Topic: (Ordinals) BRC-20 needs to be removed - page 20. (Read 7771 times)

I see in the thread that several people have explained to you already that these claimed speeds are at best peak rates, and in practice are pretty much a lie.  Comcast, for example, sends termination threats to users with sustained rate of >=6.2 mbps averaged over a month (I got one last month).

It's already also been explained to you that embedded irrelevant data in Bitcoin is *already* getting people sued.  

Meanwhile, to the extent that it really is no big deal, then you should expect systems *designed* to store data for people to exist and be usable and get the job done.

Expecting Bitcoin which is expressly *not* designed to do this, doesn't do it efficiently (e.g. no affordance for distributing storage across multiple systems) and hardly even does it today (as mentioned: it doesn't provide arbitrary retrieval) to do it for you in the future is seems foolish indeed.

But hey, maybe mankind is just too fucking stupid to deserve Bitcoin and it'll get fucked up by abusive idiots that can't resist urinating in the public water fountain any time there isn't a physical barrier preventing them from doing it.  That would be sad, but it would be far from the first time it's happened.

Comcast debuts 2Gbps internet service in four states
https://www.engadget.com/comcast-gigabit-2x-announced-203440991.html

Seagate's HAMR hard drives will debut with a whopping 32TB capacity this year, 40TB to follow
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/91797/seagates-hamr-hard-drives-will-debut-with-whopping-32tb-capacity-this-year-40tb-to-follow/index.html

I'm not so convinced its going to be necessary to do anything at all. I guess we'll have to wait and see. yes not everyone is going to have access to these things due to their location/financial situation but some people will.

If you're okay with the security implications of that, then fine! it's yet another explanation as to why there is very little to think the retrieveability of this data will be high far into the future.  My more elaborate answer only explains that even if you hold the security properties constant there is little reason to expect it.

it seems like such a huge problem for such a simple seeming thing. if everyone could just agree on the same utxo set at a certain block height they could jettison everything that came before that. kind of   and then it would be like restarting the entire blockchain from a new genisys block the only difference would be there was an existing utxo set not an empty one...that's how you solve the storage problem. every so often the chain has to be reset.
 

Nah.  That could be side information computed as part the proving process, it doesn't need to be part of the block commitment.

E.g. prove "block hash x with resulting utxo state hash xu is a valid successor to block y with utxo state hash yu".

And each block commits to every prior utxo set state by committing to the history of all blocks before it.  So, for example its possible to construct a proof that says "output 0xDEADBEEF:01 is a member of the utxo set at height 1000 of this chain with height 1001 hash Y" its just that the prover must process the whole chain up to height 1000 while constructing the proof.  The prover might be more efficient with an optimized commitment structure but it isn't necessary.  You can produce a proof for the output of ANY program. If a program can validate it, a proof can be provided.

i'm skeptical that such a system could work for bitcoin unless they changed up the structure of bitcoin blocks to include some type of utxo set commitment inside each block. but i guess if you did that, maybe it could work.

because the way it is right now, an individual block doesn't really tell you anything about what the existing utxo set is or any of its properties. that would need to change somehow.

If that we're true you'd have a point, but the good news is that isn't.

It's possible using cryptography to construct proof for statements like "0xDEADBEEF is the hash of the tip of a blockchain starting at the genesis block where all rules pass, with total difficulty Y", where the proof is much smaller than the blockchain (in some cases only a few hundred bytes).

Such systems are already in production use for small programs today. Scaling them up to work over the whole bitcoin blockchain is a (considerable) engineering exercise, but I think it's inevitable-- well inevitable that the proof systems are developed to that extent.  If Bitcoin will deploy them or not will depend on if anyone is still willing to work on it.

(And you should hope these tools are developed, because we've already seen what people do when validating the history becomes too expensive-- they skip it)

Add me to the list. Downloading the 2.6TB archive of all historical reddit posts got me one.

true unlimited is only a theoretical thing. in practice it means whatever the company offering the service wants it to mean. we all know that. same with "unlimited lifetime cloud storage" snake oil for one time payment...maybe some newbies don't understand that but that's how it is.

Sure, this is an NFT collection that inscribed a couple of packages that are commonly used, https://twitter.com/OnChainMonkey/status/1668059991327248384. This came as a follow up on Recursive Inscriptions proposal, basically splitting the data over multiple inscriptions and reusing them, removing some of the limitation that they had. A flood of JS packages in transactions is probably about to happen so that they can use it in their HTML inscriptions.

As stated on news source i mentioned, it's 1.2TB per month. While it's still sufficient for many people or contribute to Bitcoin network by running full node while allowing incoming connection, it's definitely not true unlimited. And 1.2TB isn't a lot when it's used by family for zoom meeting and video streaming on almost daily basis with HD or higher resolution. For reference, since 2021 (when COVID happen and people work/study from home) there are 14% customer who use more than 1TB/month[1].


Example i mentioned is definitely extreme case. But since we're talking about 18TB, i would speculate he just collect every Linux ISO which is exist on internet. And i've seen few people claim they receive similar threat when they exceed 2TB of internet usage.


I agree running bittorent 24/7 is a somehow extreme for home user. But those throttle also apply when you download files with bittorrent protocol. And as reminder, there's etiquette to have at least 1.0 or 1:1 ratio (e.g. if you download 1GB, you should also upload 1GB)[2], although some people say 0.5 ratio is acceptable.


Which IMO isn't true unlimited or isn't what customer expect when they see term "unlimited" on their advertising.


Both of them could be stored elsewhere. But i'd say BRC-20 is worse since it create many TX and UTXO.


Do you mind sharing the link?

---

[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/02/internet-use-soared-throughout-2020-helping-isps-cash-in-on-data-caps/
[2] https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-use-bittorrent

It's not only about BRC-20 which is usually under 1kb, people are inscribing much bigger files (https://www.ord.io/?contentType=video) at the moment for no apparent reason. I've almost never seen someone storing their NFT's collection files on Ethereum, but ORD community seems to encourage doing that on bitcoin and consider it innovative. I've seen one of the communities celebrate inscribing some of their used node_module packages on bitcoin a few hours ago.

1.2 terabyte is alot for a single day. a DVD-R disc is about 5GB right? that's like downloading over 200 DVD movies or something in a single day. i'd say 99% of people don't have that type of need. shouldn't have that type of need and if they do then they're on the wrong plan. but if they do offer a truely unlimited plan as you say then that's what that is for i guess.

Homeboy downloaded about 18TB of data in one month and wonders why they threatened to cut him off. One mnth. 18 terabytes. you do the math. equals other people can't use their internet service because homeboy is downloading Linux ISO images like crazy. probably trying to sell them.

personal internet service is not really meant to do things like share torrents. lets say Joe tries to run bittorrent 24/7, then people all over the globe are going to be hitting him up for pieces of files. so what just happened is all those people became non-paying customers of Joe's ISP. they don't like that.

unlimited is only unlimited to the extent that you don't cause a problem with other paying customers or the ISP thinks you might be. then you're not on unlimited anymore. 

And depending on the limitation, i would classify it as predatory behavior. For example, there are few ISP which advertise their internet with claim unlimited usage but also do one of these,
1. Very strict data caps/FUP[1] before your speed is slowed down significantly. In my country, i've seen few ISP which offer 50 Mbps with only 300GB monthly FUP. Even comcast (one of ISP in USA) has 1.2TB limit and then offer actual unlimited plan[2].
2. Threaten to terminate their service for customer who use lots of data[3].
3. Attempt to throttle VPN and Torrent[5] connection.


Exactly. Based on one of LoyceV testing[6], you need fairly decent setup (4 core CPU, NVMe SSD and 16GB RAM, even though Bitcoin Core only configured to use ~6GB RAM) to fully sync pruned node in 22 hours.

[1] https://selectra.in/guides/fup
[2] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/11/comcasts-data-cap-finally-goes-nationwide-in-expansion-to-12-more-states/
[3] https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/payvpu/new_isp_threatened_to_cut_off_my_connection/
[4] https://www.reddit.com/r/VPN/comments/5jmgv8/can_an_isp_detect_a_vpn_and_throttle_your/
[5] https://www.zdnet.com/article/is-your-internet-provider-throttling-bittorrent-traffic-find-out/
[6] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.61714795

The problem is: downloading blockchain data is not all what you have to do, to be a full node. You also have to verify that data. Verification time is much bigger bottleneck than blockchain size.

Some time ago, I saw that in practice in some altcoin. It was CPU-based, and had only 2 GB chain, or something around that. However, downloading 500 GB of Bitcoin was faster than downloading 2 GB of this altcoin, just because they switched from SHA-256 to some ASIC-resistant, CPU-mineable hash function. Even worse, they did it not only in block headers, but just everywhere, in every single place, which means they also replaced it in Merkle Tree, in Script opcodes like OP_SHA256, and in all other places. Then, I learned why using lightweight hash function like SHA-256 is important. I saw their chainwork, when mining a single block header, and getting 50 coins, required computing around 1000 hashes. I saw how validating a Merkle Tree with depth of ten levels was as hard as mining the next block.

And then, coming back to Bitcoin, you can read about possible attacks, that can slow down verification. Plugging a lot of OP_CHECKSIG opcodes, executing hash functions multiple times, sending strange P2P messages with complex data, etc. If the whole problem would be only about downloading speed, then we could go further than from 1 MB to 4 MB. However, if bootstrapping a new node from a server running 24/7, with static IP, and good connections to other nodes, can take a week, then I know the problem is not only about bandwidth, because I can see that in practice, when I read logs from my server, and compare network usage with CPU and disk usage.

well a lot depends on block size.  If developers panic and go to 32mb blocks fast vs 2mb blocks now the downloads would be terrible.

Which is one good argument to no allow ordinals or any block spam at all.

I can do a 500gb download pretty fast.

Even a 1tb download is not bad.

I have been lazy and should do a new core download.

there's only one way to fully validate the current utxo set and that is by downloading the entire blockchain from the genesis block. if someone wants to trust some third party then  i guess that's up to them but internet speeds and storage space seem like they will able to support blockchain growth perhaps indefinitely since technology is always improving and we already have 20+TB drives. That's about a 40:1 ratio of unused to used space. You can bet that's going to get bigger in the future. people can already have a 1Gbps internet speed. That should be sufficient far into the future for downloading the blockchain. Blockchain grows at 0.1TB per year max, it takes how many years to fill up a 20TB HDD? In 100 years the blockchain will be at most about 10TB. On a 1Gbps connection you can download that in just over 1 day. In 100 years, 1Gbps probably will be something everyone has. No one is still on dialup.

The day when you can't download and fully validate the blockchain from the genesys block if you so desire is the day that bitcoin becomes meaningless. Because you won't know if it goes all the way back to satoshi or not.

I don't share that point of view. Not with regards to ordinals and not in the next 100 years.

I have 200 down and 30 up

when I do a full blockchain they slow me to about 90 down.

well if you're supposed to get say 30 Mbps down and you're not even getting 15 most of the time then I'd say that's a bigger problem than if you are supposed to get 100 and only get 50. But that's just an opinion...if someone has 50Mbps then life should be ok. at least they can do basic things. They won't be downloading games all day long but I think alot of ISPs have limits on abusive subscribers that download like crazy anyway.

I skimmed page you mentioned, but none of them mentioned UTXO commitment. I remember BCH community attempt to do that, but i never check whether they actually implement and use it. Although with new ~15 million UTXO due to BRC-20 hype, i wonder how well UTXO commitment works.

Although people who don't care about verify whole blockchain or can trust certain person could just use download snapshot of pruned node from website such as https://prunednode.today/.


I get your point. But it's annoying when a customer only get less half or less of what ISP advertised most of the time.

Then just use something that stores the data in utxo set such as Bitcoin Stamps: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bitcoin-stamps-nfts-gaining-ordinals-225153058.html

you know what's funny? people in the USA been getting a big $50 discount off their internet service for quite a while now. Thanks to uncle sam. Not sure how long that will last though. But some of them are getting it for FREE. That's right they don't even pay a penny.

well if you were an ISP you would do the exact same thing. You can't promise perfection. Another annoying thing these companies do is advertise their promo rates. They never want you to know what the price goes up to after that first 12 months is up. You have to probably call them and threaten to take them to court just to find out what their normal rate is...