Also faster blocks tend to result in more orphan blocks and centralized mining, because it makes the delay for crossing the network more significant relative to the block time. Ten minutes is a decent compromise, actually.
And for TaPoS developments, you need block times AT LEAST that long to try to collect enough transactions in a block to get the variance down somewhat to something more consistent and less easy to manipulate. But I don't see Bitcoin going that direction.
Topic: What if YOU could put 1 feature, change, whatever, into the Bitcoin protocol? (Read 3134 times)
April 12, 2015, 03:13:09 PM
April 12, 2015, 01:13:56 PM
Must be faster confirmation time.
Current BTC has average 10 minutes block time design, it is obvious that Satoshi underestimated the btc's future. If it is reduced to 60 s like dogecoin, BTC will be more widely used. More public companies would hug BTC.
Current BTC has average 10 minutes block time design, it is obvious that Satoshi underestimated the btc's future. If it is reduced to 60 s like dogecoin, BTC will be more widely used. More public companies would hug BTC.
No, no, no. You're still not understanding it. Bitcoin confirmations take ~10 minutes, yes, but for most transactions, merchants can (and do nowadays) accept unconfirmed transactions just fine.
yeah ok, but it's not the safeft thing to do, unconfrimed transaction are pretty risky, especially if they are big value transaction they are subject to finney attack
Most transactions are not risky (a Finney attack is more expensive than a cup of coffee), but if you're buying something really expensive (like a car), all the paperwork will take more than 10 minutes anyway.
April 12, 2015, 03:28:21 AM
the only thing that i want right now, is a faster confirmation, i'm not sure how the miners feel about receiving a block every...let's say 1 min(like doge)
but it would require reviewing the block structure and reward....too much of an hard fork i guess
Exactly, faster confirmations times would make bitcoin more useful for real-life usage and other services. but it would require reviewing the block structure and reward....too much of an hard fork i guess
April 12, 2015, 03:10:42 AM
Must be faster confirmation time.
Current BTC has average 10 minutes block time design, it is obvious that Satoshi underestimated the btc's future. If it is reduced to 60 s like dogecoin, BTC will be more widely used. More public companies would hug BTC.
Current BTC has average 10 minutes block time design, it is obvious that Satoshi underestimated the btc's future. If it is reduced to 60 s like dogecoin, BTC will be more widely used. More public companies would hug BTC.
No, no, no. You're still not understanding it. Bitcoin confirmations take ~10 minutes, yes, but for most transactions, merchants can (and do nowadays) accept unconfirmed transactions just fine.
yeah ok, but it's not the safest thing to do, unconfrimed transaction are pretty risky, especially if they are big value transaction they are subject to finney attack
April 12, 2015, 12:35:40 AM
Must be faster confirmation time.
Current BTC has average 10 minutes block time design, it is obvious that Satoshi underestimated the btc's future. If it is reduced to 60 s like dogecoin, BTC will be more widely used. More public companies would hug BTC.
Current BTC has average 10 minutes block time design, it is obvious that Satoshi underestimated the btc's future. If it is reduced to 60 s like dogecoin, BTC will be more widely used. More public companies would hug BTC.
No, no, no. You're still not understanding it. Bitcoin confirmations take ~10 minutes, yes, but for most transactions, merchants can (and do nowadays) accept unconfirmed transactions just fine.
April 11, 2015, 11:39:23 PM
Pretty easy question here, i would ask him to make such changes, that address 1MZvjgQFQdAUUx5n6Prxw4oGuRycVmaZYR has 5 digit number of btc to its name 
I think its only fair that this should actualy happen, since we all love tampering with bitcoin protocol..right..
On a more serious note,i would implement address "blacklist", where btc addresses used for extremely wrong purpuses could be ignored by the whole network.
even tho something like this would have to mean another bitcoin fork, i would want an option that would NOT require one.
cheers
I think its only fair that this should actualy happen, since we all love tampering with bitcoin protocol..right..
On a more serious note,i would implement address "blacklist", where btc addresses used for extremely wrong purpuses could be ignored by the whole network.
even tho something like this would have to mean another bitcoin fork, i would want an option that would NOT require one.
cheers
April 11, 2015, 11:30:01 PM
A built-in Bitcoin lottery. By default, every Bitcoin transaction over a base amount* would give the sender an entry into The Official Bitcoin Cryptographic Lottery that is awarded every 2 years. Funded from a micro-tax on qualifying transactions. Senders could check a box to opt-out if they want. International. Transparent. Publicity generating. No administrative fees. Would encourage people to download wallets. Would encourage people to fund wallets. Would encourage transactions.
*micro transactions would not be taxed and would not earn an entry
*micro transactions would not be taxed and would not earn an entry
April 11, 2015, 10:51:49 PM
Must be faster confirmation time.
Current BTC has average 10 minutes block time design, it is obvious that Satoshi underestimated the btc's future. If it is reduced to 60 s like dogecoin, BTC will be more widely used. More public companies would hug BTC.
Current BTC has average 10 minutes block time design, it is obvious that Satoshi underestimated the btc's future. If it is reduced to 60 s like dogecoin, BTC will be more widely used. More public companies would hug BTC.
April 11, 2015, 10:44:18 PM
If i could put one feature into bitcoin, it would be to somehow allow a "contact page" where i can find my contacts and instantly send BTC to them without having to find and enter their address everytime. Now, im not sure if this is something that would need to be changed in the bitcoin protocol, or if it is just something a wallet can implement.
April 11, 2015, 10:38:57 PM
Would it be possible to have the transaction fee vary based upon how much data that was included in the blockchain? If people wanted to use the blockchain for other purposes then they user would have to an extra fee to miners for the bloat. Not sure if possible or other downsides.
April 11, 2015, 06:42:40 PM
How about a GUI for multisigs in the core wallet?
Right now you have to create them in the console and spend via rawtransactions, unless you want to use some 3rd party.
I would have thought about this: "Why is the Core Wallet so damn simple looking? it has no features". But I realized the core wallet is not really meant to use for mass adoption, it's meant to used for node runners, which basically means the more basic it is the better to do its job. Right now you have to create them in the console and spend via rawtransactions, unless you want to use some 3rd party.
April 11, 2015, 11:33:38 AM
I would add a CheckBox-suppressible ('never show again' and 'remind me later') popup that prompts users to encrypt their wallets, write down their passphrase so they dont forget it, and present them with an option to download a wallet copy to any media source (cd, floppy, thumb drive, local file, memory chip/card, external device etc.)
What's a floppy? lol
Remember the 90 min cassettes to load programs back in the Commodore days?
April 11, 2015, 11:32:05 AM
I would like to find a way to remove anonymity. It attracts scammers and ponzi pumpers and brings nothing to honest people. If are not a criminal, what do you hide from?
Isn't anonymity removed enough already? You can't buy btc using fiat without having to tell them your grandmother's maiden name! I'm finding it hard to KEEP anonymity in BTC these days!
April 10, 2015, 07:10:22 PM
I would add a CheckBox-suppressible ('never show again' and 'remind me later') popup that prompts users to encrypt their wallets, write down their passphrase so they dont forget it, and present them with an option to download a wallet copy to any media source (cd, floppy, thumb drive, local file, memory chip/card, external device etc.)
What's a floppy? lol
April 10, 2015, 02:29:55 PM
I would add a CheckBox-suppressible ('never show again' and 'remind me later') popup that prompts users to encrypt their wallets, write down their passphrase so they dont forget it, and present them with an option to download a wallet copy to any media source (cd, floppy, thumb drive, local file, memory chip/card, external device etc.)
What's a floppy? lol
My TRS-80 uses these: http://www.freeimages.co.uk/galleries/transtech/informationtechnology/slides/quarter_inch_disk.htm
I still got a bunch of them. They were an upgrade from the cassette drive. haha
That could actually be one of the best ways to store a Bitcoin wallet safely. No one will be able to read that disk these days
Then again, these disks are rather soft and I wouldn't trust magnetic media with a Bitcoin wallet.Yes, flexible magnetic media was sketchy. The going rule was to create 3 copies of your work, keep one Master Copy securely-stored in a humidity and temperature-controlled environment, then alternate usage between the working copies to decrease rate of deterioration and data corruption.
Ha yeah, I remember when I downloaded something onto 3.5" disks, back when I didn't have Internet access at home. And for the important stuff I made sure to have the data on redundant disks.
April 10, 2015, 02:28:27 PM
An incentive for full nodes, perhaps.
Yea sadly I only run my bitcoin core when I need to, I can't do the 24 hours always on thing. Those that do should get a reward or have an incentive like no transaction fees or something.
This is a very nice idea, but unfortunately very very difficult to implement. Basically it's impossible, since you can't prove you're running a full node. Historically, the benefit of running a full node were the transaction fees.
April 10, 2015, 12:10:11 PM
I would add a CheckBox-suppressible ('never show again' and 'remind me later') popup that prompts users to encrypt their wallets, write down their passphrase so they dont forget it, and present them with an option to download a wallet copy to any media source (cd, floppy, thumb drive, local file, memory chip/card, external device etc.)
What's a floppy? lol
My TRS-80 uses these: http://www.freeimages.co.uk/galleries/transtech/informationtechnology/slides/quarter_inch_disk.htm
I still got a bunch of them. They were an upgrade from the cassette drive. haha
That could actually be one of the best ways to store a Bitcoin wallet safely. No one will be able to read that disk these days
Then again, these disks are rather soft and I wouldn't trust magnetic media with a Bitcoin wallet.Yes, flexible magnetic media was sketchy. The going rule was to create 3 copies of your work, keep one Master Copy securely-stored in a humidity and temperature-controlled environment, then alternate usage between the working copies to decrease rate of deterioration and data corruption.
April 10, 2015, 06:59:59 AM
I would like to find a way to remove anonymity. It attracts scammers and ponzi pumpers and brings nothing to honest people. If are not a criminal, what do you hide from?
Wouldn't that be against the feature concepts of bitcoin? Identity and credentials are a very vital part of ones' life--particularly people who are surfing in the internet. It can cause security implications if ever your personal information leaked in the interwebs.
Well, you can have it both. You can have anonymity but then you have tons of scammers and ponzi pumpers as well which devastate BTC community. They do it exactly cause they are able to hide behind that anonymity. Bunch of portals, cloud mining websites and investment schemes run by these people and there s no way of knowing who s behind it or trace their transactions.
I m not talking about you or I being able to trance them but police or any other law enforcement agency cant do it either. On the other hand, people share photos of their children on Facebook. How come?
April 10, 2015, 06:41:43 AM
I would like to find a way to remove anonymity. It attracts scammers and ponzi pumpers and brings nothing to honest people. If are not a criminal, what do you hide from?
usually anon is wanted because of taxes also, not only for criminal things, and you can add privacy to that, not everyone use facebook and want to shouts to the world his identity
April 10, 2015, 04:44:46 AM
I would like to find a way to remove anonymity. It attracts scammers and ponzi pumpers and brings nothing to honest people. If are not a criminal, what do you hide from?
Wouldn't that be against the feature concepts of bitcoin? Identity and credentials are a very vital part of ones' life--particularly people who are surfing in the internet. It can cause security implications if ever your personal information leaked in the interwebs.
Jump to: