[2016-04-06] Bitcoin in need of restructuring, say Cornell researchers

[hendra147]

Juels says the current debate over block size overlooks bitcoin’s fundamental scaling challenge. He says tweaks to the block can be made as a quick fix, but the digital currency’s system must be completely redesigned in order to compete with major payment methods.

“The question isn’t what happens in the next year, but what happens in two or three year,” says Juels. “And that’s going to affect if Bitcoin becomes adopted as a mainstream currency or if cryptocurrency in general begins to wither.”

https://coinreport.net/bitcoin-need-restructuring-say-cornell-researchers/

[TraderTimm]

Oh look, sheltered academia thinks it knows what we "need". How amusing. Maybe they can get their resources together and comment on "current" events like Mark Karpeles stealing from everyone. Nevermind, its all just fishing for funding so they can stay safe and cozy in their departments, researching bug farts and important issues of the day.

[aigeezer]

According to Dr. Juels' website, one of his research interests is:

"Honey objects: How can we create fake resources that deceive adversaries"

http://www.arijuels.com/

It may be wise to assume that he is a player, rather than an observer.

Perhaps he will comment on the story.

[aso118]

If the researchers are so sure of themselves, nothing stops them from developing a scalable altcoin.
They should put their money where their mouths are.

[Denker]

So this guy seems to be the desperately needed Bitcoin expert we are all looking for?!
Bitcoin is doing good so far I would say.
SegWit coming soon, LN seems to make great progress and first functional version seems to be ready this summer.
The roadmap for scaling is clear and the devs working hard.
Advises by that douchebag and wannabe are not needed thanks!

[aigeezer]

I don't know how to say this delicately, but, um, Dr. Juels is arguably the inventor of Proof of Work and is VERY well qualified to comment on crypto issues.

"The term "Proof of Work" or POW was first coined and formalized in a 1999 paper by Markus Jakobsson and Ari Juels."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-work_system

His present agenda is a separate issue (I don't know what it is), but he is no amateur observer when it comes to BTC.

[cr1776]

Juels says the current debate over block size overlooks bitcoin’s fundamental scaling challenge. He says tweaks to the block can be made as a quick fix, but the digital currency’s system must be completely redesigned in order to compete with major payment methods.

“The question isn’t what happens in the next year, but what happens in two or three year,” says Juels. “And that’s going to affect if Bitcoin becomes adopted as a mainstream currency or if cryptocurrency in general begins to wither.”

https://coinreport.net/bitcoin-need-restructuring-say-cornell-researchers/

Pegged side chains are also a potential solution to many things and they often seem to be discounted.

[ArticMine]

Here is a link to the original paper http://fc16.ifca.ai/bitcoin/papers/CDE+16.pdf

[TraderTimm]

I don't know how to say this delicately, but, um, Dr. Juels is arguably the inventor of Proof of Work and is VERY well qualified to comment on crypto issues.

"The term "Proof of Work" or POW was first coined and formalized in a 1999 paper by Markus Jakobsson and Ari Juels."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-work_system

His present agenda is a separate issue (I don't know what it is), but he is no amateur observer when it comes to BTC.

But as you said in another prior post here, he could have an agenda that clouds his "recommendation". Even if he knows crypto backwards and forwards, being an authority on a subject doesn't mean you have some unique gift to predict future evolution of the Bitcoin ecosystem. We have plenty of "experts" that have declared Bitcoin "dead" a few times, too. I'm not exactly holding my breath for what this guy has to say.

I'm wary of self-appointed experts in general, especially this late in the game. Where were they when the whole enterprise was just getting started? Too deep into their own pet projects to contribute? The timing seems a bit suspicious to me.