Non-archival full nodes and archival ones reminds me of military. I don't how military is organized in your country but in my country it is as follows:
+ Regular troops (national level): the strongest, most competent, best equipped but biggest cost to maintain
+ Local troop (province level): less equipped, less competent. Acts as complimentary army when war happens
Why local troops when this country already has the strongest ones: regular troops?
+ Improve confidence at affordable cost
I do believe that non-archival nodes can act in the same way to "local troops".
Actually it is the Plan B that makes Bitcoin network more robust (decentralized) to some extent when the Plan A to increase archival nodes (like regular troops) requires huge amount of cost.
Theoretically, I don't know if non-archival full nodes and archival ones can work together to make 2-tier protection shield to Bitcoin network or not.
It looks like to me that Cryptonite network is actually composed of all non-archival full nodes. Cryptonite implementation has to remove features of programmable money/assets and some levels of security to solve blockchain bloat.
PS:
Some guys out there believe (not prove) that "withdrawal limit" doesn't bring security to the network. Is there any detailed document to explain how it works in decentralized manner?
Topic: [ANN][XCN] Cryptonite | 1st mini-blockchain coin | M7 PoW | No Premine - page 40. (Read 578501 times)
February 23, 2015, 04:38:44 AM
February 21, 2015, 03:50:07 PM
There is a possibility that autopruning will be included into 0.11. Then a Bitcoin full node may requires more or less than 1 Gb disk space
Even in such a scenario some nodes must hold the full Bitcoin blockchain. The Bitcoin wiki mentions this fact on the scalability page:Quote
Only a small number of archival nodes need to store the full chain going back to the genesis block. These nodes can be used to bootstrap new fully validating nodes from scratch but are otherwise unnecessary.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
The core issue here is that even if you prune your Bitcoin blockchain, you still need to download the full blockchain when you first join the network, and that will require "archival nodes" as the Bitcoin wiki calls them. The network is more centralized in such a scenario because a high amount of trust is placed on those few archival nodes to supply the correct blockchain history.
The clever thing about Cryptonite is that new nodes don't need to download the full blockchain, there is no need for archival nodes to bootstrap new nodes. This is essentially due to the fact that transactions aren't linked together with scripts, the inputs and outputs simply point to other addresses. Since the account tree provides a summary of all address balances everyone can forget about old transactions.
When a new node joins the Cryptonite network all it needs is the last 10k blocks, the header chain, and the account tree. New nodes don't need to download and process every transaction that ever occurred and then build a compressed list of unspent outputs like they do in Bitcoin because the account tree is a pre-processed balance sheet which is cryptographically linked to the block headers.
This video I made some time ago discusses this topic in more detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eb0sAmQD0Dk
February 21, 2015, 01:37:33 PM
There is a possibility that autopruning will be included into 0.11. Then a Bitcoin full node may requires more or less than 1 Gb disk space
February 20, 2015, 02:27:34 AM
Not true, as you can run Lite-wallets..which makes downloading the entire blockchain unnecessary. Also, as technology advanves, computers will be able to hold more and more info(RAM, memory), which also makes downloading a blockchain not as much space-consuming.
Yes I highly doubt Bitcoin will die due to a huge blockchain but it will become increasingly centralized because of it. Cryptonite enables more robust decentralization because the average joe doesn't have to spend days synchronizing with the network, it's much easier for people to setup full nodes and help make the network stronger. It also makes blockchain bloat less of a concern, the maximum block size can be higher if people don't need to download the full blockchain in order to become a full node. There is a huge debate happening right now in the Bitcoin community over whether the max block size should be raised to 20MB (requiring a hard-fork), and you'd be amazed how many people are against the idea because they think it will cause the blockchain to become too large too quickly. Cryptonite solves this problem by having a dynamic max block size which changes organically to accommodate the current rate of transactions, but since people only need the last 10k blocks to become a full node there is much less concern about blockchain bloat. 
February 19, 2015, 10:06:37 PM
The only difference is that Cryptonite has a smoothier decrease in the rewards. But after some years, the only subsidy will come from transaction fees.
If Cryptonite can guarantee that transaction fees will always equal or exceed the loss in block reward, it should be fine. Otherwise it's unnecessary and detrimental to reduce the block reward until the entire coinbase had been tapped. And as a casual user, I'd rather not pay fees until it's absolutely necessary.I remember Satoshi said in some post that in 20 years, Bitcoin will have a lot of volume or no volume at all.
Unless Bitcoin finds a way to shrink it's blockchain by at least 90%, it's going to have 0 volume in less than 5 years.Not true, as you can run Lite-wallets..which makes downloading the entire blockchain unnecessary. Also, as technology advanves, computers will be able to hold more and more info(RAM, memory), which also makes downloading a blockchain not as much space-consuming.
February 17, 2015, 10:52:48 PM
To secure the blockchain indefinitely, the block reward must never change. What's missing is a mechanism for deflation that, over time, seeks to match the rate of inflation. The simplest mechanism for deflation would be to remove old transactions that haven't been spent in a long time and add the coins back to the coinbase.
That is essentially what we plan to do when we implement account tree pruning. Although it's not a high priority because the account tree will remain small for a long time and the block reward will remain high for a very long time. On a side note it's also possible to burn/recycle coins by sending them back to the coinbase account. February 17, 2015, 05:10:45 PM
The coin is secured by the blockchain, the blockchain is secured by the miners, and the block reward secures the miner's honesty and produces new coins. But due to the hard limit on the coin supply and the lack of any mechanism for deflation, the block reward must be nerfed over time until it becomes nothing. Once the block reward drops to the point where it's no longer profitable to mine, a critical security component will be lost. Miners who formerly helped secure the network are likely to turn against it and use their vastly superior cpu power to compromise the blockchain. This is the major design flaw of Bitcoin and most altcoins.
To secure the blockchain indefinitely, the block reward must never change. What's missing is a mechanism for deflation that, over time, seeks to match the rate of inflation. The simplest mechanism for deflation would be to remove old transactions that haven't been spent in a long time and add the coins back to the coinbase. By incorporating expiration dates on all transactions and keeping the mining reward constant until the very block in which the coin supply hits the upper limit, Cryptonite could win the coin race simply by outlasting all others.
To secure the blockchain indefinitely, the block reward must never change. What's missing is a mechanism for deflation that, over time, seeks to match the rate of inflation. The simplest mechanism for deflation would be to remove old transactions that haven't been spent in a long time and add the coins back to the coinbase. By incorporating expiration dates on all transactions and keeping the mining reward constant until the very block in which the coin supply hits the upper limit, Cryptonite could win the coin race simply by outlasting all others.
Cryptonite isn't very different in this aspect. Like Bitcoin, it has a limited supply, see the OP. The only difference is that Cryptonite has a smoothier decrease in the rewards. But after some years, the only subsidy will come from transaction fees.
Anyway, there are some altcoins without limits in the supply.
I remember Satoshi said in some post that in 20 years, Bitcoin will have a lot of volume or no volume at all.
February 17, 2015, 06:47:12 AM
The coin is secured by the blockchain, the blockchain is secured by the miners, and the block reward is what secures the miner's honesty and produces new money (inflation). But because of the hard limit on the coin supply and no mechanism for deflation, the production mechanism (block reward) must be nerfed over time until it becomes nothing. Once the block reward drops to the point where it's no longer profitable to mine coin, a critical security component will be lost. Miners who formerly helped secure the network are likely to turn against it and use their vastly superior cpu power to compromise the blockchain. This is the major design flaw of Bitcoin and most altcoins.
To secure a coin indefinitely, the production mechanism must never be nerfed. Instead of placing a hard limit on the coin supply, it's better to make it elastic- to enable it to inflate and deflate according to it's level of use. Mining is the mechanism for inflation so the only thing missing is a mechanism for deflation. Deleting the oldest unused transactions from the blockchain would be an appropriate mechanism for deflation as well as for reducing the size of the blockchain, but it would mean the coins expire- "use it or lose it".
Cryptonite is the only coin I know of right now that has a limited blockchain but it still has a hard supply limit and no mechanism for deflation. By unlimiting the supply and incorporating a mechanism for deflation, Cryptonite could win the coin race simply by outlasting all others.
To secure a coin indefinitely, the production mechanism must never be nerfed. Instead of placing a hard limit on the coin supply, it's better to make it elastic- to enable it to inflate and deflate according to it's level of use. Mining is the mechanism for inflation so the only thing missing is a mechanism for deflation. Deleting the oldest unused transactions from the blockchain would be an appropriate mechanism for deflation as well as for reducing the size of the blockchain, but it would mean the coins expire- "use it or lose it".
Cryptonite is the only coin I know of right now that has a limited blockchain but it still has a hard supply limit and no mechanism for deflation. By unlimiting the supply and incorporating a mechanism for deflation, Cryptonite could win the coin race simply by outlasting all others.
Agree with every word!!
February 13, 2015, 09:34:24 AM
I was slacking around and I was thinking about trying this out. I noticed there are only an handful pools. Besides 1GH the others seem to be rather small... either everyone is solo mining this or I'm missing something.
Any news of an open AMD miner BTW? I think this is holding back.
People just prefer mining at 1GH for a few different reasons, it's already been discussed a few times. Any news of an open AMD miner BTW? I think this is holding back.
February 13, 2015, 01:32:44 AM
I was slacking around and I was thinking about trying this out. I noticed there are only an handful pools. Besides 1GH the others seem to be rather small... either everyone is solo mining this or I'm missing something.
Any news of an open AMD miner BTW? I think this is holding back.
People just prefer mining at 1GH for a few different reasons, it's already been discussed a few times. And no news that I know of. Any news of an open AMD miner BTW? I think this is holding back.
February 11, 2015, 01:14:34 PM
I was slacking around and I was thinking about trying this out. I noticed there are only an handful pools. Besides 1GH the others seem to be rather small... either everyone is solo mining this or I'm missing something.
Any news of an open AMD miner BTW? I think this is holding back.
Any news of an open AMD miner BTW? I think this is holding back.
February 11, 2015, 01:53:25 AM
BTW, others are trying to avoid the blockchain bloat: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/lightweight-cryptos-without-block-chain-bloat-coq-development-and-paper-949880
They've been trying for many years. The OP of that thread is suggesting something very much like the mini-blockchain scheme except he's suggesting the storage of unspent outputs instead of balances, which is very much similar to the ultimate blockchain compression scheme that gmaxwell mentions. The OP is basically reinventing ideas that have existed for several years. February 10, 2015, 09:39:53 PM
The idea behind this coin is fantastic, specially when people are fighting because of the size of the blocks in Bitcoin. It's a shame that this coin gets less attention than a lot of coins with zero innovation.
BTW, others are trying to avoid the blockchain bloat: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/lightweight-cryptos-without-block-chain-bloat-coq-development-and-paper-949880
BTW, others are trying to avoid the blockchain bloat: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/lightweight-cryptos-without-block-chain-bloat-coq-development-and-paper-949880
February 10, 2015, 01:19:18 AM
Mention of mini-blockchains in IBM's ADEPT white paper:
“Multiple efforts like sidechains, treechains, and mini-blockchains are ongoing to address this problem. While each approach has its merits and demerits we are yet to see consensus on a common approach across the board. A blockchain to cater to hundreds of billions of devices needs to be scalable.”
http://www.coindesk.com/ibm-reveals-proof-concept-blockchain-powered-internet-things/
Interesting stuff, good find. “Multiple efforts like sidechains, treechains, and mini-blockchains are ongoing to address this problem. While each approach has its merits and demerits we are yet to see consensus on a common approach across the board. A blockchain to cater to hundreds of billions of devices needs to be scalable.”
http://www.coindesk.com/ibm-reveals-proof-concept-blockchain-powered-internet-things/
February 09, 2015, 06:38:42 AM
Mention of mini-blockchains in IBM's ADEPT white paper:
“Multiple efforts like sidechains, treechains, and mini-blockchains are ongoing to address this problem. While each approach has its merits and demerits we are yet to see consensus on a common approach across the board. A blockchain to cater to hundreds of billions of devices needs to be scalable.”
http://www.coindesk.com/ibm-reveals-proof-concept-blockchain-powered-internet-things/
“Multiple efforts like sidechains, treechains, and mini-blockchains are ongoing to address this problem. While each approach has its merits and demerits we are yet to see consensus on a common approach across the board. A blockchain to cater to hundreds of billions of devices needs to be scalable.”
http://www.coindesk.com/ibm-reveals-proof-concept-blockchain-powered-internet-things/
February 05, 2015, 01:02:48 PM
Also I forgot to mention that I added a new page to the explorer which shows a list of peers connected to the explorer node. This may be helpful for anyone seeking active Cryptonite nodes.
http://explorer.cryptonite.info/?page=peers
http://explorer.cryptonite.info/?page=peers
Very useful, thx! It would be perfect if up-2-date clients would show up green or something (compare with block-explorer client for example)
February 05, 2015, 03:52:04 AM
Also I forgot to mention that I added a new page to the explorer which shows a list of peers connected to the explorer node. This may be helpful for anyone seeking active Cryptonite nodes.
http://explorer.cryptonite.info/?page=peers
http://explorer.cryptonite.info/?page=peers
February 05, 2015, 03:33:05 AM
Cryptonite how get easier please tell me. ?
If you're asking how to get free XCN see here: http://www.xcnfaucet.com/ February 05, 2015, 02:57:53 AM
Cryptonite how get easier please tell me. ?
you can buy them here for example: https://poloniex.com/exchange#btc_xcn
February 02, 2015, 05:08:20 AM
Cryptonite how get easier please tell me. ?
Jump to: