FACT CHECK: Bitcoin Blockchain will be 700GB in 4 Years - page 9.

coins101

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: geopolisch on September 12, 2016, 11:29:38 AM

You make me really scared OP.. if it happens and bitcoin block size reach to 700GB in that time.. no one can download and use bitcoin core client.. or maybe people who have super computers can afford to download and install it.

Is that the end of Bitcoin? Huh

No.

This is about understanding the issue and dealing with it.

I want to see some views on the facts first, then there are ways we can deal with the issues.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

^^ Right! Think of the bandwidth to move all this info around. Cool

mexicotaco

member

Activity: 87

Merit: 10

There will no folk use bitcoin qt wallet, it is too big and wastes our hard disk, it also costs 1-2 weeks to download 700 GB blockchain.

jtipt

hero member

Activity: 1050

Merit: 529

To be honest it's not a big deal. An average user doesn't keep the whole blockchain downloaded, only miners and too serious bitcoin users do that. Even now 1tb hdd/ssd doesn't cost too much every new pc now comes with 1tb hdd atleast and in four years I think 1tb would be like today's 100 gb(ok maybe little exaggerating) but you get it, not a big deal.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: geopolisch on September 12, 2016, 11:29:38 AM

You make me really scared OP.. if it happens and bitcoin block size reach to 700GB in that time.. no one can download and use bitcoin core client.. or maybe people who have super computers can afford to download and install it.

Is that the end of Bitcoin? Huh

The complete blockchain could be held in repositories.

Other than that, all anybody needs is the first transaction of any address/every address, and, say, the two last transactions of every address.

Few people do many transactions in Bitcoin... such as the exchanges, etc. Even these people often do not do many transactions with any single address. We don't need all the transactions of all the addresses. We can reduce the size of our personal copy of the blockchain on our computers by eliminating all but the first transaction done with an address, and the last two transactions done with it... maybe only the last transaction.

As long as there are a bunch of searchable blockchain repositories that contain the whole blockchain, we don't need all the info, personally.

Some of the wallet programs - such as Armory or Electrum or Multibit - are already doing this, at least to some extent.

Cool

thejaytiesto

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1014

That is why core devs don't want to raise the block size, it is a very risky thing to do. I know a block size increase will come but not for now. Also we will eventually have a way to prune the blockchain and not need to download the whole blockchain the first time, or I hope so.

geopolisch

hero member

Activity: 1022

Merit: 511

You make me really scared OP.. if it happens and bitcoin block size reach to 700GB in that time.. no one can download and use bitcoin core client.. or maybe people who have super computers can afford to download and install it.

Is that the end of Bitcoin? Huh

zimmah

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1005

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 03:45:47 PM

Quote from: awesome31312 on September 10, 2016, 03:38:06 PM

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 03:11:16 PM

Quote from: awesome31312 on September 10, 2016, 03:00:31 PM

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 02:04:30 AM

Quantum Computers are advancing much faster in calc and storage capacity. In 4 years from now, QCs will have cracked the blockchain, and Bitcoin will be gone, or at least, residing on a QC.

Cool

Wrong.

You could have been right though, if you were aware of some mathematical facts:

What we do know is that internet speed is advancing at a rate nowhere close to the rate the Blockchain is growing, I hope people have prepared for themselves some real life hobbies, especially since downloading the Blockchain will become a long process (taking a couple of weeks), andBitcointalk.org will experience more DDoS attacks.

We have underestimated quantum computers in a big way.

I agree with that, but we're not there yet.

Quote from: BiTZeD on September 10, 2016, 03:18:47 PM

It means absolutely nothing.

I disagree, internet speeds will never be able to cope with maintaining a 1 TB download to a duration of less than a week. This is not even counting the daily synchronizations necessary for spending/receiving coins. It could be a couple of Gigabytes for all we know.

Except for one thing. As the video showed, quantum computers act in such an entirely different way that there is no way to compare them with regular PCs. Certainly, if they can touch other universes, they might be able to find all the pieces of the blockchain elsewhere, other than the blockchain right here. then, all that they need do is bring that info home to Mommy.

Cool

We would have to be able to understand their language.

There is already quantum-proof encryption, and we can easily change bitcoins proof-of-work to a quantum proof system when that becomes necessary.

zimmah

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1005

Quote from: coins101 on September 09, 2016, 04:52:08 PM

My guess is that the Bitcoin Blockchain is growing at around 4% per month.

Is that assessment about right?

And what about the bandwidth each node will require each month if it's sharing data - 100 TB / month; 1,000TB / month?

What does this mean for the next halving? All miners will be running SPV's?

Note that this chart s on LOG scale.

Also, there's a ridiculous artificial 1MB cap on the blockchain size right now, so it increases slower, but at the same time it's limiting the growth and adaptation of bitcoin, so the limit has to go.

We shouldn't worry about the scaling too much, we just need to make sure the blockchain is allowed to grow, and we don't impose stupid artificial limits on it.

awesome31312

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 504

Quote from: NorrisK on September 11, 2016, 05:19:19 AM

As long as the blocksizes are capped and this cap is not removed, I guess we will just see a linear increase from now on (as most blocks are full) instead of a exponential increase.

The 3-4% increase is compounded and the amount of data increases exponentially instead of a non compounded "fixed" increase. My guess is that it will be much lower because of not having an exponential increase anymore.

When an exponential curve tends to become linear, it usually means it is stagnating. Which is not what's happening in this case, 82 Gigs is a long way from 2 Terabytes.

coins101

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: criptix on September 12, 2016, 06:31:35 AM

Quote from: coins101 on September 12, 2016, 04:57:16 AM

Quote from: NorrisK on September 11, 2016, 05:19:19 AM

As long as the blocksizes are capped and this cap is not removed, I guess we will just see a linear increase from now on (as most blocks are full) instead of a exponential increase.

The 3-4% increase is compounded and the amount of data increases exponentially instead of a non compounded "fixed" increase. My guess is that it will be much lower because of not having an exponential increase anymore.

Are you saying that blocks will not be increased? So from now on, its just a straight line increase?

If the blocksize increases linearly so will the blockchain size - and right now it seems exactly like that.

The evidence is against your view, at this point:

Quote from: coins101 on September 10, 2016, 01:28:27 AM

A chart from Blockchain.info from launch

criptix

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1145

Quote from: coins101 on September 12, 2016, 04:57:16 AM

Quote from: NorrisK on September 11, 2016, 05:19:19 AM

As long as the blocksizes are capped and this cap is not removed, I guess we will just see a linear increase from now on (as most blocks are full) instead of a exponential increase.

The 3-4% increase is compounded and the amount of data increases exponentially instead of a non compounded "fixed" increase. My guess is that it will be much lower because of not having an exponential increase anymore.

Are you saying that blocks will not be increased? So from now on, its just a straight line increase?

If the blocksize increases linearly so will the blockchain size - and right now it seems exactly like that.

marleybobthedog

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

It's not so big deal for blockchain as all over the world people are using blockchain and the size should have been much larger. Because in my experience a simple medium traffic ecommerce site generates about 1gb data monthly and for such a huge organization it should have been much more.

coins101

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: NorrisK on September 11, 2016, 05:19:19 AM

As long as the blocksizes are capped and this cap is not removed, I guess we will just see a linear increase from now on (as most blocks are full) instead of a exponential increase.

The 3-4% increase is compounded and the amount of data increases exponentially instead of a non compounded "fixed" increase. My guess is that it will be much lower because of not having an exponential increase anymore.

Are you saying that blocks will not be increased? So from now on, its just a straight line increase?

NorrisK

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 1007

As long as the blocksizes are capped and this cap is not removed, I guess we will just see a linear increase from now on (as most blocks are full) instead of a exponential increase.

The 3-4% increase is compounded and the amount of data increases exponentially instead of a non compounded "fixed" increase. My guess is that it will be much lower because of not having an exponential increase anymore.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

to all those talking about quantum computing, thinking it involves the mysticism of quantum realms and parellel dimentions.. nots not
is actually alot more simple.

but the creators of d-wave dont want competitors beating them to it so they are distracting the world with their "secret" by pretending its mystical.

here is a previous post i made explaining quantum computing logically rather than mystically

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16150882

in short the "cubit can be both a 1 and a 0 at the same time due to third dimensions" translates to a cubit can be a 0volt or 1volt AND.. 0.5volt that can represent both
its just simple measuring of electricity, no longer just no electric vs some measure of electric for 0 or 1.. but multiple measures of electric to allow more then 2 choices per 'bit'

CoinBreader

hero member

Activity: 672

Merit: 500

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 10:53:24 PM

Quote from: awesome31312 on September 10, 2016, 04:49:13 PM

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 04:36:53 PM

Quote from: criptix on September 10, 2016, 04:29:57 PM

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 03:45:47 PM

Except for one thing. As the video showed, quantum computers act in such an entirely different way that there is no way to compare them with regular PCs. Certainly, if they can touch other universes, they might be able to find all the pieces of the blockchain elsewhere, other than the blockchain right here. then, all that they need do is bring that info home to Mommy.

Cool

Look up post quantum cryptography.
You can start here:

http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2016/NIST.IR.8105.pdf

About transmission speed look up quantum teleportation and data transmission.

Hey! Thanks for the link. I think I have seen it before. So have all the developers of quantum computers. That's why government authorizes stuff like this, and why developers go way beyond it.

Cool

Since you like links so much, here is mine:

https://micahflee.com/2013/01/no-really-the-nsa-cant-break-your-crypto/

The NSA may not be able to break Bitcoin quite yet, but this video courtesy of SulmaINO (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16209756) shows that they will be able soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhHMJCUmq28

Cool

I bet at some point they will fork btc to another algo ? or even better SHAKE256-1024 would be a 1024-bit digest with the effective security of a 512-bit hash.
But anyhow back to topic i dont think the extra 700GB would be a problem in 4 years from now, already my cold storage is an external 2TB hdd , so if i dont mind im a home user, why should a node worry about ?

Senor.Bla

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 253

Quote from: coins101 on September 10, 2016, 10:30:02 AM

Quote from: n691309 on September 10, 2016, 08:16:48 AM

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 02:04:30 AM

Quantum Computers are advancing much faster in calc and storage capacity. In 4 years from now, QCs will have cracked the blockchain, and Bitcoin will be gone, or at least, residing on a QC.

Cool

Its true that quantum computers are advancing fast but as far as i know until 2020 bitcoin is quantum computers resistant

They won't tell you when it's working.

but let us be realistic here. if you QC can crack the blockchain, then it can also crack other places with much more money involved. and if you want money you do not go for bitcoin, since an attack for a big sum will be noticed and bitcoin will probably become worthless. so the only reason to do this would be to destroy bitcoin.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: awesome31312 on September 10, 2016, 04:49:13 PM

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 04:36:53 PM

Quote from: criptix on September 10, 2016, 04:29:57 PM

Quote from: BADecker on September 10, 2016, 03:45:47 PM

Except for one thing. As the video showed, quantum computers act in such an entirely different way that there is no way to compare them with regular PCs. Certainly, if they can touch other universes, they might be able to find all the pieces of the blockchain elsewhere, other than the blockchain right here. then, all that they need do is bring that info home to Mommy.

Cool

Look up post quantum cryptography.
You can start here:

http://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2016/NIST.IR.8105.pdf

About transmission speed look up quantum teleportation and data transmission.

Hey! Thanks for the link. I think I have seen it before. So have all the developers of quantum computers. That's why government authorizes stuff like this, and why developers go way beyond it.

Cool

Since you like links so much, here is mine:

https://micahflee.com/2013/01/no-really-the-nsa-cant-break-your-crypto/

The NSA may not be able to break Bitcoin quite yet, but this video courtesy of SulmaINO (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16209756) shows that they will be able soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhHMJCUmq28

Cool

awesome31312

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 504

Quote from: btvGainer on September 10, 2016, 05:55:26 PM

Quote from: coins101 on September 10, 2016, 02:12:07 AM

Quote from: c789 on September 10, 2016, 02:06:00 AM

Moore's Law.

I believe the devs are working on the size of the blockchain, but it's not at the top of their list, and rightly so. They have bigger matters which require their more immediate attention.

You're correct to point out the growing size of the blockchain, but it's a relatively small problem amongst others.

100TB to 1,000TB bandwidth requirement for full nodes in just 4 years time is not a small problem. Who has a data plan that can allow that, even unlimited plans have a fair use cap?

There is very little the devs can do about the growing size of the blockchain. Data is data.

Multi sig, for example, will counter any voodoo by the devs to reduce the size of transactions.

Can we have something like cloud storage or something to compress blockchain?Like we have file compressors can we have blockchain compressors as well?

I'm pretty sure that cloud storage could lead to an easier data compromise, so for privacy reasons, I don't think they'll ever implement that

Topic: FACT CHECK: Bitcoin Blockchain will be 700GB in 4 Years - page 9. (Read 9345 times)