Topic: Is VCash the most scalable crypto around? - page 2. (Read 2337 times)
out of curiosity. how much would it cost to run a full scale TPS test on Vcash?
Not at all, I don't have to do any research into what John has done because Vcash uses a block chain. I've done more research into scaling a block chain than likely anyone in this industry....thus, I am able to make judgement without getting into the project specific details.
The hint is in your original post - Removing the blockchain from end user computers is how we can scale to millions of nodes without so much as a hiccup.
I think you should read up on zeroledger, zerotime, and how John has used the two with an adaptive block size to do just what you have described.
The hint is in your original post - Removing the blockchain from end user computers is how we can scale to millions of nodes without so much as a hiccup.
I think you should read up on zeroledger, zerotime, and how John has used the two with an adaptive block size to do just what you have described.
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
isnt that what zerotime did?
I may be wrong, and you can feel free to test the Vcash network to prove me wrong, but zeroledger with zerotime parallelism is exactly what John has done!!!!
I beg to differ. If it is using a block chain its a completely different solution for a completely different problem.
I have a feeling your reply was off the cuff, and you havent done any research into what John has done.
Not at all, I don't have to do any research into what John has done because Vcash uses a block chain. I've done more research into scaling a block chain than likely anyone in this industry....thus, I am able to make judgement without getting into the project specific details.
The hint is in your original post - Removing the blockchain from end user computers is how we can scale to millions of nodes without so much as a hiccup.
Scaling to millions of nodes via some form of SPV protocol is not the same as scaling transactional load and maintaining decentralization. Which is the point I'm trying to make here, there are different flavours of scalability...some having further reaching benefits than others.
Also, Bitcoin can easily scale to millions of SPV driven nodes...it probably does so everyday, so its not really anything new.
Now show me a block chain / platform that can scale to millions of nodes, where all of those nodes are providing transactional processing and the network as a whole is reliably processing 10,000+ tps in a decentralized manner...and you'll have my attention
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
isnt that what zerotime did?
I may be wrong, and you can feel free to test the Vcash network to prove me wrong, but zeroledger with zerotime parallelism is exactly what John has done!!!!
I beg to differ. If it is using a block chain its a completely different solution for a completely different problem.
I have a feeling your reply was off the cuff, and you havent done any research into what John has done.
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
I will first admit I am no expert on blockchain technology or have any intimate deep knowledge on the subject. I am only lowly cryptocurrency enthusiast. However I believe John's explains the network implementation of XVC in the whitepaper. I only mention this because it seems relevant to your post.
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
isnt that what zerotime did?
I may be wrong, and you can feel free to test the Vcash network to prove me wrong, but zeroledger with zerotime parallelism is exactly what John has done!!!!
I beg to differ. If it is using a block chain its a completely different solution for a completely different problem.
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
isnt that what zerotime did?
I may be wrong, and you can feel free to test the Vcash network to prove me wrong, but zeroledger with zerotime parallelism is exactly what John has done!!!!
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds". Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
I keep saving my btc for this....but it is taking a long time to release. When can I get some emunie ??
Why is cancer taking so long for a cure?
Same question, same answer. It's hard work on a difficult problem and takes time to solve.
If it was easy, there would already be a cure for cancer (lets leave the conspiracies at the door) and a scalable, efficient, stable crypto platform
Okay, I hear you
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds". Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
I keep saving my btc for this....but it is taking a long time to release. When can I get some emunie ??
Why is cancer taking so long for a cure?
Same question, same answer. It's hard work on a difficult problem and takes time to solve.
If it was easy, there would already be a cure for cancer (lets leave the conspiracies at the door) and a scalable, efficient, stable crypto platform
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds". Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
I keep saving my btc for this....but it is taking a long time to release. When can I get some emunie ??
I'm surprised it's not more of a hot topic considering most legit projects want mainstream use in some shape or form.
It's all smokes and mirrors did you not know?
Block chains can't scale without centralization...period. Anyone that says otherwise is arguing against CAP theorem which is an effect of the speed of light limit.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
Side chains are nasty hacks that add more problems than they solve, as is the lightning network, segwit and all the other "work arounds".
This is a debate I've had many times and I spent a long time looking for solutions back in 2012-2013 before realizing the obvious.
A block chain is "a single threaded process", if you want more performance/scalability the only thing you can do is add more processing power per node, which raises the barrier to entry and reduces the number of nodes doing the actual processing (centralization).
The only way to increase scalability to 10,000 tps and beyond and maintain decentralization is to add parallelism to the processing of transactions, and drop the block chain based ledger structure. We're the only project that does that and has it functional today.
Eth is also looking at something similar, but they are 2+ years away from it as of today and it has limitations due to it being block chain based shards.
I'm surprised it's not more of a hot topic considering most legit projects want mainstream use in some shape or form.
Crypto doesn't scale because of latency and bandwidth. Anyone who tells you different is a scammer.
I have no idea about the actual question but I have a hard time respecting a coin with such a terrible win wallet.
John Connor claims:
"You don't prevent it. Blockchain's have no end, only a beginning. Incentive Nodes and volunteers host the blockchain. Removing the blockchain from end user computers is how we can scale to millions of nodes without so much as a hiccup. ZeroLedger coded directly into the core code means it can be deployed anywhere including to embedded devices and microchips.
This combined with the Autonomous block size means we never have think about scalability again. That said we are currently the most scalable cryptocurrency codebase in existence. "
and here is the guantlet thrown down:
" Feel free to write code to stress test the network and debunk it's scalability and we can re-open this topic and examine the results. :cool:"
can someone prove this otherwise?
"You don't prevent it. Blockchain's have no end, only a beginning. Incentive Nodes and volunteers host the blockchain. Removing the blockchain from end user computers is how we can scale to millions of nodes without so much as a hiccup. ZeroLedger coded directly into the core code means it can be deployed anywhere including to embedded devices and microchips.
This combined with the Autonomous block size means we never have think about scalability again. That said we are currently the most scalable cryptocurrency codebase in existence. "
and here is the guantlet thrown down:
" Feel free to write code to stress test the network and debunk it's scalability and we can re-open this topic and examine the results. :cool:"
can someone prove this otherwise?
Jump to: