Bitcoin Forum
November 18, 2017, 04:10:51 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Shouldn't we start using safer keys from now instead of waiting for problems?  (Read 5737 times)
MPOE-PR
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 12:27:12 PM
 #41


It's really unlikely that bitcoin will replace all world currencies in 20-30 years.

Especially if you consider that any single copy of the blockchain would grow by 6 TeraByte PER DAY.

i thought the maximum block size was 1mb.

144 blocks per day = maximum 144mb per day.


Yes. Yes it is. See the problem?

I guess quite obviously (and for that matter contrary to what the general wisdom figures), Bitcoin is neither designed to be nor intended to be a consumer item.

My Credentials  | THE BTC Stock Exchange | I have my very own anthology! | Use bitcointa.lk, it's like this one but better.
A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
cedivad
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 12:29:16 PM
 #42

I also said on the first post that cracking the blochain with this hardware is impossible, however it could be with quantum computers, that exists, they are not only a dream.

It will come a time when 160bits will not be enough. And I know that there are more combinations than atoms in the visible universe, but thank you anyway for this cool math.

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:
Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)
Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers
greyhawk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


View Profile
January 17, 2013, 12:30:31 PM
 #43


It's really unlikely that bitcoin will replace all world currencies in 20-30 years.

Especially if you consider that any single copy of the blockchain would grow by 6 TeraByte PER DAY.

i thought the maximum block size was 1mb.

144 blocks per day = maximum 144mb per day.


Yes. Yes it is. See the problem?

I guess quite obviously (and for that matter contrary to what the general wisdom figures), Bitcoin is neither designed to be nor intended to be a consumer item.


Please don't shatter their dreams of a bitbased utopia where everyone can dance in bitbliss on the graves of bankers.  Cry
ercolinux
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile WWW
January 17, 2013, 12:32:03 PM
 #44


It's really unlikely that bitcoin will replace all world currencies in 20-30 years.

Especially if you consider that any single copy of the blockchain would grow by 6 TeraByte PER DAY.

i thought the maximum block size was 1mb.

144 blocks per day = maximum 144mb per day.


Yes. Yes it is. See the problem?

THAT'S actually a bigger problem: I see that we have blocks of 200-300KB today, with 500-600 transactions. A limit of  less than 2000 transactions every 10 mins can be reached quite quickly if bitcion spreads.

Bitrated user: ercolinux.
cedivad
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 12:38:38 PM
 #45


It's really unlikely that bitcoin will replace all world currencies in 20-30 years.

Especially if you consider that any single copy of the blockchain would grow by 6 TeraByte PER DAY.

i thought the maximum block size was 1mb.

144 blocks per day = maximum 144mb per day.


Yes. Yes it is. See the problem?

THAT'S actually a bigger problem: I see that we have blocks of 200-300KB today, with 500-600 transactions. A limit of  less than 2000 transactions every 10 mins can be reached quite quickly if bitcion spreads.

If I'm correct this is a hard limit imposed while "we are still in alpha stage".
There is nothing that locks us from growing the blockchain 1GB per day. As someone pointed out, SSDs are already cheap enought.

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:
Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)
Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers
MPOE-PR
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 01:26:03 PM
 #46

If I'm correct this is a hard limit imposed while "we are still in alpha stage".
There is nothing that locks us from growing the blockchain 1GB per day. As someone pointed out, SSDs are already cheap enought.

Those blocks will have to be hashed. So yes there's a hard limit: miners.

For that matter, nobody seems to have asked the "asic producers" how capable their "products" would be to handle changes in that area (with or without additional clock bluffers).

My Credentials  | THE BTC Stock Exchange | I have my very own anthology! | Use bitcointa.lk, it's like this one but better.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
January 17, 2013, 01:34:59 PM
 #47

Precision change would not require hardware changes.  All miners care about is a double round of sha256 of whatevery you hand it.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
bitfarmer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 24


View Profile
January 17, 2013, 02:21:28 PM
 #48

Please take your logic and math elsewhere. Only hysteria and hyperbole belong here.
MPOE-PR
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 03:10:26 PM
 #49

Precision change would not require hardware changes.  All miners care about is a double round of sha256 of whatevery you hand it.

Not exactly the point. Things such as stales were serious problems with (some) FPGAs and systems like p2p mining iirc. Unless I misunderstand something, having 1gb blocks would pose significant problems for pretty much all miners, and would not be necessarily trivial to handle on asics designed with 1mb/block assumptions in mind.

My Credentials  | THE BTC Stock Exchange | I have my very own anthology! | Use bitcointa.lk, it's like this one but better.
Peter Todd
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


View Profile
January 17, 2013, 03:35:20 PM
 #50

Guys, stop worrying about the maximum blocksize. There are lots of ways to do off-chain transactions, here is one idea from Gavin, there is also Ripple and OpenTransactions, as well as more limited ways to do micro-transactions; Mike Hearn is apparently working on this concept. I've even got an idea myself.

On the other hand if we do increase the maximum blocksize we reduce the one incentive miners will always have: transaction fees. This reduces the security of Bitcoin for everyone, and makes it expensive for anyone to participate by mining or running a full node. I know it's kinda arbitrary, but keeping the blocksize at 1MB forever lets Bitcoin act as the "gold standard" of crypto-currencies, and enables a whole ecosystem around Bitcoin. If we do this in the future you'll be able to safely buy a house with Bitcoin, albeit for the equivalent of a few dollars in transaction fees, and also pay for a $1 chocolate bar with Bitcoin, albeit using a off-chain mechanism with a bit less security but a transaction fee of maybe a tenth of a cent.

The math is pretty simple really. Lets suppose we need 25x the current block reward value to keep Bitcoin secure in the future, and the reward is purely paid by fees. 25BTC * $15/BTC * 10 = $9375 USD/block. $9375/1Mib * 500bytes = $4.47 for your "buy a house transaction", yet, that will keep the total block chain size to a level, even with full history, that is at most 55GB/year. Anyone with an interest will be able to download the whole chain, still participate as a full node, and keep Bitcoin secure and inflation free for all of us.

Gavin Andresen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652


Chief Scientist


View Profile WWW
January 17, 2013, 04:11:17 PM
 #51

We can calculate the minimum unit from following algorithm:

Code:
# [Total value] = all Dollars in circulation + Euros in circulation + Yens in circulation + CNY in circulation + all the other currencies
# Convert [Total value] to amount of smallest units/fractions of the earth's cheapest currency (*excluding* internet currencies and currencies of countries with hyperinflation)
# Add one or 2 zeros.
There you have it. The humanity will probably never require more units of Bitcoin than that, even if Bitcoin becomes #1 World currency and everybody on the world starts using Bitcoin instead of other currencies.

Currently, total amount of the smallest units of Bitcoin is 2,100,000,000,000,000 which is just over 2 thousands of trillions (USA scale). Is it enough according to the equation above ? I highly doubt so.

Let me google that for you.... ah, here's a nice chart:
  http://dollardaze.org/blog/?post_id

There is about 5 trillion dollars in currency in the world.

So 2.1 thousand trillion satoshis is PLENTY.


How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
MPOE-PR
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 05:11:24 PM
 #52

Guys, stop worrying about the maximum blocksize. There are lots of ways to do off-chain transactions, here is one idea from Gavin, there is also Ripple and OpenTransactions, as well as more limited ways to do micro-transactions; Mike Hearn is apparently working on this concept. I've even got an idea myself.

More practically, MPEx's PUSH is doing ~100 BTC worth a day already.

Couldn't make heads or tails of the rest of your argument. Keeping the blocks under 1 mb makes house buying transactions fit in 500 bytes and 55Gb is hardcoded into quantum physics as the "affordable yearly datasize"?

My Credentials  | THE BTC Stock Exchange | I have my very own anthology! | Use bitcointa.lk, it's like this one but better.
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 17, 2013, 05:34:32 PM
 #53

Let me google that for you.... ah, here's a nice chart:
  http://dollardaze.org/blog/?post_id

There is about 5 trillion dollars in currency in the world.

Are you sure this calculations are correct ?
Also, does "other currencies" contain gold & silver bullions + diamonds ?

Even if these calculations are correct then we have roughly 5,000,000,000,000,000 (5 quadrillions in US scale or 5 trillions in normal scale) units of dollars in circulation. If you add 2 more zeros for penny, then we have

=5,000,000,000,000,000,00 units of dollars vs
21,000,000,000,000,000 units of bitcoin

So no, as you can see - it isn't enough. At least 2 zeros (or better 3) are missing from this picture.

DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
January 17, 2013, 05:54:40 PM
 #54

What calculations are you doing?

First no those numbers don't include other forms of wealth, they are the amount of currency and money globally.  They don't include houses, and stocks, bonds, life insurance policies, priceless art, etc.  Even if Bitcoin replaces all forms of Currency or Money it won't be replacing all forms of wealth.  You aren't going to live inside a Bitcoin, and drive a Bitcoin to work.  You aren't going to eat Bitcoins and give your bride to be an engagement Bitcoin and take time off work to go on a Bitcoin.  Nobody is going to go to museums and look at priceless framed Bitcoins and talk about the Bitcoin that they hate where they Bitcoin the Bitcoin all Bitcoin long.

The global currency supply (M0) is roughly $5T (not the $5 septrillion number you posted).  For Bitcoin to replace all global currency (M0) would put the value of 1 BTC at $238,095.25, in 2012 US dollars.  A satoshi would have have a value of roughly 0.25 US cents.  

I would argue that under such a (implausible) scenario many people would demand bank accounts for their coins so maybe using the global money supply (M1) which includes demand account deposits would be more meaningful and that is roughly $50T. For Bitcoin to replace all global currency (M0) would put the value of 1 BTC at $2,380,952.38, in 2012 US dollars.  A satoshi would have have a value of roughly 2.4 US cents.  

As countries are eliminating coins worth more than that a global single world Bitcoin currency would be more than sufficient.

Examples:
Canada eliminated Canadian cent making smallest coin worth $0.05 USD.
China smallest unit (physical or electronic) is 1/100th of a Yuan which is worth ~$0.06 USD.
Finland has reduced circulation of Euro cent making the smallest coin worth ~$0.07 USD.
Australia smallest coin is the 5 cent piece and there is talk of eliminating it which would make the smallest unit worth ~$0.10 USD

Edited for clarity.
MPOE-PR
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 06:48:48 PM
 #55

I would argue that under such a (implausible) scenario

Implausible you say? It's the more likely scenario I say!

My Credentials  | THE BTC Stock Exchange | I have my very own anthology! | Use bitcointa.lk, it's like this one but better.
DannyHamilton
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 06:53:06 PM
 #56

. . . Nobody is going to go to museums and look at priceless framed Bitcoins . . .
Actually, I can see that one happening.

greyhawk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


View Profile
January 17, 2013, 08:07:23 PM
 #57

. . . Nobody is going to go to museums and look at priceless framed Bitcoins . . .
Actually, I can see that one happening.

I'm thinking Churches.
julz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 10:30:57 PM
 #58

There is about 5 trillion dollars in currency in the world.
So 2.1 thousand trillion satoshis is PLENTY.

This argument seems to assume that humans will be the only economic actors.
I predict that Artificial Intelligences with Bitcoin wallets will be numerous - potentially outnumbering humans.




@electricwings   BM-GtyD5exuDJ2kvEbr41XchkC8x9hPxdFd
deus-ex-machina
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 166



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 10:35:40 PM
 #59

I agree with OP. Already had my wallet emptied from a brute-force.
DannyHamilton
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974



View Profile
January 17, 2013, 10:46:47 PM
 #60

. . . Already had my wallet emptied from a brute-force.

How do you know that?

 Undecided

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!