Bitcoin stories via Google News

Bitcoin stories via Reddit r/btc




  • 0conf Insurance: A Revolutionary New Paradigm
    by /u/Rizzmond on December 9, 2018 at 5:56 pm

    Long time lurker and BCH supporter here. I am coming out of the shadows to present what I think to be a revolutionary take on 0conf security. This is not an in-depth technical analysis but merely a general system overview. I hope people will take the time to examine this and pick it apart; I am rather confident it will hold up to scrutiny but we shall see! The current problem with 0conf: As it currently stands, 0conf is quite secure if all the miners are assumed to be honest. If a wallet waits 6.29 seconds and receives 37 transaction announcements it has a %99.922 chance of detecting a double spend (https://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/file/848064fa2e80f88a57aef43d7d5956c6/P2P2013_093.pdf).However, the double spend chance starts increasing dramatically when a miner colludes with the double spender. In addition, there is no penalty to attempting a double spend (you could argue the transaction fees are a penalty but they are negligible at best). Currently Proposed Solutions to Improve 0conf Security: Awemany's 0conf solution is based around a forfeit penalty (https://www.yours.org/content/awemany%E2%80%99s-0-conf-solution-05c960d3d60e).The proposal requires the sender of the transaction to put forth a security deposit with their zero conf transaction. This security deposit can be claimed by a miner if the sender's public address is used twice.This system, while a significant improvement over current 0conf security, has some significant drawbacks: The transaction receiver (the merchant) does not get reimbursed, they have no direct protection. The security deposit must be bigger than the transaction to provide a proper disincentive. If a miner is colluding with the double spender the security deposit has to be enlarged in proportion to the miner's hash share to provide a proper disincentive since any miner can claim the forfeit. A 33% miner colluding would require the security deposit to be at least twice the size of the transaction to still provide a disincentive (it might even be worse than this if the colluding miner has an advantage claiming the deposit compared to other miners) ABC has also announced something called “preconsensus”, but there is practically no information on what that exactly is. 0conf Insurance: A New Paradigm There is not really a solution to this rather intractable problem of confirming something that hasn't been confirmed. Like Awemany's ZCF proposal, the 0conf insurance model relies on disincentive to prevent double spending. However, unlike the ZCF proposal, the insurance model provides strong guarantees that the transaction receiver (the merchant) will be reimbursed, requires the consumer to only have the transaction value on hand, and is not nearly as susceptible to miner collusion.The basis of the insurance system is a contract between the miners and the merchant. The miners in effect become the insurers for 0conf transactions and will reimburse merchants for double spends. In addition, the penalty for a miner colluding with the double spender is severe enough to stop practically any double spend attempt. Here is how it works: When miners mine a block they are given the coinbase reward, transaction fees, and insurance fees (more on that later). Instead of being able to be move them immediately, they are delayed 200 blocks (henceforth known as the miner's “stockpile”). This stockpile is used as the basis for miners to provide insurance with the following steps: the transaction receiver sends a request to the producers of the 100 last blocks (from where the receiver thinks the current block height is). It specifies the transaction amount that the receiver wants to insure and what block height range it should be in the producers send the transaction receiver a signed message indicating they are interested if producers for at least 80 of those last 100 blocks reply that they are interested, the transaction receiver creates a contract based on its previously sent message (transaction info and block height range target) that is only valid when signed by all of the block producers specified in the contract the transaction receiver sends this contract out to be signed by the interested producers if all of the interested producers specified in the contract sign the contract, the transaction receiver accepts the transaction by sending a fee to all those who signed (1% of the insured value split up between specified producers) if the transaction does not make it into the next 5 blocks and all the fees made it into the next 2 blocks, the receiver can create a new transaction using the contract which fulfills the insurance guarantee with coin from the insurers' delayed coinbase and transaction fee stockpile ​ Using this scheme, the receiver has his transaction insured by ~80% of the total network hashrate. In practice, step 6 will never actually happen. Since 80% of the hashrate is incentivised they can readily orphan the double spend block while resting assured that at least 80% of the network is doing the same thing. The (possibly) colluding 20% miner has its block orphaned and he loses the coinbase reward and transaction fees. Let's actually describe a scenario. ​ Receiver sees a current block height of 50000. Of the blocks 49901 to 50000: Miner A has mined 13 Miner B has mined 35 Miner C has mined 5 Miner D has mined 32 Miner E has mined 15 The merchant receives a request from a consumer for a 0conf transaction totaling 10000 sats The merchant sends a message to miners A-E asking for insurance for a 10000 sat transaction from the sender to the merchant that should appear somewhere between block height 50001-50005 Miners B,D, and E sign a message indicating they are interested in the policy and send it to the merchant The merchant creates a contract specifying the value (10000 sats), the source and destination (consumer address and merchant address), the miners signatures required (B,D and E), the division of the insurance fee (based on the # of blocks the miner created in the 49901-50000 range) and the block height range (50001-50005). This contract can only be used if miners B,D, and E sign the contract AND all the insurance fees transactions are in the 50001-50002 range. The merchant sends out miners B, D and E for signing Miners B, D, and E verify that the required miner signatures do in fact match 80% of the blocks from range 49901-50000 and the consumer does have 10000 sats in his address (as of block 50000). They then sign the contract and send it back to the merchant. The merchant verifies the miners signatures and then sends out the fees as specified in the contract: 43 sats to miner B, 39 sats to miner D, 18 sats to miner E. The merchant accepts the transaction from the consumer The consumer attempts to double spend the transaction while colluding with miners A&C The colluding miners (A and C) successfully mine block 50001 with the double spend before the honest miners (B,D and E) can What happens if the honest miners respond: -Upon receiving the block(s) containing the double spend and the insurance fees, the honest miners (B,D and E) orphan the block containing the double spend (and any others that have been built on top of it) and continue trying to make the block with the transaction they insured. -Since the insurers control a vast majority of the hashrate, their chain is quickly able to outpace the chain created by the colluding miners (A&C) and the Nakamoto consensus eliminates it. What happens if the honest miners don't respond: -The double spend block is accepted by the network in block 50001 -The insurance fees are successfully confirmed in blocks 50001-50002 -When the merchant see the current block height is 50005 and the contract has not been fulfilled, he submits his contract to the network and claims his insurance payout from honest miners' stockpiles (3500 from B,3200 from D, and 1500 from E). ​ To sum it up, this incentivizes the insuring miners to act like mercenaries for the consumer, actively attacking any miner collusion. ​ Advantages: -The merchant's transaction is effectively fully insured unless the miners have to reimburse an amount greater than their stockpile. The reimbursement is highly unlikely ever to happen though, because the honest 80% is actively orphaning the colluding blocks. -Miners will love this model as it creates a whole new (potentially huge) revenue stream. This will attract hashrate to BCH not just based on the coinbase reward and # of transactions (transaction fees), but also based on 0conf transaction value -The consumer does not need to put any security deposit forward -It is extremely fast. Messages need to be sent back and forth between the miners and merchant twice, so assuming at most 500ms of transit time we can assert the merchant should accept the transaction within 2seconds + processing time Disadvantages: -This requires protocol changes -Historical hashrate (last 100 blocks) may not accurately reflect hashrate working on the next block (added risk for the insuring miners) ​ I eagerly await comment and criticism! submitted by /u/Rizzmond [link] [comments […]

  • Beyond the basic rules for surviving your time in the cryptosphere; trying to navigate your way through the thousands of coins by individuals, groups, companies,
    by /u/AnnualImagination on December 9, 2018 at 5:39 pm

    submitted by /u/AnnualImagination [link] [comments […]

  • Why isn't Coinex splitting my coins?
    by /u/cschauerj on December 9, 2018 at 5:35 pm

    I did this manually with most of my stash using Electron.cash. I swept in a few other random pre-fork paper wallets and the same process on Electron did not work this time around. So I decided to let Coinex do the work for me. I transferred in the coins expecting the SV to be recognized and it is not. In the meantime their customer support is super slow. I want to get this sorted out so I can dump the rest of the SV garbage before the artificial price hike is gone. submitted by /u/cschauerj [link] [comments […]

  • Is the End Of the Bitcoin Bear Market near? Let's explore here. Also discussed, the reducing Network Hashrate and Difficulty
    by /u/gameragelive on December 9, 2018 at 5:22 pm

    submitted by /u/gameragelive [link] [comments […]

  • Started mining BCH today 🙂 feels great
    by /u/fulltrottel on December 9, 2018 at 5:15 pm

    submitted by /u/fulltrottel [link] [comments […]

  • BCH Trading is starting on Monday the 10th of December at 1PM on the GEMINI Exchange. Its a nice exchange and will help with cross country payments.
    by /u/frozen124 on December 9, 2018 at 4:53 pm

    submitted by /u/frozen124 [link] [comments […]

  • Text-Enabled BCH Payments Now Available in 35 Countries With Cointext
    by /u/Bitcoinmathers on December 9, 2018 at 4:35 pm

    submitted by /u/Bitcoinmathers [link] [comments […]

  • Unfortunately, no updates on Free Society. I was hoping to hear something about it since it's one of my favorite projects announced in 2017. I wonder if the massive price drop made people pull out capital.
    by /u/Uncryptic0 on December 9, 2018 at 4:28 pm

    submitted by /u/Uncryptic0 [link] [comments […]

  • why does bitinfocharts claim bch total supply is 28.7 million coins?
    by /u/jerseyjayfro on December 9, 2018 at 3:30 pm

    are they doing something weird with including the sv coins in bch supply? https://bitinfocharts.com/bitcoin%20cash/ submitted by /u/jerseyjayfro [link] [comments […]

  • Irrational behavior is the hallmark of ulterior motives.
    by /u/thorvszeus on December 9, 2018 at 3:04 pm

    submitted by /u/thorvszeus [link] [comments […]

  • Merry Bitmas Edition! Spreading Bitcoin Cash Just Became Easier + Roger Ver's Reveals Fight Ambition
    by /u/crypto_advocate on December 9, 2018 at 2:54 pm

    submitted by /u/crypto_advocate [link] [comments […]

  • Is anyone able to verify BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2 signatures?
    by /u/GuessWhat_InTheButt on December 9, 2018 at 2:28 pm

    Taken from here: https://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/download Adress: bitcoincash:qrdvmdluf2s5cf08wcp9h2ja8lqt5peq35y56z4s7s Message: { 'files': { 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-arm32.tar.gz': '60ca19f6a54e8b38f461d377e6b7b423256b97ffb1611c7509bf5221d2dc9d20', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-arm64.tar.gz': '5fb54257d34eea6d87d37c8ad22822d4ea73341257d6e8c6e82898f3b9f7a233', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-linux32.tar.gz': '15b45d081d82c357cda02e3bbf1c546a347a18f7ac8bb8f368989b90f5ba0ab2', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-linux64.tar.gz': 'e22f284b1dc066376cc727a34f22809ec926e2e80e7ea02658c7a6aaf3a78714', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-osx.dmg': 'ec405696e25ef904d7aaf07c032dd6a3c52b04aef8f6b2742be5c0ff4dd20a88', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-osx.tar.gz': '6d7ecbf7e140f8144b159a85bd6b7e17a84b7aca376b1428867d5ef085cbdf4a', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-osx64.tar.gz': 'efb88b1b167e6e8bd5fe28ef3f5919b7443db4614722134c047ee20c0583686a', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-win32-setup.exe': '405792994ea8b8fe50a6e2f21bec2ebe12220b5c0efec73f509d1868f57cfda8', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-win32.zip': '7d8707f92424cf56f1e05701524746cd49bcf25897303286ef934427503383e7', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-win64-setup.exe': '1b6807116856bccae6b3c8c3179a036455ebf4d52ff4026b57285a3cda271109', 'BUcash-1.5.1.0rc2-win64.zip': '049772150461190f60aee0b1da0a397ee05fa68e4b1e305f3de483b71cb317dc'}, 'program': 'Bitcoin Unlimited Cash', 'version': '1.5.1.0rc2'} Signature: HMyHmSRc+3hyRP6jmts5VkaCh0JaBKN7qa1FqiM6yQ4hUPN2AA5NxQdw72Uk+GeMMRmvfaV7RAMS9Mt1O1lQLf8= Entering this in BUcash 1.5.0.1 gives me a "Message verification failed" message. submitted by /u/GuessWhat_InTheButt [link] [comments […]

  • SV is Pro governments because they want to sell Bitcoin to Banks, Govts, and Businesses. Thus the patents.
    by /u/BitttBurger on December 9, 2018 at 2:19 pm

    The whole pro-government bullshit is so Calvin can make bitcoin seem “safe“ for businesses and banks to participate in. They own patents because they plan to sell layer two services and get rich. This is all about them getting money. This whole thing. And his followers don’t even realize it. If you’re not seeing how this is playing out and where they’re going by now, it’s time to wake up. They’re literally doing a Blockstream business model with Layer two products and services. submitted by /u/BitttBurger [link] [comments […]

  • BSv (it really isn't Satoshi's Vision): TWO scammers actively destroying everything the white paper stands for while spewing bullshit claiming the opposite in order to acquire wealth. That's all it is.
    by /u/ChaosElephant on December 9, 2018 at 1:19 pm

    submitted by /u/ChaosElephant [link] [comments […]

  • The consequences of being antagonistic
    by /u/pyalot on December 9, 2018 at 1:06 pm

    I am perhaps not the best person to write about the consequences of antagonism, but even I cannot escape some interesting observations. BSV proponents (chief among them CSW and Calvin) have the habit of being antagonistic to everybody. To pick one example, Watch us double spend and reorg exchanges -- CSW about exchanges that don't support SV, Aug. 29th On Nov. 15th his chain splits off, and is being mined at a substantial loss by... somebody who's got a lot of money to spend. Estimates put it that he controls between 70-90% of the hashpower on SV. The consequence: Exchanges have been somewhat reluctant to list BSV. Those that did list it eventually have taken pragmatic measures to protect themselves, such as requiring between 30-60 confirmations for a BSV deposit while it is between 3-10 for BTC or BCH. Some exchanges that apply more strict verification of what instruments they list and put each trough a lengthy evaluation phase (such as gemini or coinbase) have not listed BSV at all and probably will not list it for a long time if ever. The lesson: A cryptocurrency does not exist in a vacuum. There is an existing community of businesses, developers and users and there is a lot of competition. Antagonizing a large part of that community (exchanges) with threats of losses/fraud is not doing your cryptocurrency any favors. Unfortunately this lesson is entirely lost on Calvin: Unnamed co-conspirator exchanges and payment processors need to seek legal advice as all details on this manipulation come out in discovery. The only way to limit liability now is to reduce damages by delisting illegal ABC and having BSV be fully functional as BCH. -- Calvin Ayre, Dec. 8th Somehow Calvin still believes that since antagonizing didn't work in the first place to get his cryptocurrency preferential treatment, more antagonizing (this time with threats of lawsuits) will now solve the problem... Calvin, lots of money is no substitute for common sense and good relationships with the community that you depend on. You should know that. Apparently you want the support of the community. But you're surprised that community is unwilling to do you any favors when you're being nasty to them. I find this a frankly baffling and inexplicable behavior in a businessman. submitted by /u/pyalot [link] [comments […]

  • BTC.com BSV extraction tool not working.
    by /u/SukiKrieg on December 9, 2018 at 12:56 pm

    Having problems with the extraction tool. I have 3 separate wallets. The two smaller ones worked just fine. The larger one I had run multiple times even going as far as searching 24000 addresses and it's still coming up zero. I opened a help ticket yesterday but I'd like to get access to them as soon as possible because of market conditions. Don't want to move the balance out of the wallet. Any suggestions or tricks anyone is aware of? submitted by /u/SukiKrieg [link] [comments […]

  • Awwe, they turned off the shills...
    by /u/BCH-Withdrawal-Prob on December 9, 2018 at 12:33 pm

    It's going to be so boring :(. submitted by /u/BCH-Withdrawal-Prob [link] [comments […]

  • Meanwhile in Tokyo
    by /u/MemoryDealers on December 9, 2018 at 11:29 am

    submitted by /u/MemoryDealers [link] [comments […]

  • [Delusion of the day] Shaming BSV for their actions before and after losing the hashwar they started... is now like shaming victims of rape 🤔
    by /u/SouperNerd on December 9, 2018 at 9:51 am

    submitted by /u/SouperNerd [link] [comments […]

  • One year since I first bought BTC
    by /u/Acroneon on December 9, 2018 at 8:38 am

    I am so thankful to the lesson crypto have me for my life. It teached me that I am too stupid to understand bubbles cheap asian pasta tastes better when it is eaten with closed eyes tap water is very nice when you are thirsty Money is not the most important thing in the world but health and family are If you are poor, sick and lonely, just watch Carlos Matos the whole day submitted by /u/Acroneon [link] [comments […]

  • Simple Ledger Developers Publish Monthly Puzzle With Bitcoin Cash Treasure - Bitcoin News
    by /u/newsybitcoin on December 9, 2018 at 6:53 am

    submitted by /u/newsybitcoin [link] [comments […]

  • Bitcoin Unlimited FTW!!
    by /u/phonetwophone on December 9, 2018 at 6:50 am

    Bitcoin Unlimited has understood these bottlenecks and worked around them already, and the latest release of BU running on high-end hardware can now admit thousands of transactions per second into mempool. This is possible because we made changes to the code, and we will continue to make changes to the code because these are necessary to scale Bitcoin to a global p2p ecash system. If you think that you can grow Bitcoin without continued changes to the codebase, then you are clueless about how tech. development works. https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/a4hn1q/the_bu_boys_are_bad_ass_imo/ebesoj1/ submitted by /u/phonetwophone [link] [comments […]

  • In the entire history of Craig/nChain’s involvement in crypto how many times have they said something is coming, and how many times has that thing subsequently happened?
    by /u/MemoryDealers on December 9, 2018 at 1:08 am

    submitted by /u/MemoryDealers [link] [comments […]

  • July 2013 was the last time you could buy bitcoin for 100 USD
    by /u/zeptochain on December 8, 2018 at 9:04 pm

    Just sayin' submitted by /u/zeptochain [link] [comments […]

  • Florida Man Strikes Again, Asks Judge To Reverse Bitcoin Cash Fork
    by /u/trampabroad on December 8, 2018 at 8:53 pm

    submitted by /u/trampabroad [link] [comments […]

  • Frequently Asked Questions and Information Thread
    by /u/BitcoinXio on October 4, 2018 at 8:23 pm

    This FAQ and information thread serves to inform both new and existing users about common Bitcoin topics that readers coming to this Bitcoin subreddit may have. This is a living and breathing document, which will change over time. If you have suggestions on how to change it, please comment below or message the mods. What is /r/btc? The /r/btc reddit community was originally created as a community to discuss bitcoin. It quickly gained momentum in August 2015 when the bitcoin block size debate heightened. On the legacy /r/bitcoin subreddit it was discovered that moderators were heavily censoring discussions that were not inline with their own opinions. Once realized, the subreddit subscribers began to openly question the censorship which led to thousands of redditors being banned from the /r/bitcoin subreddit. A large number of redditors switched to other subreddits such as /r/bitcoin_uncensored and /r/btc. For a run-down on the history of censorship, please read A (brief and incomplete) history of censorship in /r/bitcoin by John Blocke and /r/Bitcoin Censorship, Revisted by John Blocke. As yet another example, /r/bitcoin censored 5,683 posts and comments just in the month of September 2017 alone. This shows the sheer magnitude of censorship that is happening, which continues to this day. Read a synopsis of /r/bitcoin to get the full story and a complete understanding of why people are so upset with /r/bitcoin's censorship. Further reading can be found here with a giant collection of information regarding these topics. Why is censorship bad for Bitcoin? As demonstrated above, censorship has become prevalent in almost all of the major Bitcoin communication channels. The impacts of censorship in Bitcoin are very real. "Censorship can really hinder a society if it is bad enough. Because media is such a large part of people’s lives today and it is the source of basically all information, if the information is not being given in full or truthfully then the society is left uneducated [...] Censorship is probably the number one way to lower people’s right to freedom of speech." By censoring certain topics and specific words, people in these Bitcoin communication channels are literally being brain washed into thinking a certain way, molding the reader in a way that they desire; this has a lasting impact especially on users who are new to Bitcoin. Censoring in Bitcoin is the direct opposite of what the spirit of Bitcoin is, and should be condemned anytime it occurs. Also, it's important to think critically and independently, and have an open mind. What is the goal of /r/btc? This subreddit is a diverse community dedicated to the success of bitcoin. /r/btc honors the spirit and nature of Bitcoin being a place for open and free discussion about Bitcoin without the interference of moderators. Subscribers at anytime can look at and review the public moderator logs. This subreddit does have rules as mandated by reddit that we must follow plus a couple of rules of our own. Make sure to read the /r/btc wiki for more information and resources about this subreddit which includes information such as the benefits of Bitcoin, how to get started with Bitcoin, and more. What is Bitcoin? Bitcoin is a digital currency, also called a virtual currency, which can be transacted for a low-cost nearly instantly from anywhere in the world. Bitcoin also powers the blockchain, which is a public immutable and decentralized global ledger. Unlike traditional currencies such as dollars, bitcoins are issued and managed without the need for any central authority whatsoever. There is no government, company, or bank in charge of Bitcoin. As such, it is more resistant to wild inflation and corrupt banks. With Bitcoin, you can be your own bank. Read the Bitcoin whitepaper to further understand the schematics of how Bitcoin works. What is Bitcoin Cash? Bitcoin Cash (ticker symbol: BCH) is an updated version of Bitcoin which solves the scaling problems that have been plaguing Bitcoin Core (ticker symbol: BTC) for years. Bitcoin (BCH) is just a continuation of the Bitcoin project that allows for bigger blocks which will give way to more growth and adoption. You can read more about Bitcoin on BitcoinCash.org or read What is Bitcoin Cash for additional details. How do I buy Bitcoin? You can buy Bitcoin on an exchange or with a brokerage. If you're looking to buy, you can buy Bitcoin with your credit card to get started quickly and safely. There are several others places to buy Bitcoin too; please check the sidebar under brokers, exchanges, and trading for other go-to service providers to begin buying and trading Bitcoin. Make sure to do your homework first before choosing an exchange to ensure you are choosing the right one for you. How do I store my Bitcoin securely? After the initial step of buying your first Bitcoin, you will need a Bitcoin wallet to secure your Bitcoin. Knowing which Bitcoin wallet to choose is the second most important step in becoming a Bitcoin user. Since you are investing funds into Bitcoin, choosing the right Bitcoin wallet for you is a critical step that shouldn’t be taken lightly. Use this guide to help you choose the right wallet for you. Check the sidebar under Bitcoin wallets to get started and find a wallet that you can store your Bitcoin in. Why is my transaction taking so long to process? Bitcoin transactions typically confirm in ~10 minutes. A confirmation means that the Bitcoin transaction has been verified by the network through the process known as mining. Once a transaction is confirmed, it cannot be reversed or double spent. Transactions are included in blocks. If you have sent out a Bitcoin transaction and it’s delayed, chances are the fee you used wasn’t enough to out-compete others causing it to be backlogged. The transaction won’t confirm until it clears the backlog. This typically occurs when using the Bitcoin Core (BTC) blockchain due to poor central planning. If you are using Bitcoin (BCH), you shouldn't encounter these problems as the block limits have been raised to accommodate a massive amount of volume freeing up space and lowering transaction costs. Why does my transaction cost so much, I thought Bitcoin was supposed to be cheap? As described above, transaction fees have spiked on the Bitcoin Core (BTC) blockchain mainly due to a limit on transaction space. This has created what is called a fee market, which has primarily been a premature artificially induced price increase on transaction fees due to the limited amount of block space available (supply vs. demand). The original plan was for fees to help secure the network when the block reward decreased and eventually stopped, but the plan was not to reach that point until some time in the future, around the year 2140. This original plan was restored with Bitcoin (BCH) where fees are typically less than a single penny per transaction. What is the block size limit? The original Bitcoin client didn’t have a block size cap, however was limited to 32MB due to the Bitcoin protocol message size constraint. However, in July 2010 Bitcoin’s creator Satoshi Nakamoto introduced a temporary 1MB limit as an anti-DDoS measure. The temporary measure from Satoshi Nakamoto was made clear three months later when Satoshi said the block size limit can be increased again by phasing it in when it’s needed (when the demand arises). When introducing Bitcoin on the cryptography mailing list in 2008, Satoshi said that scaling to Visa levels “would probably not seem like a big deal.” What is the block size debate all about anyways? The block size debate boils down to different sets of users who are trying to come to consensus on the best way to scale Bitcoin for growth and success. Scaling Bitcoin has actually been a topic of discussion since Bitcoin was first released in 2008; for example you can read how Satoshi Nakamoto was asked about scaling here and how he thought at the time it would be addressed. Fortunately Bitcoin has seen tremendous growth and by the year 2013, scaling Bitcoin had became a hot topic. For a run down on the history of scaling and how we got to where we are today, see the Block size limit debate history lesson post. What is a hard fork? A hard fork is when a block is broadcast under a new and different set of protocol rules which is accepted by nodes that have upgraded to support the new protocol. In this case, Bitcoin diverges from a single blockchain to two separate blockchains (a majority chain and a minority chain). What is a soft fork? A soft fork is when a block is broadcast under a new and different set of protocol rules, but the difference is that nodes don’t realize the rules have changed, and continue to accept blocks created by the newer nodes. Some argue that soft forks are bad because they trick old-unupdated nodes into believing transactions are valid, when they may not actually be valid. This can also be defined as coercion, as explained by Vitalik Buterin. Doesn't it hurt decentralization if we increase the block size? Some argue that by lifting the limit on transaction space, that the cost of validating transactions on individual nodes will increase to the point where people will not be able to run nodes individually, giving way to centralization. This is a false dilemma because at this time there is no proven metric to quantify decentralization; although it has been shown that the current level of decentralization will remain with or without a block size increase. It's a logical fallacy to believe that decentralization only exists when you have people all over the world running full nodes. The reality is that only people with the income to sustain running a full node (even at 1MB) will be doing it. So whether it's 1MB, 2MB, or 32MB, the costs of doing business is negligible for the people who can already do it. If the block size limit is removed, this will also allow for more users worldwide to use and transact introducing the likelihood of having more individual node operators. Decentralization is not a metric, it's a tool or direction. This is a good video describing the direction of how decentralization should look. Additionally, the effects of increasing the block capacity beyond 1MB has been studied with results showing that up to 4MB is safe and will not hurt decentralization (Cornell paper, PDF). Other papers also show that no block size limit is safe (Peter Rizun, PDF). Lastly, through an informal survey among all top Bitcoin miners, many agreed that a block size increase between 2-4MB is acceptable. What now? Bitcoin is a fluid ever changing system. If you want to keep up with Bitcoin, we suggest that you subscribe to /r/btc and stay in the loop here, as well as other places to get a healthy dose of perspective from different sources. Also, check the sidebar for additional resources. Have more questions? Submit a post and ask your peers for help! submitted by /u/BitcoinXio [link] [comments […]

 

Cryptocurrency stories via Google News




 

Ethereum stories via Google News




Ripple stories via Google News