Topic: Cupper, Silver and Gold (BitCoin Scalability solved, I think...) (Read 1617 times)

I suggest a newbie discussion room.

A "cupper" chain?

Noun   1.   cupper - a cup of tea

Hmm... so apart from the beer chain and the pizza chain, we'd need a tea chain as well. Yes, that'd improve scalability to different kinds of drinks and beverages.

Omg...

I stopped reading after this.

You didn't even bother to ask a newbie question, you just jumped right in with "improvements" to the protocol in your mind.  I find that behavior rude.  It's merely annoying when a newbie asks the same questions over and over, but to waltz in here and do what you have is like a buck private walking into the general's pre-op meeting and declaring that you think that it would be a better plan to knock on the front door and share a toke.  The documents exist, as does this forum's search function.  You made no attempt to understand the subject, and nor were you seeking clarification from anyone, much less as humblely as you know you should have been.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_hashing_algorithm

This short link gives you a quick idea of how data if handled in blocks and within the chain.

There tons of resource on Wikipedia, including Satoshi's whitepaper
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin
  http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Is there a good write up on all of this?
While this is not how i wolld have done it, i guess smarter people than me designed it and as long as it keeps making me $200 per day i am happy
Googling "how btc works' just yilds tons of videos and articles which do not actually explain the block design... just the idea behind the currency... Having a B.Sc in nuclear engineering and an M.Sc in physics does not help without actually knowing the design specifics... is the a technical write up on this, hopefully a 1 paper not 100 papers with 95% of repeated info in each...

No. Blocks have 2 parts, the header, that is what is hashed for the proof of work, and the transaction list that the block solver added to it. The transaction themselves hold the address of the sender, the address of the recipient and the sender signing some BTC to that address (in case of standard tx, without going in it in details).

Instead of explaining to a noob like me why i am wrong you threaten me? Thats not very friendly... You do realize that it takes me less effort to register for a new anonymous account than it does for you to ban me, rite?

You do not understand the system, but rather than spend some time reading and thinking, you jump right in with suggestions on how to "improve" upon how you imagine the system works.  You have been registered for one day.  Do not speak again until you can demonstrate that you have a basic understanding of the functions of the block, blockchain, proof-of-work system and transactions.  I will be watching.  You can consider this the penalty box.

Hmm, I may be wrong, but i thought this is how it works:

Each block has 3 sections to it:
1. Encrypted private key used to write the block
2. Unencrypted public key used to read the block
3. Transaction history of this block readable with public key.

Block owner has a private key stored on his system to decrypt section 1 of the block and have access to private key with whichhe can modyfy block.
When ownership of the block is transfered the new owner sends the public half of his private key and old owner encrypts section 1 with that key, hence making new owner the only 1 able to read the private key and furthur modify the block.

This would mean that each block has a static value, say 0.01BTC....

Am I Rite?

/Puts a helmet on and hides under the table.

Oh boy. Do you have a helmet? Now it's time to put it to good use.

If you let people chose which chain they want to mine, they'll all pick one and be done with it.

If you force people to run the 3 chains, this effectively reduces the strength of the block chain by 3 to do essentially what a bunch of digits behind the decimal already do.

Many people worry about BTC scalabiity and many fancy schems are created to distribute the block chain into smaller chains. I suggest a different approach. The current suggestions and multi-block-chain designs all use horizontal model, that is bitcoins in all chains have the same value. I suggest a vertical model. Here is how it works:

Current bitcoin block chain will be called "silver chain".
Two new block chains will be called "gold chain" and "cupper chain". All 3 chains are ran in parallel. All nodes have all 3 chains stored on them.
1 block in silver chain will be worth 100 blocks in cupper chain and 1 block in gold chain will be worth 100 blocks in silver chain.

Curently to transfer 200BTC 200 separate blocks must be updated and sent to the network.
With vertical stack only 2 blocks in gold chain would have to be updated to transfer equivalent of 200BTC. Since only updated blocks need to be sentout to the network to update all block chains this would reduce network load by a factor of 100. This will also reduce hashing load by a factor of 100.


I actually suspect that currently 1 block is worth less than 1BTC, since we can send 0.01BTC... Which mens to send 1 BTC currently 100 blocks need to be updated... I actually dont know for sure that it is 100 blocks, may be its 1000??? Someone who knows more than me can correct this detail.