Topic: [ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything (decentralized blockexplorer coming) - page 99. (Read 790391 times)
September 24, 2016, 01:43:46 PM
any updates? *giggity*
September 23, 2016, 01:31:36 PM
Finally a dev who understands decentralisation. 
Now I can't wait for the new wallet.
I'll see if I can make a small donation in a few days.
-sf-
Now I can't wait for the new wallet.
I'll see if I can make a small donation in a few days.
-sf-
September 23, 2016, 01:17:01 PM
But in reality, falling numbers of full nodes with 8 connections serving an ever increase in users creates its own network skews (as devs graphics demonstrate).
The point to take away from all this is that you will help the bitcoin network much more by adding an IP (with a computer sitting behind it serving 24/7) than you will by adding lots of connections.
The amount of connections you add to the network is irrelevant (to a degree) and might even hurt decentralization (at some point).
We could have just 1 big bank set up 10 high powered servers that can have 1 million connections each, and customers will get "served" well, but that's not what bitcoin is all about.
Bitcoin is about decentralization first.
September 23, 2016, 01:04:10 PM
Do you monitor your bandwidth use at all?
At 90GiB your node would probably use around 1TB to 1.5TB each month?
The bandwidth use should directly relate to the amount of simultaneous connections your node has.
People who run a node on a server with >100 connections will use a lot of bandwidth.
I run my bitcoin node on a raspberry pi, which has just 8 connections to the outside world IIRC.
I haven't monitored my bandwidth, but I doubt it's much more than 1 GB a day (up/down added together).
-sf-
Good point. Devs posts too are excellent clarifications on that same point (cool graphics, btw)
It will be interesting to monitor bandwidth against 8 connections? Something everyone should aim to replicate as a minimum.
But in reality, falling numbers of full nodes with 8 connections serving an ever increase in users creates its own network skews (as devs graphics demonstrate).
September 23, 2016, 12:35:07 PM
Pieter Wuille had a beautiful comment about this in this thread here:
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8109/how-does-one-attain-1-000-connections-like-blockchain-info
Yep, many full node operators are way too "connection-happy" and then they complain about high bandwidth costs, LMAO!
It's another display of human greed gone wrong and the negative unwanted effects this can have.
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/8109/how-does-one-attain-1-000-connections-like-blockchain-info
Yep, many full node operators are way too "connection-happy" and then they complain about high bandwidth costs, LMAO!
It's another display of human greed gone wrong and the negative unwanted effects this can have.
September 23, 2016, 12:14:28 PM
Let's visualize a "sea of raspberry pi nodes" (and desktop nodes run @ home) that just keep a minimum amount of connections to a few random nodes:
Ofcourse spatial proximity doesn't make sense in this visualization, but you get the idea, this is what beautiful decentralization looks like.
...
And here we have the same situation, but with 2 full nodes that open as many connections as possible:
That doesn't look very decentralized to me.
Not only is this much more centralized, but those 2 nodes also occupy way too many open ports of the smaller nodes.
Now, I do understand that a bitcoin MINER wants his new found block to be propagated to the rest of the network as fast as possible, this is a very good reason to run a node with that many connections.
Payment processors probably want to know as much about the network as possible too. (especially if they allow for zero confirmation payments)
And then there are actors who want to snoop on your activities and privacy.
I think the way to fight this is with a large amount of tiny full nodes, and that's why I want to make the implementation of raspberry pi's as easy as possible.
Awesome... you will love the new wallet.
Ofcourse spatial proximity doesn't make sense in this visualization, but you get the idea, this is what beautiful decentralization looks like.
...
And here we have the same situation, but with 2 full nodes that open as many connections as possible:
That doesn't look very decentralized to me.
Not only is this much more centralized, but those 2 nodes also occupy way too many open ports of the smaller nodes.
Now, I do understand that a bitcoin MINER wants his new found block to be propagated to the rest of the network as fast as possible, this is a very good reason to run a node with that many connections.
Payment processors probably want to know as much about the network as possible too. (especially if they allow for zero confirmation payments)
And then there are actors who want to snoop on your activities and privacy.
I think the way to fight this is with a large amount of tiny full nodes, and that's why I want to make the implementation of raspberry pi's as easy as possible.
I run my bitcoin node on a raspberry pi, ...
Awesome... you will love the new wallet.
September 23, 2016, 11:21:42 AM
The bandwidth traffic should directly relate to the amount of simultaneous connections your node has.
People who run a node on a server with >100 connections will use a lot of bandwidth.
Good point.
I've seen a few people report the rather problematic bandwidth usage of full nodes, and while they post all kinds of graphs and reports,
they always ommit to tell you how many connections the node has open on average.
Of course, when your full node has 150 connections, you will have to "pay the price for this" so to speak.
Also, from a decentralization standpoint, it is much better (and cheaper) to have 10000 guys run a raspberry node than a full server.
Wait... let me visualize this....
September 23, 2016, 11:08:21 AM
Do you monitor your bandwidth use at all?
At 90GiB your node would probably use around 1TB to 1.5TB each month?
The bandwidth use should directly relate to the amount of simultaneous connections your node has.
People who run a node on a server with >100 connections will use a lot of bandwidth.
I run my bitcoin node on a raspberry pi, which has just 8 connections to the outside world IIRC.
I haven't monitored my bandwidth, but I doubt it's much more than 1 GB a day (up/down added together).
-sf-
September 23, 2016, 04:08:38 AM
My Bitcoin full node shows 90.7 Gbyte.
(97'475'363''817 bytes)
-sf-
(97'475'363''817 bytes)
-sf-
Do you monitor your bandwidth use at all?
At 90GiB your node would probably use around 1TB to 1.5TB each month?
September 22, 2016, 05:23:01 PM
My Bitcoin full node shows 90.7 Gbyte.
(97'475'363''817 bytes)
-sf-
(97'475'363''817 bytes)
-sf-
September 22, 2016, 02:15:31 PM
People are starting to complain about the size of the Bitcoin blockchain
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/53xsgz/bitcoin_core_taking_up_97_gigabytes_on_my_hard/
It seems that Spreadcoin will indeed be solving a problem that is just now beginning to rise to the surface. Great concept Georgem, well done.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/53xsgz/bitcoin_core_taking_up_97_gigabytes_on_my_hard/
It seems that Spreadcoin will indeed be solving a problem that is just now beginning to rise to the surface. Great concept Georgem, well done.
September 22, 2016, 03:55:42 AM
You got me interested. The new proposed wallet looks and sounds very promising.
But yeah, It takes a flat brain to believe in flat earth...
I already like you!
Welcome
Also, we do have another forum specifically for SpreadCoin here: http://spreadcointalk.org/
So feel free to check that out.
Even though I like that one better, I try to post in both to keep this one active as it does draw attention from a larger audience.
Thank you very much.
I don't have much time right now to visit multiple forums regularly, but I will consider it in the future.
I saw Spreadcoin mentioned in the trezor thread. I am very interested to see how it will be supported in the new wallet. (I own a trezor)
-sf-
September 21, 2016, 05:51:38 PM
You got me interested. The new proposed wallet looks and sounds very promising.
But yeah, It takes a flat brain to believe in flat earth...
I already like you!
Welcome
Also, we do have another forum specifically for SpreadCoin here: http://spreadcointalk.org/
So feel free to check that out.
Even though I like that one better, I try to post in both to keep this one active as it does draw attention from a larger audience.
September 21, 2016, 04:36:58 PM
You got me interested. The new proposed wallet looks and sounds very promising.
-sf-
-sf-
September 20, 2016, 01:17:39 PM
Just dropping some small knowledge, ...
The Spreadwallet will come with 2FA, but it will only support hardware 2FA solutions:
So this means, either a TREZOR, or any encryptable USB drive, like the 2 examples that you see in the pic (each costing around 25$).
The TREZOR gives the highest security, since the private keys never leave the device. (The wallet only asks the TREZOR to sign transactions)
The encrypted USB devices give a smaller amount of security, since you can only decide at what time the private keys are visible to the wallet. It's better than nothing.
No, I don't plan on supporting any third party centralized 2FA solution (like google, etc anything that runs on a cloud/server)... those don't have any place in a decentralized wallet.
Stay tuned for more news...
The Spreadwallet will come with 2FA, but it will only support hardware 2FA solutions:
So this means, either a TREZOR, or any encryptable USB drive, like the 2 examples that you see in the pic (each costing around 25$).
The TREZOR gives the highest security, since the private keys never leave the device. (The wallet only asks the TREZOR to sign transactions)
The encrypted USB devices give a smaller amount of security, since you can only decide at what time the private keys are visible to the wallet. It's better than nothing.
No, I don't plan on supporting any third party centralized 2FA solution (like google, etc anything that runs on a cloud/server)... those don't have any place in a decentralized wallet.
Stay tuned for more news...
September 19, 2016, 05:41:05 PM
After all the talk about VTR, I'm expecting big things from you when Georgem releases the Spreadwallet and SNs here.
September 19, 2016, 03:36:10 PM
Done.
September 19, 2016, 12:04:40 PM
Typical. Dumping to 6k and I'm working for 12 hours while it happens
Yea, I'm a bit annoyed that I didn't have any buys in. On the bright side there is far more liquidity to buy. I'll be picking up more next month
September 19, 2016, 11:38:49 AM
Typical. Dumping to 6k and I'm working for 12 hours while it happens
September 17, 2016, 04:33:56 PM
I wonder how many coins 1.8mh will generate? thx
Maybe around 600 spreadcoin per month. Might be a little less since the difficulty jumps higher now and then. Jump to: