- No dependencies.
- A better way of handling "dust spam" than just forbidding those transactions for now. I anticipate problems with this in the future.
- The difficulty should be automatically reduced to the previous level if no blocks are produced for x hours.
- I'd like "complete" documentation: all non-trivial parts of the source code written in English.
I think the existing economic model is perfect.
Topic: The MOST Important Change to Bitcoin - page 3. (Read 17180 times)
I would still make it 50 BTC though, just split it up between the 2nd, 3rd, 4th place runner ups, etc. So the first place PC gets 25, the 2nd place PC gets 12, 3rd place PC gets 7, 4th place PC gets 3, etc. etc.
So perhaps as the difficulty increases, instead of giving all of the reward to the the client that got the winning block, additional runner up prizes could be given out to the node with the second, third or fourth lowest hash. This would work particularly well with the constant block verification idea that somebody mentioned in another thread since the lowness of all hashes would already be being compared.
Yes, that's what I meant. The reward would be split among N nodes with the lowest hashes, with N varying with the difficulty, such that most nodes would receive some reward every day or two. The split could be weighted, with the winner getting most of the reward.So perhaps as the difficulty increases, instead of giving all of the reward to the the client that got the winning block, additional runner up prizes could be given out to the node with the second, third or fourth lowest hash. This would work particularly well with the constant block verification idea that somebody mentioned in another thread since the lowness of all hashes would already be being compared.
Yes, that's what I meant. The reward would be split among N nodes with the lowest hashes, with N varying with the difficulty, such that most nodes would receive some reward every day or two. The split could be weighted, with the winner getting most of the reward. Bitcoin ought to regularly reward nodes for their contribution to the system, rather than offering increasingly-valuable prizes (blocks) that are increasingly-unlikely.
When I started using Bitcoin a couple weeks ago, ~2,000 Khash/s yielded ~0.8 blocks per day = ~40 bitcoins = ~$0.30 (as I recall). Now, I get zero blocks per day. If I got one, it'd be worth $2.70 or so. Arguably, if I'm patient, I'll get a block every week or two, on the average.
The problem is that most new users probably won't wait a week or two.
This isn't equivalent to keeping difficulty constant. That would accelerate the production of blocks (and bitcoins) -- which would have other (arguably bad) effects.
So perhaps as the difficulty increases, instead of giving all of the reward to the the client that got the winning block, additional runner up prizes could be given out to the node with the second, third or fourth lowest hash. This would work particularly well with the constant block verification idea that somebody mentioned in another thread since the lowness of all hashes would already be being compared. When I started using Bitcoin a couple weeks ago, ~2,000 Khash/s yielded ~0.8 blocks per day = ~40 bitcoins = ~$0.30 (as I recall). Now, I get zero blocks per day. If I got one, it'd be worth $2.70 or so. Arguably, if I'm patient, I'll get a block every week or two, on the average.
The problem is that most new users probably won't wait a week or two.
This isn't equivalent to keeping difficulty constant. That would accelerate the production of blocks (and bitcoins) -- which would have other (arguably bad) effects.
Bitcoin ought to regularly reward nodes for their contribution to the system, rather than offering increasingly-valuable prizes (blocks) that are increasingly-unlikely.
When I started using Bitcoin a couple weeks ago, ~2,000 Khash/s yielded ~0.8 blocks per day = ~40 bitcoins = ~$0.30 (as I recall). Now, I get zero blocks per day. If I got one, it'd be worth $2.70 or so. Arguably, if I'm patient, I'll get a block every week or two, on the average.
The problem is that most new users probably won't wait a week or two.
This isn't equivalent to keeping difficulty constant. That would accelerate the production of blocks (and bitcoins) -- which would have other (arguably bad) effects.
When I started using Bitcoin a couple weeks ago, ~2,000 Khash/s yielded ~0.8 blocks per day = ~40 bitcoins = ~$0.30 (as I recall). Now, I get zero blocks per day. If I got one, it'd be worth $2.70 or so. Arguably, if I'm patient, I'll get a block every week or two, on the average.
The problem is that most new users probably won't wait a week or two.
This isn't equivalent to keeping difficulty constant. That would accelerate the production of blocks (and bitcoins) -- which would have other (arguably bad) effects.
Leave everything exactly as it is, except have the difficulty adjusted every 1,000 blocks instead of every 2,016 blocks just to make it twice as responsive to server farms joining the network and then when light CPUs are running the network.
And a splash screen! For windows client anyway, the Linux client always seems to pop up right away.
And a splash screen! For windows client anyway, the Linux client always seems to pop up right away.
If you could go back and make any one change to Bitcoin while it was first being developed, what change would you choose? Feel free to list other changes, but share which you would prefer over all others. You're welcome to change your mind, so don't stress yourself out over it.
The one change which I prefer would be to have the rate of bitcoins being minted stay constant forever.
Another idea I've heard is to have block difficulty constant to so that the number of amount of bitcoins being dispensed increases as the swarm increases. Recently somebody mentioned changing the block history to a balance sheet to reduce the block chain size. Another recent idea was to have the back end and front end of Bitcoin fully separate. Deciding that the client is the same except it makes you rich and other such silly changes don't count.
Now it's your turn. What would be the MOST important change to Bitcoin?
The one change which I prefer would be to have the rate of bitcoins being minted stay constant forever.
Another idea I've heard is to have block difficulty constant to so that the number of amount of bitcoins being dispensed increases as the swarm increases. Recently somebody mentioned changing the block history to a balance sheet to reduce the block chain size. Another recent idea was to have the back end and front end of Bitcoin fully separate. Deciding that the client is the same except it makes you rich and other such silly changes don't count.
Now it's your turn. What would be the MOST important change to Bitcoin?
Jump to: