Bitcoin Technology | Bitcointalksearch.org

Monnt

legendary

Activity: 938

Merit: 1002

Quote from: xIIImaL on February 07, 2017, 04:01:05 AM

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

Even I noticed that issue in transaction of blockchain wallet to somewhere. I have forward my campaign income to my parent wallet but it took long time then before. Upgrading the version has to do by blockchain, Once they done with that then we can update on it accordingly.

The transaction time is not really related to the block chain technology it is really related to the miners that have the bitcoin and the fees you pay on transaction, if we want to solve the bitcoin transaction time we have to redefine the whole confirmation system in the blockchain and make it that it is processed automatically.

TofuLover

newbie

Activity: 11

Merit: 0

Quote from: hajimasan on February 07, 2017, 05:49:02 AM

Yes, obviously its possible to speed up the system of transaction confirmation but it depends on the group of miners who will do the task if more miners start mining with high-end system then there wouldn't be any waiting for transaction confirmation. and these unconfirmed transactions are mainly caused due to span transaction was done to attack the blockchain network.

i think that mining system have nothing to do while what needed to solve a block is hashpower from various centralized hashpower source.

hajimasan

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 500

Yes, obviously its possible to speed up the system of transaction confirmation but it depends on the group of miners who will do the task if more miners start mining with high-end system then there wouldn't be any waiting for transaction confirmation. and these unconfirmed transactions are mainly caused due to span transaction was done to attack the blockchain network.

talkbitcoin

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1032

All I know is that I know nothing.

Quote from: noictib on February 07, 2017, 03:50:40 AM

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

In my opinion upgrading the system of the blockchain is not a option of solving the problem of transactions ( mainly in confirmation ) .
Because all this depends upon the online nodes in the whole world . In I remembered that last time online node was about 350 out of 8333 node( previous day ) .
You can understand easily why problems of unconfirmation happening .Numbers of transactions are more than the numbers of the nodes online .
I think Here. one and only one solution is to putting some news nodes systems only and increasing the reward to support the node system ( because I know that about one of them is rewarded once a week which can be disappointing for those who always making desire that he will get weekly money/bitcoin as reward)

you are completely wrong!
whether there are 10 nodes or 10 billion nodes, it doesn't matter for number of unconfirmed transactions. nodes are ensuring the security of the network and like a bakcbone of bitcoin network. they also help relaying the transactions.

in any case block size is the problem causing the issue here! a block can only take in a limited number of transactions while there are more transactions waiting to be in a block (more than the capacity)

xIIImaL

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1005

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

Even I noticed that issue in transaction of blockchain wallet to somewhere. I have forward my campaign income to my parent wallet but it took long time then before. Upgrading the version has to do by blockchain, Once they done with that then we can update on it accordingly.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

pay nodes to be nodes does not lead to diverse decentralised node count

it leads to a select few people who run 100 nodes. who blacklist other people and white list their own to ensure the funds flow through their list to increase their own income

it also costs the transactor more due to having to pay for each 'hop'/relay on the way to where it should go.
which again ends up with people blacklisting certain nodes and trying to find ways to get to the destination with least hops/relays.

imagine Fibre
set up as the gate keeper to pools and filtering data down to the nodes but whitelisting which nodes connect to it. thus the single owner of Fibre (matt corallo) would get the income in such an event of 'nodes getting paid' because everyone loops through his Fibre nodes ring around the pools

noictib

hero member

Activity: 966

Merit: 515

One of the world's leading Bitcoin-powered casinos

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

In my opinion upgrading the system of the blockchain is not a option of solving the problem of transactions ( mainly in confirmation ) .
Because all this depends upon the online nodes in the whole world . In I remembered that last time online node was about 350 out of 8333 node( previous day ) .
You can understand easily why problems of unconfirmation happening .Numbers of transactions are more than the numbers of the nodes online .
I think Here. one and only one solution is to putting some news nodes systems only and increasing the reward to support the node system ( because I know that about one of them is rewarded once a week which can be disappointing for those who always making desire that he will get weekly money/bitcoin as reward)

soul-impact

hero member

Activity: 854

Merit: 500

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

They are trying to upgrade the Bitcoin by adding the SegWit into its system. SegWit helps us to reduce the amount of KB per transaction and we can easily confirm more transactions at the time. However, I have not seen anything clearly about the SegWit up to now and I hope the the Bitcoin dev team will soon finish it before the number of Bitcoin users is more than 50 millions

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: Amph on February 07, 2017, 02:34:35 AM

how can you identify who is a spammer and who is not, a spammers can also be someone that send normal transaction from time to time, to deceive his action and plus spam the network

also at this point the network is simply overloaded with non-spam transaction, it's not even about spammer for now, i means TX are not in queue because there are spammers...

Quote from: franky1 on February 05, 2017, 01:15:45 PM

Quote from: Kprawn on February 05, 2017, 01:10:41 PM

The question is, spammers spammers

to save repeating myself from other topics

Quote from: franky1 on February 03, 2017, 07:46:52 AM

this is about the "spam" cries. and a way to solve it using CODE. not fee's

though there are spam attacks. we need to truly stop using a umbrella term, in regards to calling lots of different types of transactions "spam".
for me i consider BLOATED transactions that spend funds EVERY block an obvious spam attack.
yet others treat simply spending less than 0.1btc a spam attack.(facepalm)

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: franky1 on February 06, 2017, 02:25:54 PM

segwit does not solve intentional spam, malicious users just wont use p2wpkh keys
segwit does not solve intentional quadratics, malicious users just wont use p2wpkh keys

LN does not solve intentional spam, malicious users just wont use LN hops or hubs.

the only way i can see that will sort out the fee war and the intentional real spam, without much drastic action is to introduce a new "priority formulae" that actually does a proper job of sorting out the spammers from the normal users

how can you identify who is a spammer and who is not, a spammers can also be someone that send normal transaction from time to time, to deceive his action and plus spam the network

also at this point the network is simply overloaded with non-spam transaction, it's not even about spammer for now, i means TX are not in queue because there are spammers...

Slark

legendary

Activity: 1862

Merit: 1004

A this point I refuse to see that bitcoin can be upgraded, not with the current standards and requirement of consensus of 95%.

There is too much hidden interests going on behind the scenes. It seems that every group has its own agenda and plans and tries to take over bitcoin.

So unless community will face imminent danger i.e. bitcoin network collapse, ultra high fees for every tx or persisting spam attack disrupting functionality of BTC, nothing will change.

Xester

hero member

Activity: 994

Merit: 544

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

Yes it is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology but the problem is getting the consensus of the miners to agree on something or on a solution. But up to now there are many proposals being presented but the problem is that the community cannot gather enough consensus so there will be a solution to the limited blocksize.

Kakmakr

legendary

Activity: 3542

Merit: 1965

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: n0ne on February 06, 2017, 11:48:05 PM

Quote from: wavespump on February 06, 2017, 11:08:24 PM

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

Yes, Segregated Witness is the technology you want to know, it only requires a soft fork to enlarge the block size to 2MB, the opposite technology is bitcoin unlimited, which requires a hard fork, it will devalue the bitcoin price. But SegWit is only supported by 20% miners, we will wait for 50% to get SegWit soft fork.

Segwit is the technology that's to make bitcoin move forward towards growth. As most users mentioned fork is the better if the blocksize gets increased. Its not getting support from more miners just due to the mining difficulty they experience. Mining will be more profitable for large scale miners, where small mining farms won't get much profit. For this reason blocksize increase is not supported much, which is the cause for transaction and confirmation delay.

Hugh? What are you saying here? Segwit does increase the block size and it will increase growth. A hard fork is the worst option we could take. The difficulty has nothing to do with SegWit. Why would mining be more profitable for large scale miners, than small miners?

Miners actually supports bigger blocks and the reason for the confirmation delays is the spam attacks. ^hmmmmmm^

n0ne

hero member

Activity: 2618

Merit: 548

DGbet.fun - Crypto Sportsbook

Quote from: wavespump on February 06, 2017, 11:08:24 PM

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

Yes, Segregated Witness is the technology you want to know, it only requires a soft fork to enlarge the block size to 2MB, the opposite technology is bitcoin unlimited, which requires a hard fork, it will devalue the bitcoin price. But SegWit is only supported by 20% miners, we will wait for 50% to get SegWit soft fork.

Segwit is the technology that's to make bitcoin move forward towards growth. As most users mentioned fork is the better if the blocksize gets increased. Its not getting support from more miners just due to the mining difficulty they experience. Mining will be more profitable for large scale miners, where small mining farms won't get much profit. For this reason blocksize increase is not supported much, which is the cause for transaction and confirmation delay.

wavespump

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

Yes, Segregated Witness is the technology you want to know, it only requires a soft fork to enlarge the block size to 2MB, the opposite technology is bitcoin unlimited, which requires a hard fork, it will devalue the bitcoin price. But SegWit is only supported by 20% miners, we will wait for 50% to get SegWit soft fork.

RoommateAgreement

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 500

Bazinga!

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

blockchain technology is just a technology that you can use in any way you want. and that is why there are hundreds of altcoins created so far.
you can check them out, but don't get your hopes up. in many cases they fix something but mess up lots of other things. such as faster confirmation but lots of orphaned blocks which makes low confirmation numbers worthless.

Raimonn

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1001

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

Yes, i think it is possible to upgrade, the problem is how to upgrade, a soft fork (segwit) or a hard fork (B.U.). There is too much discussion between the two groups, and for now i think the only possibility to see consensus its a new third option.

IamNotAnonymous

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 01:16:41 PM

Is possible to upgrade the blockchain technology solving issues like the transactions taking too much time to finish without compromise the currency we have now or without creating a new version devaluing the currently one?

Yes, it is possible.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 03:21:03 PM

It could be a good idea.

It just would make too many eternal unconfirmed transation pending, I don't know if there is any problem with this for the system.

nope because they are dropped unless there is only a couple hours left.
also CLTV allows confirmation and then locks funds from being unspent after (like the block rewards 100 confirm maturity)

thus mempools wont fill up with tx's waiting a day.
people either pay up to get priority.
or
their come back later and rebroadcast when matured/aged
or
they use ln as a voluntary service.

mrcash02

hero member

Activity: 1190

Merit: 525

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

Quote from: franky1 on February 06, 2017, 02:56:04 PM

Quote from: mrcash02 on February 06, 2017, 02:37:37 PM

Quote from: franky1 on February 06, 2017, 02:25:54 PM

segwit does not solve intentional spam, malicious users just wont use p2wpkh keys
segwit does not solve intentional quadratics, malicious users just wont use p2wpkh keys

LN does not solve intentional spam, malicious users just wont use LN hops or hubs.

the only way i can see that will sort out the fee war and the intentional real spam, without much drastic action is to introduce a new "priority formulae" that actually does a proper job of sorting out the spammers from the normal users

And the spammers sorted out with this formula couldn't use Bitcoin? Banned of Blockchain?

The spammer sorted out would be the address, and this person can create another address and spam again a transaction and again with many other new addresses.

what if there was a formulae that NEVER gave priority unless someones funds were aged atleast a day or they added a CLTV maturity period of a day.
also where the more bloated their transaction was or the more they wanted to bypass the 1day delay to respend sooner would cost them dearly

EG where those genuine/moral users that want to spend more then once a day can save some costs using the voluntary side services such as LN.
while leaving malicious intentional spammers who would refuse to use LN as it doesnt serve their malicious intent, left waiting or paying alot

It could be a good idea.

It just would make too many eternal unconfirmed transation pending, I don't know if there is any problem with this for the system.

Topic: Bitcoin Technology (Read 1338 times)