Yup, I am Mr Sunshine... lol... (No, certain things just touch on certain nerves with me... Like "god complex doctors", who are just pissed that they spent so much money, to make money, and can't... because, well, they just are not worth what they think they are. Pure opinion.)
To the above, who should have shortened my quote.
The moving I was talking about was from Wallet A to Wallet A, not to Wallet B. It is not a MAJOR problem, but there are many who get pissed about being charged 30 coins for trying to send 35 coins, because the "wallet", which created the dust-coins, is now trying to send 1000 chunks of 0.02, 0.00123, 0.12314 ... ... ... to "make" 35 coins. The "tax-penalty", for merging all this "dust", is x-per-kb of data. (Something that you don't even know exists, you don't know the size, and you can't control it, and you didn't create it. But you are still "charged", or it refuses to send the coins.)
That can easily be solved by "moving" from Wallet A -acct 1234, to wallet A -acct 7473.... a bunch of small tx's, which then does this...
0.02 + 0.00123 (two small dust tx's) = 0.02123 (one small dust tx)
Turning that 35 coins from 1000 dust-tx's into one solid tx of 35, before it tries to leave your wallet. (You do not have to do that ONLINE, as long as it confirms... it should be valid... thus, no ONLINE sending penalty.)
As for the 10 chains... You don't grasp what I was saying... (My fault, I am sure, I am not easy to follow without a diagram.)
The hash-rate would still be 100Ghs for the network, not 100/10... However, they all work chain 0, then chain 1, then chain 2, then chain 3... They are all bound like one chain. However, each would be prepared in advance, with the following results deposits, and incoming tx's, which have had 9 blocks of time to propagate through the network, before being worked.
Like this...
(
#2 being worked/solved/hashed, 3 being "setup", 2 is hashed to 1 on this row, and 2 below in the column, and TIME.)
{Building audited valid tx's in room
#3, while
#2 is being solved}
0,1,
2->
0,1,2,3,4,5
0,1,2,3,
4,5 (
withdraw (#0),
deposit-1 (#4) OVER ->,
deposit-2 (#0) ABOVE ^... forward moving only.)
0,1,2,3,4,5
0,1,2,3,4,5
0,1,2,3,4,5
0,1,2,3,4,5
0,1,2,3,4,5(-> connects by hash to the next row, column 0)
- SEED -
However, this is 3D... the solutions would be behind, off the block#... not part of the TX chain. The results of the solution are kept as a hash. Those get trimmed-off after like 1000 confirms, and that tx-chain is the only hard-coded part sent to others who are not block-archivers, who ARE keeping the archive of the solutions.
The purpose, besides security... (you can't "fork" block 7, because we are all doing the same one, if a centralized tracker indicates block 7 @ 12:34:00 is the block being worked and the results of that prepared block has a hash of a0f0123 for the contents.) The non-security aspect allows you to 1, prepare tx's in advance for block 7, while block 6 is being worked. You can then jump right onto block 7, after 1 minute, when 6 has now been solved, and you have already preloaded block 7's data and confirmed it, and KNOW it is the right one to work on. (You would not have to "check" to see if you are on the right chain. However, if for some reason you notice, or the porgram notices that it is stuck, or failing a lot... You would know, and have the ABILITY to "look for the correct chain", if that ever happens, or leave and mine something else, until the issue is resolved... The issue may be an attack, or a natural OOPS, or something like a severance of a major back-bone hub on the internet. The internet is not persistent. ISP's disconnect all the time to reset and packets get delayed and lost and corrupted.) Even if it is just something related to trying to mine on old software that needs upgrading... At the moment, that just creates a fork, of old and new software results. Only takes one person to start mining with old software that ignores checks, or a hacked program to pretend it is on the right chain.
As for your comment about 11...
I "know" the "existing method" is to use only "one solution"... But there are many solutions in a hash. We are told to submit the first solution we find "above" that difficulty. There are billions of valid solutions, because each one is unique to our wallet identification, which is how it confirms "A valid solution". Though, I assume you were talking about "prime". However, my suggestion was to accept the top 100 in x-time, (as opposed to rolling for a lotto-diff result), and auto-close the block after 1-minute. (With the end-time being part of that solution-hash, which would auto-reject any solution that didn't match, as the new-time would not match the solutions, which instantly get hashed/solved to any-diff, closing the block... so that the hash can be used to start solving the next block.)
The point of that was... then there is not 1 winner per block. There is 100 winners per block, which gives a more even reward, and helps to remove the "luck" that pools and solo miners have to loose-out to... also... related to security... if the 100 winners are the same every time, you can safely assume that the results are a hack, or the block data you are being fed is wrong. Unlike being fed one block with one winner, which never even gets checked, beyond checking to see if it is valid. (The bonus was, for those coins that wish to keep coins off pools, they could sort-of control the abuse of power from a pool, as pools would have to use multiple wallets and couldn't accidentally attack the network... because if the 100 had to all be unique wallet-id's, a pool could only have 1:100th of every solution, and 99:100 would have to come from another wallet, another pool, another solo-miner.)
Remember, pools were intended to attempt to defeat the "luck losses", and "spread the wealth". If the program did that by nature, you would not need all that additional overhead, and you would have more personal gains. Not to mention less theft, and less sour-play pools that just take your coins and run. (They still exist, there is one up every day... Ever see your shares rejected, but the pool operators also mining, and seems to have more than the normal amount of shares, with the same power... or ever notice the pool seems to have a "technical difficulty" or "lots of rejects" from nowhere... then you find they swapped wallets, and just took your hashed coins. It has happened many times.)