Suggestion for totalization blocks. | Bitcointalksearch.org

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: donking on April 24, 2012, 05:58:45 PM

So basically bitcoin can be attacked by creating a billion different addresses and then transferring the smallest amount possible to that address?

(10 Bitcoin / 0.00000001)=1000000000
1000000000*(0.258kB per transaction?)

=246 GB addition to block chain?

Not bad for just 10 Bitcoin.
Huh

You really thought nobody (good or bad) thought of that till now?

Satoshi paper should be require reading before anyone is able to propose
a) a fatal flaw or attack on the network
b) some defense against a fatal flaw (likely worse than the non-existent "fatal" flaw)
c) some desperately needed breaking protocol change

http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Foxpup

legendary

Activity: 4542

Merit: 3393

Vile Vixen and Miss Bitcointalk 2021-2023

Quote from: donking on April 24, 2012, 05:58:45 PM

So basically bitcoin can be attacked by creating a billion different addresses and then transferring the smallest amount possible to that address?

(10 Bitcoin / 0.00000001)=1000000000
1000000000*(0.258kB per transaction?)

=246 GB addition to block chain?

Not bad for just 10 Bitcoin.
Huh

Don't forget the transaction fee (which in this case works out to around 2 million BTC or so), otherwise such transactions will never get included in the blockchain at all.

donking

jr. member

Activity: 38

Merit: 2

So basically bitcoin can be attacked by creating a billion different addresses and then transferring the smallest amount possible to that address?

(10 Bitcoin / 0.00000001)=1000000000
1000000000*(0.258kB per transaction?)

=246 GB addition to block chain?

Not bad for just 10 Bitcoin.
Huh

vk2012

newbie

Activity: 5

Merit: 0

ok

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Creating a summary won't save any meaningful amount of space compared to pruning the blockchain and opens the chain up to some new attack vectors.

I hazard to make a prediction that no new "summary" blocks will ever be used.

Pruning can cut down the size of the blockchain by ~75% but that this means the blockchain will be rather large. As the number of users and active addresses grows it will only grow and a summary won't reduce the size more than pruning will.

A pruned blockchain contains all the unspent outs in blockchain format. Summary simply consolidates them into the same block (a huge computational task both for creation and verification). The same amount of information is still present.

light clients will be the solution for most end users going forward. Bitcoin enthusiasts, miners, pools, exchanges, major mechants, and possibly even banks will form the backbone of full nodes.

Meni Rosenfeld

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1054

See https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/block-chain-summary-or-ledger-or-balance-74559 for a suggestion like the OP's and the problems with it.

What will be done is pruning.

But it should be very clear that even with pruning, the blockchain will be big. It won't fit on a smartphone, and possibly not on a desktop PC. End-users will use Simplified Payment Verification or other solutions.

kokjo

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1000

You are WRONG!

Quote from: Jutarul on April 24, 2012, 04:22:28 AM

@Gabi: Could you please provide a reference to "what will be done". In particular, is there a technical solution developed already?

go read the bitcoin paper written by satoshi, it explains.

EDIT: http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Jutarul

donator

Activity: 994

Merit: 1000

@Gabi: Could you please provide a reference to "what will be done". In particular, is there a technical solution developed already?

mc_lovin

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1000

www.bitcointrading.com

So glad to hear there is a solution! I think the blockchain is like 2GB now? I was thinking, when all the bitcoins are released it would be like 10GB and beyond, but I'm sure you guys are hard at work preventing wasted disk space!

Gabi

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1008

If you want to walk on water, get out of the boat

Don't worry, there are already some ways to fix the problem, your idea is more or less what will be done

cloudswrest

newbie

Activity: 24

Merit: 0

  I just registered so I'm a "newbie" even though I've been following bitcoin for almost a year.

  A well known issue with the bitcoin protocol is the ever increasing length of the block chain, a copy of which every client maintains, and which contains every transaction since day zero. A possible solution occured to me:

  Why not have, after every 10,000 blocks or so, a "totalization" block that sums or totalizes the balance of every bitcoin address that has a non-zero balance (discard addresses that total to zero balance). This block can then be timestamped and hash signed by miners. New regular blocks then continue on after, and are linked to, the totalization block. After some number, perhaps 100 or so, of new blocks the totalization block can be considered validated and all block chain info prior to the totalization block can be discarded. I'll call it "regenesis"!

A metaphor to think of is rocket staging on a trip to orbit. The dead weight of older stages are discarded. For block chain length competiton you could accept the chain with the earliest totalization block with the longest chain of following blocks (but not more than 10,000). I'm sure there are issues to work out, but the idea seems sound to me.

-Cloudswrest

Topic: Suggestion for totalization blocks. (Read 996 times)