FACT CHECK: Bitcoin Blockchain will be 700GB in 4 Years

[coins101]

My guess is that the Bitcoin Blockchain is growing at around 4% per month.



Is that assessment about right?

And what about the bandwidth each node will require each month if it's sharing data - 100 TB / month; 1,000TB / month?

What does this mean for the next halving?  All miners will be running SPV's?

[1713560789]

1713560789

[1713560789]

1713560789

[1713560789]

1713560789

[coins101]

A chart from Blockchain.info from launch

[Senor.Bla]

this seems maybe a bit to much. could you include the data from the beginning until now? this would help.
also there updates in development that should result in smaler blockchainsize and bandwith requirement.
worst case scenario is, that you are right, but storage capacity will increase too and 700GB will not be much in 4 years.

[BADecker]

Quantum Computers are advancing much faster in calc and storage capacity. In 4 years from now, QCs will have cracked the blockchain, and Bitcoin will be gone, or at least, residing on a QC.

[c789]

Moore's Law.

I believe the devs are working on the size of the blockchain, but it's not at the top of their list, and rightly so. They have bigger matters which require their more immediate attention.

You're correct to point out the growing size of the blockchain, but it's a relatively small problem amongst others.

[coins101]

Moore's Law.

I believe the devs are working on the size of the blockchain, but it's not at the top of their list, and rightly so. They have bigger matters which require their more immediate attention.

You're correct to point out the growing size of the blockchain, but it's a relatively small problem amongst others.

100TB to 1,000TB bandwidth requirement for full nodes in just 4 years time is not a small problem. Who has a data plan that can allow that, even unlimited plans have a fair use cap?

There is very little the devs can do about the growing size of the blockchain. Data is data.

Multi sig, for example, will counter any voodoo by the devs to reduce the size of transactions.

[BTCLovingDude]

did you make this chart yourself or are you copying it from somewhere?
why is it rising exponentially instead of with a fixed rate:
https://blockchain.info/charts/block-size it has been an straight line so far according to this chart after 4 years block size should be ~240GB

and even if the block size is increased again the rise should be an straight line not exponential growth.

p.s. i think you should move this topic to New Posts Development & Technical Discussion otherwise it will get buried here and i really want to know how much of what i said is right and how much of it is wrong.

[coins101]

did you make this chart yourself or are you copying it from somewhere?
why is it rising exponentially instead of with a fixed rate:
https://blockchain.info/charts/block-size it has been an straight line so far according to this chart after 4 years block size should be ~240GB

and even if the block size is increased again the rise should be an straight line not exponential growth.

p.s. i think you should move this topic to New Posts Development & Technical Discussion otherwise it will get buried here and i really want to know how much of what i said is right and how much of it is wrong.

The blockchain has gained about 20GB in less than 12 months.

That's not straight line since Bitcoin was launched 6 years ago.

It's my chart.

The blockchain.info data seems to agree with me to some degree

https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all

[BTCLovingDude]

did you make this chart yourself or are you copying it from somewhere?
why is it rising exponentially instead of with a fixed rate:
https://blockchain.info/charts/block-size it has been an straight line so far according to this chart after 4 years block size should be ~240GB

and even if the block size is increased again the rise should be an straight line not exponential growth.

p.s. i think you should move this topic to New Posts Development & Technical Discussion otherwise it will get buried here and i really want to know how much of what i said is right and how much of it is wrong.

The blockchain has gained about 20GB in less than 12 months.

That's not straight line since Bitcoin was launched 6 years ago.

It's my chart.

The blockchain.info data seems to agree with me to some degree

https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all

yes but blocks that were mined a long time ago were small size blocks and i don't think it is correct to use that data for extrapolation.

for example block
329100 was 99KB (2014-11)
229100 was 184KB (2013-4)
129100 was 13KB (2011-6)

and so on but if you change the timespan=2year you can see in the last two years it is an straight line which is because of the nearly full blocks. starting from end of 2014 ishi think it is mostly mid 2015!

so if you want to extrapolate you should only consider the data that is similar which means the same block size starting at end of 2014 ish (or find the original time) then with the fixed (800-900 KB) size blocks the increase is an stable rise (straight line)

let me just add that my logic will only work as long as we stick to the max 1MB block which is the current protocol. so it will rise following that straight line that i keep saying.
calculating the future would be something like this:
number of blocks mined each day * size of one block (1MB or 900 average)

but if block size increased then all these calculations would be wrong and depending on the size of blocks (1.1, 1.2, .... 1.9, 2+,...) it would be different.

[lottery248]

bitcoin core to double the size of blockchain in 2017 IIRC, that's why the bitcoin blockchain is gonna be more than ever. how horrible if we cannot expand what our capacity has/have.

at least a micro SD card does a 256GB.

[coins101]

bitcoin core to double the size of blockchain in 2017 IIRC, that's why the bitcoin blockchain is gonna be more than ever. how horrible if we cannot expand what our capacity has/have.

at least a micro SD card does a 256GB.

Hardware is not the rate limiting factor. It's just an added expense to get more space.

Bandwidth is the greater issue.

[coins101]

did you make this chart yourself or are you copying it from somewhere?
why is it rising exponentially instead of with a fixed rate:
https://blockchain.info/charts/block-size it has been an straight line so far according to this chart after 4 years block size should be ~240GB

and even if the block size is increased again the rise should be an straight line not exponential growth.

p.s. i think you should move this topic to New Posts Development & Technical Discussion otherwise it will get buried here and i really want to know how much of what i said is right and how much of it is wrong.

The blockchain has gained about 20GB in less than 12 months.

That's not straight line since Bitcoin was launched 6 years ago.

It's my chart.

The blockchain.info data seems to agree with me to some degree

https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all

yes but blocks that were mined a long time ago were small size blocks and i don't think it is correct to use that data for extrapolation.

for example block
329100 was 99KB (2014-11)
229100 was 184KB (2013-4)
129100 was 13KB (2011-6)

and so on but if you change the timespan=2year you can see in the last two years it is an straight line which is because of the nearly full blocks. starting from end of 2014 ishi think it is mostly mid 2015!

so if you want to extrapolate you should only consider the data that is similar which means the same block size starting at end of 2014 ish (or find the original time) then with the fixed (800-900 KB) size blocks the increase is an stable rise (straight line)

let me just add that my logic will only work as long as we stick to the max 1MB block which is the current protocol. so it will rise following that straight line that i keep saying.
calculating the future would be something like this:
number of blocks mined each day * size of one block (1MB or 900 average)

but if block size increased then all these calculations would be wrong and depending on the size of blocks (1.1, 1.2, .... 1.9, 2+,...) it would be different.

You are sort of right, but the evidence is not a straight line.

If you increase block sizes, they will not be full from the day the size limit is increased. But as adoption happens, the rise will not be a straight line.  You then hit another need to increase the blocks.

But what if there is a block size that is dynamic?  If adoption is allowed to continue towards Visa levels of transactions, then these factors combine to create exponential growth.

We are both making hypothetical claims, but the evidence so far points towards exponential growth.

[criptix]

did you make this chart yourself or are you copying it from somewhere?
why is it rising exponentially instead of with a fixed rate:
https://blockchain.info/charts/block-size it has been an straight line so far according to this chart after 4 years block size should be ~240GB

and even if the block size is increased again the rise should be an straight line not exponential growth.

p.s. i think you should move this topic to New Posts Development & Technical Discussion otherwise it will get buried here and i really want to know how much of what i said is right and how much of it is wrong.

The blockchain has gained about 20GB in less than 12 months.

That's not straight line since Bitcoin was launched 6 years ago.

It's my chart.

The blockchain.info data seems to agree with me to some degree

https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all

yes but blocks that were mined a long time ago were small size blocks and i don't think it is correct to use that data for extrapolation.

for example block
329100 was 99KB (2014-11)
229100 was 184KB (2013-4)
129100 was 13KB (2011-6)

and so on but if you change the timespan=2year you can see in the last two years it is an straight line which is because of the nearly full blocks. starting from end of 2014 ishi think it is mostly mid 2015!

so if you want to extrapolate you should only consider the data that is similar which means the same block size starting at end of 2014 ish (or find the original time) then with the fixed (800-900 KB) size blocks the increase is an stable rise (straight line)

let me just add that my logic will only work as long as we stick to the max 1MB block which is the current protocol. so it will rise following that straight line that i keep saying.
calculating the future would be something like this:
number of blocks mined each day * size of one block (1MB or 900 average)

but if block size increased then all these calculations would be wrong and depending on the size of blocks (1.1, 1.2, .... 1.9, 2+,...) it would be different.

You are sort of right, but the evidence is not a straight line.

If you increase block sizes, they will not be full from the day the size limit is increased. But as adoption happens, the rise will not be a straight line.  You then hit another need to increase the blocks.

But what if there is a block size that is dynamic?  If adoption is allowed to continue towards Visa levels of transactions, then these factors combine to create exponential growth.

We are both making hypothetical claims, but the evidence so far points towards exponential growth.

You just answered your own question.
It is a assumption depending on max blocksize and no fact.

[Red-Apple]

Quantum Computers are advancing much faster in calc and storage capacity. In 4 years from now, QCs will have cracked the blockchain, and Bitcoin will be gone, or at least, residing on a QC.

your post is completely irrelevant here!
first of all we are talking about 4 years not 40 years. second of all even if QC becomes a thing available to public we can move to more complicated encryption to avoid them.


anyways i think as c789 pointed out, everybody has something more important in their minds rather than increase of blockchain size.
and maybe i am wrong but i think one of the reasons that some miners were against the block size increase was the similar reason.

also i don't think your 700GB is accurate because we don't know what will happen in the future. for now max block size is 1 and we don't know when it is going to be increased and even by then we don't know how much of it will be full. the number of unconfirmed transactions show that the current size is enough for the number of transactions and even if it was increased today the size of blocks will be the same unless someone starts spamming again.

so there are too many variables at play that we can't be sure about the 700GB the only thing that you can say is that it will be somewhere between 240 and 700

[gentlemand]

Hardware is not the rate limiting factor. It's just an added expense to get more space.

Bandwidth is the greater issue.

Sssh. People don't want to hear that little fact. My bandwidth has been unchanged since 2004 and doesn't look like it's changing any time soon. Storage is a piece of piss. Bandwidth requires lumbering bureaucracies to slowly grind into motion.

[n691309]

Quantum Computers are advancing much faster in calc and storage capacity. In 4 years from now, QCs will have cracked the blockchain, and Bitcoin will be gone, or at least, residing on a QC.

Its true that quantum computers are advancing fast but as far as i know until 2020 bitcoin is quantum computers resistant

[coins101]

Quantum Computers are advancing much faster in calc and storage capacity. In 4 years from now, QCs will have cracked the blockchain, and Bitcoin will be gone, or at least, residing on a QC.

Its true that quantum computers are advancing fast but as far as i know until 2020 bitcoin is quantum computers resistant

They won't tell you when it's working.

[severaldetails]

Would it not be possible to buy a harddrive with the blockchain already on it?
Downloading 700GB P2P, I guess that would take weeks or even months.
Every package sent around the globe usually is faster.
In 4 years, a 700 GB USB stick will be a normal thing.

[coins101]

Would it not be possible to buy a harddrive with the blockchain already on it?
Downloading 700GB P2P, I guess that would take weeks or even months.
Every package sent around the globe usually is faster.
In 4 years, a 700 GB USB stick will be a normal thing.

1TB usb is currently around $600. Plus, loading fees, plus delivery, plus taxes, lets say its around $400 $300 delivered to your door in 4 years. Would you buy one?

Don't forget that monthly bandwidth cost.

[severaldetails]

Would it not be possible to buy a harddrive with the blockchain already on it?
Downloading 700GB P2P, I guess that would take weeks or even months.
Every package sent around the globe usually is faster.
In 4 years, a 700 GB USB stick will be a normal thing.

1TB usb is currently around $600. Plus, loading fees, plus delivery, plus taxes, lets say its around $400 $300 delivered to your door in 4 years. Would you buy one?

Don't forget that monthly bandwidth cost.

Ok, let's say we put it on a ssd. You get a 1TB ssd today for about 200$. In four years maybe 50$.
If you can spare somebody from downloading the blockchain for weeks, I can imagine that there are people who give you 150$ for it. In four years.
I really think that could work.
Do you have another opinion?