|
candoo (OP)
|
 |
March 25, 2013, 08:20:25 PM
Last edit: March 25, 2013, 08:54:36 PM by candoo |
|
Well, why dont we "create" a masterblock.
A masterblock is created by the miners every 1,000 blocks. It contains all known bitcoin adresse and their volume at the moment when the block is created. The whole network checks the masterblock and give its confirmation if its legit and right calculated.
You can delete all blocks that came before the master block, because the masterblock tells you all btc amounts.
That means we would get a rid of a 1000GB blockchain and only need the last 1,000 blocks in normal clients.
"Full nodes" could always store the whooole blockchain and all masterblocks to make history
|
Einer trage des andern Last, so werdet ihr das Gesetz Christi erfüllen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions must be included in a block to be properly completed. When you send a transaction, it is broadcast to miners. Miners can then optionally include it in their next blocks. Miners will be more inclined to include your transaction if it has a higher transaction fee.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
candoo (OP)
|
|
March 25, 2013, 08:28:11 PM |
|
Please give me your comments.
Could this solve the 1000 GB blockchain issue?
Pros and cons?
|
Einer trage des andern Last, so werdet ihr das Gesetz Christi erfüllen.
|
|
|
|
rme
|
|
March 25, 2013, 08:30:12 PM |
|
Please give me your comments.
Could this solve the 1000 GB blockchain issue?
Pros and contras?
Cons: you lose all the transaction history (dates, confirmations and so) Pros: Free Space |
|
|
|
|
|
candoo (OP)
|
|
March 25, 2013, 08:31:55 PM |
|
Please give me your comments.
Could this solve the 1000 GB blockchain issue?
Pros and contras?
Cons: you lose all the transaction history (dates, confirmations and so) Pros: Free Space Well "full nodes" could store the whooole blockchain with all transaction and blocks. The "normal" or "enduser" clients could delete old blocks by script |
Einer trage des andern Last, so werdet ihr das Gesetz Christi erfüllen.
|
|
|
|
candoo (OP)
|
|
March 25, 2013, 08:41:07 PM |
|
Masterblock could be every 2016 blocks. So it would be like every 2 weeks
|
Einer trage des andern Last, so werdet ihr das Gesetz Christi erfüllen.
|
|
|
farlack
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1311
Merit: 1000
|
|
March 25, 2013, 08:43:16 PM |
|
Please give me your comments.
Could this solve the 1000 GB blockchain issue?
Pros and contras?
Cons: you lose all the transaction history (dates, confirmations and so) Pros: Free Space ^^ Your cons is the #1 Because if btc become the new thing, governments will still want their taxes. And with enough time.. a way to catch theifs will be found. |
|
|
|
|
kjj
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1025
|
|
March 25, 2013, 08:48:45 PM |
|
Cons: OP didn't search hard enough to find any of the other threads about this idea...
|
17Np17BSrpnHCZ2pgtiMNnhjnsWJ2TMqq8
I routinely ignore posters with paid advertising in their sigs. You should too.
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
|
March 25, 2013, 08:52:56 PM |
|
Well, why dont we "create" a masterblock.
A masterblock is created by the miners every 1,000 blocks. It contains all known bitcoin adresse and their volume at the moment when the block is created. The whole network checks the masterblock and give its confirmation if its legit and right calculated.
Someone comes up with this idea, or something like it, about every six months or so. The answer to "why not" is that we don't need to. There are other solutions to the size of the blockchain, most notablely the one that was proposed by Satoshi himself in his whitepaper. The blocks were designed to be "pruned" of long spent transactions, if the user desired that, but never to require such an action. That's why the internal block structure uses a Merkel Tree instead of a flat file format. Including special blocks to update a running list of non-zero balance addresses would not only require breaking the current system, it would also eventually be blocks of such massive size as to be counter-productive. There is no full client that utilizes pruning that I know of, but there is nothing preventing you from coding that yourself if you have the skills and believe that pruning is a near term need. Furthermore, anyone who desires to avoid the blockchain altogether can simply use a light client, such as BitcoinSpinner or Electrum. Search the forum for "pruning" of blocks, light clients, and "Stratum" for more information. |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
|
candoo (OP)
|
|
March 25, 2013, 08:54:24 PM |
|
Well, why dont we "create" a masterblock.
A masterblock is created by the miners every 1,000 blocks. It contains all known bitcoin adresse and their volume at the moment when the block is created. The whole network checks the masterblock and give its confirmation if its legit and right calculated.
Someone comes up with this idea, or something like it, about every six months or so. The answer to "why not" is that we don't need to. There are other solutions to the size of the blockchain, most notablely the one that was proposed by Satoshi himself in his whitepaper. The blocks were designed to be "pruned" of long spent transactions, if the user desired that, but never to require such an action. That's why the internal block structure uses a Merkel Tree instead of a flat file format. Including special blocks to update a running list of non-zero balance addresses would not only require breaking the current system, it would also eventually be blocks of such massive size as to be counter-productive. There is no full client that utilizes pruning that I know of, but there is nothing preventing you from coding that yourself if you have the skills and believe that pruning is a near term need. Furthermore, anyone who desires to avoid the blockchain altogether can simply use a light client, such as BitcoinSpinner or Electrum. Search the forum for "pruning" of blocks, light clients, and "Stratum" for more information. Thank you for that information. You are welcome to close this topic |
Einer trage des andern Last, so werdet ihr das Gesetz Christi erfüllen.
|
|
|
|
