come on, it will be like any other wallets , no difference 
Topic: Block chain size/storage and slow downloads for new users - page 16. (Read 228658 times)
"SPV wallets will always be fast no matter how popular Bitcoin gets." why do you think so? come on, it will be like any other wallets , no difference
come on, it will be like any other wallets , no difference 
I just tried Multibit, but it won't correctly load the funds on my addresses.
I was looking at that one but I have found the same problems. Loads up but when trying to import it gets stuck or seems to crash on me. Going to try a few more out and see if I can come to a solution of a light weight wallet.
I just tried Multibit, but it won't correctly load the funds on my addresses.
Looking at Electrum can you import wallets on this using private key. Is it the same as just doing it on btc qt import ect?
For a solution for this to work for everyone with or without hdd space. Blockchain should be on the cloud and a small index file downloaded to ones system and then qt wallet for computer or mobile phone or tablet can easily be updated and a small amount of data to be put on system. This would not only free up space on peoples computers but it would also allow faster transactions to go though the network. A lot can be done to improve services and I disagree for new users to be penalised because their new to the services. What happens if 1 million new business want to start accepting it for their business and they have to wait ages to download the blockchain and update their wallets. It wouldn't work out it would deter more people from using it.
No the solution is to use a SPV client. The network is already the "cloud". Satoshi solved this problem a year before the genesis block was minted and people keep trying to come up with inferior "solutions".
If you want to be a full node there is no substitute for the (pruned) blockchain. You don't need to be a full node, you can operate as an SPV client instead. There is no reason to try and combine the both into a solution which takes the worst elements of each and accomplishes nothing.
Never even heard of a SPV client. I understand partly it being in the cloud but what I meant was for more services on the cloud to speed things up than it currently is and to also reduce the amount of space used. If this is the case using SPV client you are on about maybe you can point me in the direction to one or details about it. As I would be interested in such things as always looking for something light weight and easy going.
For a solution for this to work for everyone with or without hdd space. Blockchain should be on the cloud and a small index file downloaded to ones system and then qt wallet for computer or mobile phone or tablet can easily be updated and a small amount of data to be put on system. This would not only free up space on peoples computers but it would also allow faster transactions to go though the network. A lot can be done to improve services and I disagree for new users to be penalised because their new to the services. What happens if 1 million new business want to start accepting it for their business and they have to wait ages to download the blockchain and update their wallets. It wouldn't work out it would deter more people from using it.
No the solution is to use a SPV client. The network is already the "cloud". Satoshi solved this problem a year before the genesis block was minted and people keep trying to come up with inferior "solutions".
If you want to be a full node there is no substitute for the (pruned) blockchain. You don't need to be a full node, you can operate as an SPV client instead. There is no reason to try and combine the both into a solution which takes the worst elements of each and accomplishes nothing.
For a solution for this to work for everyone with or without hdd space. Blockchain should be on the cloud and a small index file downloaded to ones system and then qt wallet for computer or mobile phone or tablet can easily be updated and a small amount of data to be put on system. This would not only free up space on peoples computers but it would also allow faster transactions to go though the network. A lot can be done to improve services and I disagree for new users to be penalised because their new to the services. What happens if 1 million new business want to start accepting it for their business and they have to wait ages to download the blockchain and update their wallets. It wouldn't work out it would deter more people from using it.
The blockchain size becomes a issue for my disk.
I was terribly annoying to download all those blocks.
Thanks for the tip, I'll pass this on to my friends.
Thanks for the tip, I'll pass this on to my friends.
block chain too big come on guys.
Just chant "Moore's Law, Moore's Law, ..." and everything will be fine. It's a time-honored engineering solution in Bitcoinland. Among the 99.99% of us who do no actual engineering at least. And those who do seem content to have the others be so easily placated.
so im having this noob question i started the gui miner a few day ago...and im using slush pool and an account on bitcoin.cz....and it says there shares and score and mhash...but always blocks 0 ...is that a problem or something cause i dont know and also i`ve been told that i should request a flag for my video board its nothing big (ati radeon hd 4350)...
also if any` knows if i can add more workers on my account from mining.bitcoin.cz..and if yes how
also if any` knows if i can add more workers on my account from mining.bitcoin.cz..and if yes how
block chain too big come on guys.
2% fee's will solve all the BTC problems: slow-confirmation-risk, seller-risk, etc. Mom&Pop will use it. *Not* because BTC is so great but because there is no reason not to use it (a bit like PayPal).
With a 2% fee there is absolutely no reason to use it. Merchants gain nothing but added complexity and expense. They can simply keep using PayPal. The largest advantage for merchants is a significant boost to their net margins by the removal of the 2% overhead by bypassing the credit card network. It makes no sense to bypass the credit card network to pay the same amount in fees to a different third party. Merchant adoption would be essentially zero.
Not entirely. Merchants may adopt it at 2% for the same reason they adopt AMEX at 3%.
But even if we agree that 2% *is* the limit and that merchants have no reason to adopt..... that doesn't mean we are back to 0%.
we have a zone of possible agreement between 0-2% of most consumer transactions. All that value is created by BTC. We'll see how much gets claimed by the consumer, by the seller, and how much by the middle men. It will (i.e. should) depend on who has a better alternative to adoption.
2% fee's will solve all the BTC problems: slow-confirmation-risk, seller-risk, etc. Mom&Pop will use it. *Not* because BTC is so great but because there is no reason not to use it (a bit like PayPal).
With a 2% fee there is absolutely no reason to use it. Merchants gain nothing but added complexity and expense. They can simply keep using PayPal. The largest advantage for merchants is a significant boost to their net margins by the removal of the 2% overhead by bypassing the credit card network. It makes no sense to bypass the credit card network to pay the same amount in fees to a different third party. Merchant adoption would be essentially zero.
You won't need the whole blockchain, or confirmations, or 51 character private keys. That will be managed by whatever replaces Visa & Mastercard (unless they are more flexible then I predict).
I know nada about how the network works
Then you will need to place as much trust in those "managers" of your BTC, as you currently often have to do with fiat. What's the point of having BTC if you are going to be using it in a way that will let others easily deprive you of it?
I agree with you. I *do* enjoy the new freedom and control . But I know that, if I want BTC to reach it's full potential, there are 2 things that will contribute significantly:
1) regulators have to tolerate the system
2) 'mom & pop' have to use BTC (even if they dont understand it and couldnt care less about it).
2% fee's will solve all the BTC problems: slow-confirmation-risk, seller-risk, etc. Mom&Pop will use it. *Not* because BTC is so great but because there is no reason not to use it (a bit like PayPal). Similarly, BTC brokers need to have mandatory reporting to the IRS just like stock brokers. This will keep the gov't happy.
I WANT that to happen so we can all continue to enjoy our new (and growing) economic freedoms. I dont see this as black-or-white: (freedom vs. regulation) but rather a mix that moves in the right direction. Same thing happened with the internet. Providers have lots of control, take big fee's and have to give up data to the gov't when asked. But look at the freedoms gained......right? Huge!
So, just like the revolution in "how we get information".....I'm hoping for a similar revolution in how we get/use/transfer 'value'
My Bitcoin Core-64 keeps having to rebuild the blockchain. Second day in a row I've had to rebuild it.
Great. When it finished it gave an I/O error and asked if I wanted to re-load the blockchain again. I'm so sick of this shit....
My Bitcoin Core-64 keeps having to rebuild the blockchain. Second day in a row I've had to rebuild it.
Addresses with <.001, or even .00000001 make up the most important part of the blockchain for those who invision BTC micro payments as the solution to problems like spam email
There is a similar case to be made for the history of every coin ever transacted.
There is a similar case to be made for the history of every coin ever transacted.
This is the kind of stuff that would make blockchain heavier...
I'll bet on the smart guys here finding a solution that does not involve every casual user downloading the entire blockchain onto their little mom&pop chromebook.
They can already use an SPV or other lightweight wallet, and have a few to choose from.
There is enough value being created by BTC to solve all these problems. There will be more fees and I'll bet they will total close to 2% of every transaction with 5yrs. small price to pay for all the other benefits.
You won't need the whole blockchain, or confirmations, or 51 character private keys. That will be managed by whatever replaces Visa & Mastercard (unless they are more flexible then I predict).
You won't need the whole blockchain, or confirmations, or 51 character private keys. That will be managed by whatever replaces Visa & Mastercard (unless they are more flexible then I predict).
I know nada about how the network works
Then you will need to place as much trust in those "managers" of your BTC, as you currently often have to do with fiat. What's the point of having BTC if you are going to be using it in a way that will let others easily deprive you of it?
There is plenty of space for UX to improve (and it has already vastly improved), but you can't have your cake and eat it too.
I was thinking to cut the chain down in size would be to:
1. Delete any BTC addresses that has less than .001 BTC. Add a merge function button in the wallet that moves any BTC too small together. Let everyone know the chain will restart and only keep btc addresses over .001 in the new chain.
2. The blockchain is filled with the same BTC bouncing around everywhere, do we really need to keep that information, just delete it and keep the current address amounts.
That should cut down the size dramatically and it could be done once a year. Just implementing #2 would be most helpful, #1 would also be helpful but not necessary.
1. Delete any BTC addresses that has less than .001 BTC. Add a merge function button in the wallet that moves any BTC too small together. Let everyone know the chain will restart and only keep btc addresses over .001 in the new chain.
2. The blockchain is filled with the same BTC bouncing around everywhere, do we really need to keep that information, just delete it and keep the current address amounts.
That should cut down the size dramatically and it could be done once a year. Just implementing #2 would be most helpful, #1 would also be helpful but not necessary.
Addresses with <.001, or even .00000001 make up the most important part of the blockchain for those who invision BTC micro payments as the solution to problems like spam email
There is a similar case to be made for the history of every coin ever transacted. You and I couldn't care less a about that info, but regulators find it an attractive feature so if you want regulators to like BTC then you will want that info available.
I know nada about how the network works but I'll bet on the smart guys here finding a solution that does not involve every casual user downloading the entire blockchain onto their little mom&pop chromebook. There is enough value being created by BTC to solve all these problems. There will be more fees and I'll bet they will total close to 2% of every transaction with 5yrs. small price to pay for all the other benefits.
You won't need the whole blockchain, or confirmations, or 51 character private keys. That will be managed by whatever replaces Visa & Mastercard (unless they are more flexible then I predict).
Rant over.
Jump to: