The transactions aren't all recorded so we know everyone's balance. Yes, that would be inefficient.
They're all kept, forever, so we can prevent double-spends.
Topic: Simplify Bitcoin - page 2. (Read 2387 times)
Ehh, ok I'm in a store, I WANT to buy something. I SEND the money becuase I want the store owner to give me say a Snickers. He's not gonna give me the Snickers unless he gets the money! I want all 50 to say: ok, give him the Snickers.
Yes.. but according to your idea after this you throw away all records/transactions - so when you try to use the same money again at a different snickers store the same 50 nodes won't remember you have no money or maybe its 50 new ones.So the store manager is cheated.
The whole point of the blockchain/BTC is to prevent this. Without saving all the linked transactions linked ultimately to the header, the headers are pointless.
Ehh, ok I'm in a store, I WANT to buy something. I SEND the money becuase I want the store owner to give me say a Snickers. He's not gonna give me the Snickers unless he gets the money! I want all 50 to say: Ok, give him the Snickers.
It wouldn't be self signed. It would be p2p controlled, so nodes will ask my node in realtime if I really sent the coins and when enough (say 50) has verified the transaction with me (in a secure manner, ie. they will know it's really me they are talking to) then the transaction is registered and committed.
How would your node not just say you sent/did not send it to all 50?No offense, but it seems to me you need to go read the wiki or some FAQ.
It wouldn't be self signed. It would be p2p controlled, so nodes will ask my node in realtime if I really sent the coins and when enough (say 50, EDIT: this should be variable, so you can set it to 50 if you're in a rush or 100.000 if you're making a big purchase which is not time sensitive) has verified the transaction with me (in a secure manner, ie. they will know it's really me they are talking to) then the transaction is committed. registered and committed after say 500 of nodes have verified the transaction.
Transferring current funds is easy.
Only 1 big problem left: Your client HAS to be online when you make a transaction. I think it's a reasonable tradeoff seen we have to be able to compete with VISA and Mastercard which the current system (even if Moores law keeps up) has no chance in hell of delivering.
Transferring current funds is easy.
Only 1 big problem left: Your client HAS to be online when you make a transaction. I think it's a reasonable tradeoff seen we have to be able to compete with VISA and Mastercard which the current system (even if Moores law keeps up) has no chance in hell of delivering.
Only two problems, rather big ones.
(1) How would we know how much each person has? I know you are saying self-signed, but then I could say "I have 9001137 Bitcoins".
(2) How would you transfer the old transactions to the new system?
In reality, there is no practical way to do this.
(1) How would we know how much each person has? I know you are saying self-signed, but then I could say "I have 9001137 Bitcoins".
(2) How would you transfer the old transactions to the new system?
In reality, there is no practical way to do this.
Why do the transactions need to be stored in the block chain?
Would it be possible to drop the transaction history from the block chain and just use it for the proof of work.
Basically making bitcoinsself signed somehow, so we can save disc space and improve transaction speed/volume.
This would be possible if the bitcoins themselves are encrypted by each owner (like your wallet is now anyhow) and the p2p system only keeps track of who has how much "right now" instead of details about every historical transaction ever to occur.
Or am I missing something?
I think the new address for each payment is really a bad way to do anonymity and it's better to actually see from which account (address) the money originated from. The address (account) is still anonymous, just not uniquely anonymous.
Would it be possible to drop the transaction history from the block chain and just use it for the proof of work.
Basically making bitcoins
This would be possible if the bitcoins themselves are encrypted by each owner (like your wallet is now anyhow) and the p2p system only keeps track of who has how much "right now" instead of details about every historical transaction ever to occur.
Or am I missing something?
I think the new address for each payment is really a bad way to do anonymity and it's better to actually see from which account (address) the money originated from. The address (account) is still anonymous, just not uniquely anonymous.
Jump to: