I just want to open the floor to thoughts about a parallel block chain system.
"Parallel blockchain" could mean different things to different people. An alt-crypto currency is a parallel blockchain, but I'm not sure if that's what you are referring to.
As far as changing the Bitcoin protocol for "faster" confirmations, that would require a hard fork. Unless this method adds value to Bitcoin it likely won't be accepted by the economic majority and thus will not survive as a fork. "Faster" confirmations comes at a cost (security of confirmed transactions) and thus the Bitcoin protocol won't likely see such a chain. Again, .... other alt coins do this now.
Or were you thinking of some other approach?
I agree with you, all valid points.
I had a very rough idea, and the problem is I confess I have not gone line by line (NeHe) style through BTC code or een had time at a superficial level.
It seems though that the next block is secured by the last and so on. I was conjecturing say at some point something the clients can run [n] block chains such that each [n+1] only occurs and when the security is above a certain level, and those security characteristics are in inherited by the [n+1] chain, then new transactions for a coin get initially [randomly?] assigned to a chain and continue on until the next [n+1] and assignment occurs. However when dealing with a specific coins, some sort of marker data allows the client to know which of the [n] chains to access.
Again I may be talking right out of my hat here, and failing to understand a lot.....by I (dimly) perceive that satoshis signing method could be used across and between chains operating and accepted/generated by the same client/system.
Its almost as if we are going in a linear fashion when we may also go parallel using the same tech
Such a method implies sacrificing security on the individual parallel chains, taken as whole they would be of a similar security level.
The advantage being scaling.
