 or 3 times a week.

of course that won't make bitcoin unusable, even if you have to verify 1000 blocks. but if we want to make bitcoin more popular we also have to focus on usability. and i don't think many peolpe would be happy with a payment solution that takes 20min to load before you can use it.


i don't want to make bitcoin sound bad, i love the idea as much as most here do, i just want to point out that there is a lot of work to be done, especially on technical details of the software