designed this in such a way, to help with latency and to make sure all nodes get this information timeously. New ideas are always welcomed, but it should be noted that ideas should be suggested with
the integrity and security of the network in mind.
Topic: Raising the frequncey of block generation (Read 549 times)
Why mess with something that obviously worked for years now... Do not f#$^ with something that might put a Billion dollar experiment in jeopardy and endanger everyone's investment. Satoshi has
designed this in such a way, to help with latency and to make sure all nodes get this information timeously. New ideas are always welcomed, but it should be noted that ideas should be suggested with
the integrity and security of the network in mind.
designed this in such a way, to help with latency and to make sure all nodes get this information timeously. New ideas are always welcomed, but it should be noted that ideas should be suggested with
the integrity and security of the network in mind.
these are silly theories that dont work.
making 9 blocks that have no reward is simply not going to make miners desire to solve blocks. they would rather work on block number 10.
this can cause many issues such as difficulty dropping 10x because now there are 10 blocks to make in the same average period as 1 at the moment.
this can cause many issues such as miners skipping a few things to not waste time on the no reward blocks.
this can cause many issues such as miners not using as much hashpower to conserve the costs(electric)
in short to be able to hash a block in 1 minute.. security has to suffer.
there is nothing wrong with broadcasting upto 4mb of data.. even the core-devs agree with this because thats what the allowances are for segwit. the issue is not about data.. but about allocation. core are still dragging their feat to allocate 2mb of buffer space for a traditional block,
they are holding back capacity and they are the only ones causing the controversy where there is no doomsday scenario apart from what they are making themselves by creating controversy
making 9 blocks that have no reward is simply not going to make miners desire to solve blocks. they would rather work on block number 10.
this can cause many issues such as difficulty dropping 10x because now there are 10 blocks to make in the same average period as 1 at the moment.
this can cause many issues such as miners skipping a few things to not waste time on the no reward blocks.
this can cause many issues such as miners not using as much hashpower to conserve the costs(electric)
in short to be able to hash a block in 1 minute.. security has to suffer.
there is nothing wrong with broadcasting upto 4mb of data.. even the core-devs agree with this because thats what the allowances are for segwit. the issue is not about data.. but about allocation. core are still dragging their feat to allocate 2mb of buffer space for a traditional block,
they are holding back capacity and they are the only ones causing the controversy where there is no doomsday scenario apart from what they are making themselves by creating controversy
Hmm, I don't know what effect this would have on the network. Surely if would make the blockchain muuuch larger, but would it improve confirmation times, or would we struggle to solve blocks that fast?
Also, the 9 and 1 paradigm will make miners leave for the 9, and start back hashing on the final 'profit block'. Why mine worthless blocks with no reward?
How they will go ideal once every 10 minutes and then come powerful for hunting for profit block.Also, the 9 and 1 paradigm will make miners leave for the 9, and start back hashing on the final 'profit block'. Why mine worthless blocks with no reward?
If still that is possible, what about dividing block rewards into 10 shares. Like every minute (or quicker ) block with rewards of 1.25 BTC each.
Basically I want to know what are the problems with quicker block generations why Satoshi opted for 10 minutes gaps.
If block reward time get lowered to 1 minute (suppose) with current 1mb per block than in 10 minute bitcoin ledger will grow 10mb rather than current 1mb per 10 minute. So better to increase block size to 2mb or 3mb with current 10 minute generation time.
Miners would simply abandon the first 9 blocks and clusterfuck on the final reward block, this would probably create more problems than solving any
To solve the 1M block-size conflicts, what if the frequency of block generation will be changed to every minute.
Block reward should be generated as of now for every 10 minutes.
I mean to say 9 blocks without rewards but with the gap of 1 minute and the 10th block with reward as usual.
Block reward should be generated as of now for every 10 minutes.
I mean to say 9 blocks without rewards but with the gap of 1 minute and the 10th block with reward as usual.
What kind of half-baked "idea" is that? Have you really thought about the issue, before posting? Increasing the frequency of block generation with maximum blocksize remaining the same equals an increase in total maximum blocksize. In addition faster block generation could add problems for network propagation. The reason for the on average approx. 10 minute latency for new blocks is allowing for enough time for the block information reaching the majority of nodes in the network.
Judging from your writing style, you do not seem to fully understand how Bitcoin works. There is no fixed time set for blocks being generated. It depends on the chance that miners find a new block at a specific mining difficulty. Block generation times form a probability distribution, with the average time for a new block being currently around 10 min.
ya.ya.yo!
Hmm, I don't know what effect this would have on the network. Surely if would make the blockchain muuuch larger, but would it improve confirmation times, or would we struggle to solve blocks that fast?
Also, the 9 and 1 paradigm will make miners leave for the 9, and start back hashing on the final 'profit block'. Why mine worthless blocks with no reward?
Also, the 9 and 1 paradigm will make miners leave for the 9, and start back hashing on the final 'profit block'. Why mine worthless blocks with no reward?
To solve the 1M block-size conflicts, what if the frequency of block generation will be changed to every minute.
Block reward should be generated as of now for every 10 minutes.
I mean to say 9 blocks without rewards but with the gap of 1 minute and the 10th block with reward as usual.
And one more question: will the quick confirmations support double spending ?
Block reward should be generated as of now for every 10 minutes.
I mean to say 9 blocks without rewards but with the gap of 1 minute and the 10th block with reward as usual.
And one more question: will the quick confirmations support double spending ?
Jump to: