Blockchain size (another thread, yes)

[ShakyhandsBTCer]

at current block limit of 1mb per block.. there is a max monthly growth of ~4.4gb, with a current block fill of 10%-25%.

as it has been discussed, its not a problem.

for instance Call of duty has a larger data size then bitcoin, with its updates, patches and new versions every 18 months. call of duty need to solve their problems of data bloat and download times.... way before blockchain does

yet i do not see millions of shoot-em-up users complaining.

same goes for world of warcraft. and many other games.

this is not the 1990's where hard drives are a 32gb max limit, where internet is 64k.. we are in the age of fibre optic cable and where something smaller then a postage stamp can store more then games/bitcoins needs.

data storage and internet speed evolution is the solution

This may be true but bandwidth and storage is not free. The fact that it costs people money to provide a service to the network (keeping it secure) while not receiving anything in return (anything tangible) will always have the number of nodes depressed.

[1715435530]

1715435530

[franky1]

at current block limit of 1mb per block.. there is a max monthly growth of ~4.4gb, with a current block fill of 10%-25%.

as it has been discussed, its not a problem.

for instance Call of duty has a larger data size then bitcoin, with its updates, patches and new versions every 18 months. call of duty need to solve their problems of data bloat and download times.... way before blockchain does

yet i do not see millions of shoot-em-up users complaining.

same goes for world of warcraft. and many other games.

this is not the 1990's where hard drives are a 32gb max limit, where internet is 64k.. we are in the age of fibre optic cable and where something smaller then a postage stamp can store more then games/bitcoins needs.

data storage and internet speed evolution is the solution

This may be true but bandwidth and storage is not free. The fact that it costs people money to provide a service to the network (keeping it secure) while not receiving anything in return (anything tangible) will always have the number of nodes depressed.

it costs $50 for call of duty, and >$300 for a console to play it and be part of the playstation/microsoft network. but they get nothing back in return..

hmmmmmmm how many consoles are there in the world which proves that people dont truly care

[zimmah]

Don't many newcomer use webwalllets anyway?

[franky1]

Don't many newcomer use webwalllets anyway?

they do, but most newcomers only have pocket money amounts at first. once they start getting more then a weeks salary worth of bitcoins they should switch to proper security, such as a node/offline store of bitcoins where they truly own the privkey.. not third parties

anyone using web services long term to store more then a week of labour is just asking to get hacked.

which is where i find the funny part, people argue about data stor that amounts to a $10 microSD card. and downloads of a week of fibre optic speed for full blockchain sync again only$3-$10. yet are willing to risk alot more throwing their funds in webwallets..

the mind truly boggles!

[smoothie]

I dont see an exponential growth here.
https://blockchain.info/en/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=1&address=

Look again it is using a Log scale.

[GODLIKE]

at current block limit of 1mb per block.. there is a max monthly growth of ~4.4gb, with a current block fill of 10%-25%.

as it has been discussed, its not a problem.

for instance Call of duty has a larger data size then bitcoin, with its updates, patches and new versions every 18 months. call of duty need to solve their problems of data bloat and download times.... way before blockchain does

yet i do not see millions of shoot-em-up users complaining.

same goes for world of warcraft. and many other games.

this is not the 1990's where hard drives are a 32gb max limit, where internet is 64k.. we are in the age of fibre optic cable and where something smaller then a postage stamp can store more then games/bitcoins needs.

data storage and internet speed evolution is the solution

This may be true but bandwidth and storage is not free. The fact that it costs people money to provide a service to the network (keeping it secure) while not receiving anything in return (anything tangible) will always have the number of nodes depressed.

it costs $50 for call of duty, and >$300 for a console to play it and be part of the playstation/microsoft network. but they get nothing back in return..

hmmmmmmm how many consoles are there in the world which proves that people dont truly care

Erm... they PLAY, in return.
Bitcoin has no other function than replacing money, it's not so fun as CoD.

[GODLIKE]

Don't many newcomer use webwalllets anyway?

they do, but most newcomers only have pocket money amounts at first. once they start getting more then a weeks salary worth of bitcoins they should switch to proper security, such as a node/offline store of bitcoins where they truly own the privkey.. not third parties

anyone using web services long term to store more then a week of labour is just asking to get hacked.

which is where i find the funny part, people argue about data stor that amounts to a $10 microSD card. and downloads of a week of fibre optic speed for full blockchain sync again only$3-$10. yet are willing to risk alot more throwing their funds in webwallets..

the mind truly boggles!

You are right but keep also on mind that this is a completely new thing, and many people not only can't understand how they get hacked, many don't even install or keep updated an antivirus... the truth is that half population of the world is simply not ready for Bitcoin... it's like they would walk with a bag full of money on their shoulders and don't care if they are going into the bad famed spot of the city.

[ShakyhandsBTCer]

at current block limit of 1mb per block.. there is a max monthly growth of ~4.4gb, with a current block fill of 10%-25%.

as it has been discussed, its not a problem.

for instance Call of duty has a larger data size then bitcoin, with its updates, patches and new versions every 18 months. call of duty need to solve their problems of data bloat and download times.... way before blockchain does

yet i do not see millions of shoot-em-up users complaining.

same goes for world of warcraft. and many other games.

this is not the 1990's where hard drives are a 32gb max limit, where internet is 64k.. we are in the age of fibre optic cable and where something smaller then a postage stamp can store more then games/bitcoins needs.

data storage and internet speed evolution is the solution

This may be true but bandwidth and storage is not free. The fact that it costs people money to provide a service to the network (keeping it secure) while not receiving anything in return (anything tangible) will always have the number of nodes depressed.

it costs $50 for call of duty, and >$300 for a console to play it and be part of the playstation/microsoft network. but they get nothing back in return..

hmmmmmmm how many consoles are there in the world which proves that people dont truly care

They receive entertainment while they are playing those games. 

[franky1]

They receive entertainment while they are playing those games.  

and anyone with bitcoins would/should have the entertainment of knowing that their bitcoins wont disappear with a webwallet owners lie of "we've been hacked" tweeted from his sunbed on a expensive resort.

because
1, their bitcoins are safe in a proper bitcoin wallet(node)
2. the node is also securing bitcoin to stop nasty protocol changes that can make bitcoins valueless

at a price far far cheaper then a game, and having that warm, safe, feeling for not only 6 hours pay-time. but for life.

but if you dont care about keeping bitcoin safe from protocol changes, possible hacks/insider webwallet thefts.. maybe you should donate all funds to seans outpost or to someone that does care about bitcoins.

its like complaining that bitcoins is expensive and not worth the hassle, maybe worth you going back to credit cards. storing gold has more hassle and alot more expense to trade/move/use. i think you need a little more time to soak in what bitcoin is truly about.

in short if 100,000 people held 1bitcoin ($600) each and i told you tomorrow that by not having nodes every bitcoin would b worth $0 wouldnt you and the other 99k start to realise that being a node at a small expense of maybe $20 memory stick to ensure bitcoin stayed at $600 was a good thing

[cinder]

At some point in the future, if the transactions do pick up by the masses, someone will probably need to optimize and clean out the data.

[nahtnam]

Yes I know this has been "discussed" a thousand times already, but still... the blockchain is growing by around 1GB per month.
This is probably (and hopefully) going to grow exponentially as the number of transactions is quite directly connected with the number of users.
I don't even want to think when Bitcoin will enter Wall Street...

A lot of people use online wallets, and I think newbies will also use online wallets.

But many people immediately give up with Bitcoin though, when they see their Wallet client is taking ages to sync, but also hard disk space consumption is becoming annoyingly heavy.
This puts Bitcoin on track for investors etc, but puts off track common people that would like to enter the currency.

I think there are wallets that only download part of the blockchain. Also, I just leave the wallet syncing at night, and its usually done by the time I wake up.

So, if this has been discussed a thousand times, what where the "conclusions", and if the case, why no solution has been taken yet?

I think there are wallets that download only part of the blockchain, and ofcourse there are online wallets.

I am using Electrum at the moment and find it very comfortable.
The problem of course is security.
I also can't understand how I can trust the developers of it, how can I know they don't know my passwords and security passphrase, but at the moment, seeing my funds are very low, it's ok.

You can check the source: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum