@ B.N.: thanks for confirming that. It's all good. All good. All good -- and . . . let's you and I and Others refresh the theory on bloat:
that is, we shall use Uno to buy stuff (in Btc via Shape-Shift). The question to ask is: what is the optimal amount of transactional volume? Where is the middle ground between:
(a) enough Uno transactional volume to maintain a strong merchant network? and
(b) an amount of transactions that will -- even decades down the track ('cause we're uniquely 'future-oriented' here at Uno) -- result in bloat?
Approaching the topic from the other end: is blockchain bloat a problem and if so, can it be dealt with outside of limiting or dictating user transaction volume?
If I understand correctly, the answer is "yes, with Merkle trees."
Here's an article which may be helpful:
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/17824/how-to-ensure-network-scalibility-fighting-blockchain-bloat/One company that seems to be doing this already for Bitcoin is Factom:
http://factom.org/They're building extended function on the blockchain and keeping it size-efficient, you might say. Factom don't have to be The People who do this, they're an example of what appears to be a well-organised bunch who have been looking into this for some time. Having just learned and read about this while composing this reply, I suspect a solution to blockchain bloat is very much an active project right now.
--
Also, here's a quote from a recent discussion about BTC bc bloat right here on the bct forums:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9926343There are many others and you can even search "blockchain bloat" (including quote marks) in Google to see other stuff about this. Being that UNO is SHA256, it's handy for parallel consideration
