blockchain size Do we really need 20 gbs of data?

[gmaxwell]

There is nothing "official" about The Bitcoin Foundation.  They are a private club of people who have decided to give themselves a fancy sounding name and release their own reference implementation of the protocol.  Their client is as much a third party client as any other.

I could create my own organization called The Bitcoin Association, and then I could release my own version of the reference implementation.  My wallet would be just as "official" as theirs.

As a point of clarification, the reference client is not the Bitcoin foundation's. It's an independent open source project which existed a long before the foundation.  The foundation currently funds some of the folks with commit access, though not all, and pays for some resources and tools.

Notwithstanding that, everything else you said was also perfectly fine.

[1714964293]

1714964293

[1714964293]

1714964293

[1714964293]

1714964293

[1714964293]

1714964293

[justusranvier]

Anyway, don't expect it to happen within the next 10 years - not with this team, and ATM there isn't any other bitcoin software that would be suitable for mining.

It won't be long before there will be another Bitcoin implementation suitable for mining: https://blog.conformal.com/btcd-beta-announcement/

[DannyHamilton]

There is nothing "official" about The Bitcoin Foundation.  They are a private club of people who have decided to give themselves a fancy sounding name and release their own reference implementation of the protocol.  Their client is as much a third party client as any other.

I could create my own organization called The Bitcoin Association, and then I could release my own version of the reference implementation.  My wallet would be just as "official" as theirs.

As a point of clarification, the reference client is not the Bitcoin foundation's. It's an independent open source project which existed a long before the foundation.  The foundation currently funds some of the folks with commit access, though not all, and pays for some resources and tools.

Notwithstanding that, everything else you said was also perfectly fine.

I may be mistaken, but I get the impression that a few members of The Bitcoin Foundation have significant influence over the individuals that decide which changes get pulled into the release candidates.

[piotr_n]

Anyway, don't expect it to happen within the next 10 years - not with this team, and ATM there isn't any other bitcoin software that would be suitable for mining.

It won't be long before there will be another Bitcoin implementation suitable for mining: https://blog.conformal.com/btcd-beta-announcement/

On a bit unrelated matter.
There is enough money in mining already, for the miners to develop and start maintaining their own software; one that suits their needs.
I guess that will eventually happen.
Incentive is what drove bitcoin core devs (or its commit deciders) away from miners and also incentives are going to drive miners away from bitcoin core.

[tss]

Re: blockchain size Do we really need 20 gbs of data?

YES

[spooderman]

do you really need 10 fingers?

[jbrnt]

I used to use bitcoin core client and a blockchain.info wallet when I first started. Keeping the blockchain up to date is a real pain if you do not keep bitcoin core running 24/7. I changed to Electrum later on.

I think normal "consumer" user do not need all 20G of blockchain. A lightweight client will suffice. I believe we will see more web wallets and lightweight clients as more people adopt bitcoin because they are more user friendly. Downloading 20G of data is not what a newbie user would want to face.

[ranochigo]

You can run a light weight client. I believe developers are already trying to solve this problem of blockchain bloat. It isn't necessary for you to run a full node since if you don't leave your computer on for 24/7 and port forward port 8333, it does nothing to the blockchain.

[s2]

What would the harm be in taking all the transactions from 2009-2013 and hashing this result to give us H.  We now have a bitcoin reference client that can load a db that matches this has so we know it contains all unspent outputs as the starting point, we now just need to store the transactions/blocks since this point to keep a verified blockchain.  This way people can download the enitre history if they want to or just use a snapshot from a given year.

A year's blockchain history sounds sufficient for solid network integrity and minimizes the need to store an ever growing chain but perhaps I misunderstood how it works?

[Deviant1]

What would the harm be in taking all the transactions from 2009-2013 and hashing this result to give us H.  We now have a bitcoin reference client that can load a db that matches this has so we know it contains all unspent outputs as the starting point, we now just need to store the transactions/blocks since this point to keep a verified blockchain.  This way people can download the enitre history if they want to or just use a snapshot from a given year.

A year's blockchain history sounds sufficient for solid network integrity and minimizes the need to store an ever growing chain but perhaps I misunderstood how it works?

I was wondering the same thing. Wouldn't it be the best of both worlds if you could download the full blockchain if you wish or a version that just contained "snapshots" of previous years? I know I would go back to using Bitcoin core then as opposed to third party wallets.

[doof]

I get a bunch of free $ / hrs from Microsofts Azure cloud program.  I run a few small spec VMs as nodes.  My way to contribute back a little.