Hello,
I have an idea I would to present, depending upon the feedback I will devote more time to it.
I propose that many of the basic problems with virtual currency stems from the fact that they are stored on a general purpose file system. All file systems are built around the concept that beyond some basic I/O permissions a file is a block of data on a storage medium which can be easily copied, edited and moved. There is an embedded idea of trust in the end user behind this. While this is a highly desired design goal for 99.999% of all computer applications I would propose that it is not desirable for a crypto-currency.
I believe that the basic ethos of an ideal crypto-currency is nobody can be trusted, only machines can be trusted. The current file system is designed to provide open information and trusts the end user. In an ideal crypto-currency system when I transfer money from my bank account to create a virtual coin it is owned by
system, while I can control how and what it is spent it on it is the property of the system until I spent it on a tangible good. I can’t be trusted beyond that, since I could be a malicious user. I can’t be trusted to know where it is, but only the guaranteed that it does exist and I can perform financial transactions with it.
I propose a file system that violates many of the current rules of software abstraction. A general purpose file system manages data on a hard drive as a utilitarian application that is a servant to other applications. This file system would be an embedded system that contains an application, networking and disk management all in one.
It could almost qualify as a mini-virtual machine.
This file system would offer a unique interface to the user, not a directory tree but a small menu of options to be manipulated by the bit coin client. The file system would be able to communicate with other file systems using virtual synchrony to safely transfer data, distribute computing and provide a backup in case of a hardware failure. The location of data would be hidden to the end user, the ability to copy a wallet at the user level would not exist. If a wallet was lost the user can request from the system a recovery wallet from stored fragments on the network, this process would of course be safe guarded to prevent a false claim.
By creating a massive hidden distributed file system the need for intense encryption is rendered partially mute. The unorthodox and complex nature of such a system would be its own form of encryption on top of any traditional RSA encryption.
Any thoughts? (Other then I'm crazy
)
