Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 06:58:02 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Design Flaws of Bitcoin That Could Be Corrected in Another Digital Currency  (Read 2191 times)
EuSouBitcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 463


View Profile
October 12, 2011, 01:02:37 PM
 #1

Are there any characteristics of Bitcoin which you consider disadvantages that can't be change in BTC but that could be changed in another digital currency? If another digital currency is going to replace Bitcoin I would think that it have to have advantages over BTC. Of course there could be external differences that could make another digital currency more desirable. For example, if a country were to issue it's own digital currency. But what parts of the Bitcoin protocol would you change if you were starting from scratch?
1480964282
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480964282

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480964282
Reply with quote  #2

1480964282
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480964282
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480964282

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480964282
Reply with quote  #2

1480964282
Report to moderator
1480964282
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480964282

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480964282
Reply with quote  #2

1480964282
Report to moderator
edd
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
October 12, 2011, 01:05:26 PM
 #2

What type of flaws can't be addressed? If enough people agree on a solution, it shouldn't be difficult to simply fix the current system compared to creating a new one from scratch.

Still around.
EuSouBitcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 463


View Profile
October 12, 2011, 01:42:41 PM
 #3

I'm asking. But if everything about Bitcoin can be changed, then there are no guarantees. If I buy BTC thinking the supply of BTC can not be changed to allow more than 21 million, I'm wrong. It could easily be changed to allow 21 billion, 21 trillion or more.

Faster confirmations would be nice. Is that possible? Is there a price to pay for faster confirmations?
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
October 12, 2011, 01:55:11 PM
 #4

I would make sure the guy who invented it didnt run off with a million coins.

FreeTrade
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854



View Profile
October 12, 2011, 01:57:08 PM
 #5

I'm asking. But if everything about Bitcoin can be changed, then there are no guarantees. If I buy BTC thinking the supply of BTC can not be changed to allow more than 21 million, I'm wrong. It could easily be changed to allow 21 billion, 21 trillion or more.

Faster confirmations would be nice. Is that possible? Is there a price to pay for faster confirmations?

One of the strengths of Bitcoin is that it is very difficult to change. I've seen a few 'oh Bitcoin is easy to change if enough people agree' statements. That kind of agreement is possible if an existential threat were to arise, but there isn't going to be agreement to implement incremental improvements.

I think faster confirmations are a feature of some of the other alternative currencies. I imagine there is a trade-off there. Maybe network overhead/speed of confirmations.

The CPU-friendly currencies address the biggest design flaw of Bitcoin IMHO.

Not sure there's anything else I'd change. Everything else seems to have been exceptionally well thought out.


The internet is freedom to communicate without permission. Crypto is freedom to trade without permission.

HODLCoin ANN - Interest rate 0.000015% per block for every balance. Term Deposit Rate 2500% - http://hodlcoin.com/
FreeTrade
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854



View Profile
October 12, 2011, 02:00:29 PM
 #6

I would make sure the guy who invented it didnt run off with a million coins.

Built in reward for early adopters was/is a really smart feature.

The internet is freedom to communicate without permission. Crypto is freedom to trade without permission.

HODLCoin ANN - Interest rate 0.000015% per block for every balance. Term Deposit Rate 2500% - http://hodlcoin.com/
error
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574



View Profile
October 12, 2011, 04:02:58 PM
 #7

Faster confirmations would be nice. Is that possible? Is there a price to pay for faster confirmations?

Not a design flaw. A few weeks ago there was a thread about all the things that break if you make confirmations too much faster than 10 minutes on average. And being even faster than that isn't really needed anyway.

15UFyv6kfWgq83Pp3yhXPr8rknv9m6581W
piuk
Hero Member
*****
expert
Offline Offline

Activity: 910



View Profile WWW
October 12, 2011, 04:16:30 PM
 #8

A couple of things i'd change:

1) Use SHA 256 throughout. The cryptography is only as strong as the weakest link, so I don't see a point in using a mix of RIPMED and SHA, now your venerable to exploits in two algorithms.
2) Implement changing hash functions as a part of the protocol e.g. each block would include a flag identifying what it was hashed with. Clients should have support for many hash functions, if a one is shown to be weak it can be phased out.
3) Make command uint8 - char[12] wastes 11 bytes every message.
4) Separate Address messages for ipV4 and ipv6. clients that support ipv6 can specifically request ipv6 addresses. No point in wasting 12 bytes for every ipv4 address.
5) Remove coinbase. Use the previous block hash and timestamp as the entropy for the coinbase transaction.
4) Version based on protocol changes, not any particular client.
5) Remove sequence from TxIn
6) No alerts (deprecated already)
7) PING should require another PING response.
Cool Make transaction scripts optional, requiring extra fees. The majority of transactions would use hard coded signing methods.
9) Block rewards decrease to a minimum block reward of ~1 BTC, meaning no 21 million limit.

2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708



View Profile
October 12, 2011, 04:57:37 PM
 #9

10) use the correct network byte order everywhere in the protocol

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
Hawkix
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 517



View Profile WWW
October 12, 2011, 05:23:18 PM
 #10

A couple of things i'd change:

1) Use SHA 256 throughout. The cryptography is only as strong as the weakest link, so I don't see a point in using a mix of RIPMED and SHA, now your venerable to exploits in two algorithms.

Its the opposite. It would not be good idea to use SHA256 to keep your accounts secret while the whole network puts pressure to "crack" it as Proof of Work.

5) Remove coinbase. Use the previous block hash and timestamp as the entropy for the coinbase transaction.

That would result in doing the same work multiple times. Also, this prohibits merged mining.

9) Block rewards decrease to a minimum block reward of ~1 BTC, meaning no 21 million limit.

This does not scale well in case there is large Bitcoin adoption.

Donations: 1Hawkix7GHym6SM98ii5vSHHShA3FUgpV6
http://btcportal.net/ - All about Bitcoin - coming soon!
ama
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
October 12, 2011, 05:26:49 PM
 #11

A couple of things i'd change:

How are nine (9!) things counted as a couple?

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.    Grin

Buy me a coffee: 18NMyRMSkCjk8FnmdfAuxbuSSET4ASwBL5
Or a decaf: Lcn3xp5iVwo6aSFx8VYaRxp8qJyPGvzgah
Bitcoin Pyramid
Sargasm
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
October 17, 2011, 05:09:47 AM
 #12

As I've mentioned in multiple other posts... Addresses paired with an encrypted key file used to authenticate transactions.

 I will probably suggest 100 more times.  If you want btc to be taken really seriously, you have to find a solution to the fact that peoples money sits on their computer and is prone to possible brute force cracking.  Sure the most savvy of us create layers of encryption and backups but eventually the currency must be easily transacted from anywhere and that may require dual wallet, verification key implementation.  That way data lossmcan be mitigated because cloud/ served wallet services will only have the data for the transactions which will require a separate key to validate.
Sargasm
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
October 17, 2011, 05:10:53 AM
 #13

IMO, the value of stabilizing the currency would be enough to elicit a tandem response without forking.
gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
*
qt
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016



View Profile
October 17, 2011, 06:03:12 AM
 #14

As I've mentioned in multiple other posts... Addresses paired with an encrypted key file used to authenticate transactions.

Support for signing arbitrary data using bitcoin 'addresses' is in the current development code and 0.5 release candidate.

kokjo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050

You are WRONG!


View Profile
October 17, 2011, 08:50:16 AM
 #15

But what parts of the Bitcoin protocol would you change if you were starting from scratch?
the scripting language its just to complicated, and bloated.

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves and wiser people so full of doubts." -Bertrand Russell
gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
*
qt
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016



View Profile
October 17, 2011, 02:55:02 PM
 #16

But what parts of the Bitcoin protocol would you change if you were starting from scratch?
the scripting language its just to complicated, and bloated.

0_o
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!