New Method of Veryfying transactions?!

[Marcosgcr]

I would like to say first that i am not an programer or anything in the area. Im an administrator and i was interested in Bitcoin and others criptocurrencys due to its volatility. Now i am even more interested in it.
Recently i was comparing the systens that exist in the verification of a transaction (PoW;tangle;PoF and others)
Something that every criptoenthusiat likes is the descentralization but in Bitcoin mining this isn't true. In Bitcoin farming big porcentage of the proof of work is done by a farming company. This problem have already some solutions such tangle and POW but yeat they have their flaws.
I have a simple idea soo i don't know if it's stupid or good but i don't will know if i share with the community..
The system has no miners and the veryfiers are the users that send/receive the criptocurrency.The only rule that the system has is: Receiver and sender transaction have to result in 0.
Eg:
Sam have 3 COIN
Michael have 0 COIN


Sam sends 3 COIN to Michael.
In this example, the transaction is:
SAM -3
Michael +3
Results: 0
In this basic idea of mathematics..
The system is online and need to the approval of its owners.
Michael go on Sam wallet adress or social perfil. Requests a transaction (the only rule is, every transaction have to result in 0), Michael wants 10 from Sam.
The transaction is on hold
Moments later, Sam sees the solicitation and see that he will send 10 to Michael. He approves the transaction.
The transaction is made.

Every transaction obviously results in 0
Because someone will receive the amount that the other is sending.

Issues:
Double Spending- Solved
Mining- Solved

New Issues;
Security/Spam- This plataform needs to be secure and don't allow spam.(if so everyone would ask everyone for transactions)

I hope my idea isn't stupid.
Good day for you
Ideas and critics are welcome

[1715042292]

1715042292

[1715042292]

1715042292

[1715042292]

1715042292

[1715042292]

1715042292

[davis196]

New method?Really?
Anyway,what if Sam requests 10 coins from Michael and Michael has only 2 coins in his wallet?
Will the final result be +10 coins for Sam and -8 for Michael(hence,8 new coins were created from nothing)?
The only possible solution for this problem is that Michael doesn't confirm the transcation request made by Sam.Buy,what if he confirms it?
I don't think that this is a new consept,but I like theoretic models anyway.

[jseverson]

Things should be kept as simple as possible, so it's really not stupid to propose a simple solution. There's this, however:

New Issues;
Security/Spam- This plataform needs to be secure and don't allow spam.(if so everyone would ask everyone for transactions)

It can't work at all unless this is addressed. You also missed decentralization. Something like this already happens with banking systems, but it's worthless as a cryptocurrency because of that crucial factor.

[ginobitcoiner]

very good way, this method is very reasonable and very useful and hopefully it can be one of the method references for members of this forum.
good job friend, this is not a stupid way

[Tipsters]

I would like to say first that i am not an programer or anything in the area. Im an administrator and i was interested in Bitcoin and others criptocurrencys due to its volatility. Now i am even more interested in it.
Recently i was comparing the systens that exist in the verification of a transaction (PoW;tangle;PoF and others)
Something that every criptoenthusiat likes is the descentralization but in Bitcoin mining this isn't true. In Bitcoin farming big porcentage of the proof of work is done by a farming company. This problem have already some solutions such tangle and POW but yeat they have their flaws.
I have a simple idea soo i don't know if it's stupid or good but i don't will know if i share with the community..
The system has no miners and the veryfiers are the users that send/receive the criptocurrency.The only rule that the system has is: Receiver and sender transaction have to result in 0.
Eg:
Sam have 3 COIN
Michael have 0 COIN


Sam sends 3 COIN to Michael.
In this example, the transaction is:
SAM -3
Michael +3
Results: 0
In this basic idea of mathematics..
The system is online and need to the approval of its owners.
Michael go on Sam wallet adress or social perfil. Requests a transaction (the only rule is, every transaction have to result in 0), Michael wants 10 from Sam.
The transaction is on hold
Moments later, Sam sees the solicitation and see that he will send 10 to Michael. He approves the transaction.
The transaction is made.

Every transaction obviously results in 0
Because someone will receive the amount that the other is sending.

Issues:
Double Spending- Solved
Mining- Solved

New Issues;
Security/Spam- This plataform needs to be secure and don't allow spam.(if so everyone would ask everyone for transactions)

I hope my idea isn't stupid.
Good day for you
Ideas and critics are welcome

That method still have some limitations. For example, every people will want to get more from the legitimate transaction they are supposing. Because of that, it will load the server with full of invalid requests and no one is willing to invest that kind of server for the crypto community. To that end, the mining system still is the best for now.

[franky1]

here are the issues

1. bitcoin already does the + - part.
with bitcoin if your looking at it in human readable format
imagine the Vin/txin/input (unspent input)  of a transaction is the  -
imagine the Vout/txout/output(destination) of a transaction is the +

so then
vin/txin
   sam 3btc
vout/txout
   michael 3btc
signed:sam

so its like this
-
  sam 3
+
  micheal 3
signed:sam

2. the beauty of bitcoin is that michael does NOT have to be online to accept payment.
sam is giving away his value so only sam needs to be involved. he is signing to say he doesnt want it..
he is literally throwing it at michael. rather than waiting for michael to shake his hand.

3. the OP's transaction doesnt appear to show that the transaction can prove that sam even had the 3 coins.
in bitcoin the vin sam is where "sam" is an identifier of when sam got his coins.. not simply saying sam has 3 coins

bitcoins system is not an account balance. each transaction is a chain of from Dave to sam .. sam to michael
where "sam 3" in the sam to michael is an encoded (from davestx 3)

4. most importantly. if you really want a account balance system rather than a transaction chain secured by batching transactions into blocks which are chained.
and  if you want the account balance system to be run on a server that both sides need to log into... it exists already.
its called a bank

[Balambgarden]

Is transfers slow for anyone?

Usually when no send Bitcoin it's like 30 min but now it's over an hour and nothing.

[chocolah29]

Good concept but what confuse me is if this will be the new method, it's more likely a peer to peer which means to be able to transfer to someone I will be needing a high end computer and gpus that can support this? Or if not, what will be the new system?

So what if I can't afford to have this? I'll be left out, I guess.

I'm sorry for a lot of questions, I'm puzzled.

[franky1]

Is transfers slow for anyone?

Usually when no send Bitcoin it's like 30 min but now it's over an hour and nothing.

at time of posting. there has been 4 blocks in the last 20 minutes. and those blocks are not full, so the network is not congested
your transaction may not be included in those blocks if:
1. your using a web service. (they can be lazy and wait for ages then push loads of transactions out at once)
2. your using your own personal wallet but you didnt calculate a fee
3. your using your own personal wallet but its not connected to other peers for the network to get your transaction

[Strufmbae]

Is transfers slow for anyone?

Usually when no send Bitcoin it's like 30 min but now it's over an hour and nothing.

Bigger transaction fee is the fastest transaction you could have. However,  op has point but, the approval of both parties is kinda scary,  especially to the sender, how about if the receivers asks for payment and then suddenly the sender acciddentally approves the request.  My point is there should be a steps or level before approving request.