What if YOU could put 1 feature, change, whatever, into the Bitcoin protocol? - page 4.

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: freedombit on April 09, 2015, 01:58:38 AM

Somehow reduce the processing power needs so that a simple smart phone can participate in the P2P verification and message relay processes of the blockchain for decentralization purposes.

As I said before, a network secured by smartphones is way too insecure for me to be interested in it.

e1ghtSpace

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1001

Crypto since 2014

I would make the mining algo double after 5 years.
It would start at sha128 for the first 5 years. Maybe a few people'll get hacked, it'd be cool.
Then on the 5th year (at this current time) it would be sha256 and everyone will be confident that their coins are secure.
Then on the 10th year its sha512 and people will be very secure.
And it keeps going up.
Ultimately it'll probably never work. Addresses will keep getting longer and longer. (I think) but hey, it'd be a funny altcoin. I don't know how it would work though.

freedombit

sr. member

Activity: 274

Merit: 250

Quote from: Kprawn on April 09, 2015, 01:29:07 AM

I would like normal people with low spec computers. {CPU/GPU's} to be once again able to mine Bitcoins. It should have built in code to detect mining farms and throttle/reduce their income, to make it less viable for them to mine on such a big scale. {ASIC proof}

Then, companies like DELL can pre-install mining software with every computer the sell, to be enabled by the user, when the computer is not in use. {The user will then get rewarded for sharing his CPU/GPU to help with mining and he can pay his electricity bill automatically} In a perfect world, this should cover his full bill, with the added electricity he used for normal use and the extra electricity he used for the mining. Wink

This will put some money back into the pockets of MANY people, who are in debt and enable projects where electricity costs are a issue and also help with sustaining Bitcoin mining.

We can just dream. Sad

This seems very important to the infrastructure and trust in the system. Somehow reduce the processing power needs so that a simple smart phone can participate in the P2P verification and message relay processes of the blockchain for decentralization purposes. On that note, is it possible to break up the block chain so that limited data is stored by smaller processing power devices? For example, save only the last "layer" or latest balances of the blockchain. Or possibly only a "regional branch" of the blockchain. Not regional in the geographic sense, but regional in the sense of one branch of the blockchain. I think I've seen both of these ideas thrown around.

Kprawn

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1074

I would like normal people with low spec computers. {CPU/GPU's} to be once again able to mine Bitcoins. It should have built in code to detect mining farms and throttle/reduce their income, to make it less viable for them to mine on such a big scale. {ASIC proof}

Then, companies like DELL can pre-install mining software with every computer the sell, to be enabled by the user, when the computer is not in use. {The user will then get rewarded for sharing his CPU/GPU to help with mining and he can pay his electricity bill automatically} In a perfect world, this should cover his full bill, with the added electricity he used for normal use and the extra electricity he used for the mining. Wink

This will put some money back into the pockets of MANY people, who are in debt and enable projects where electricity costs are a issue and also help with sustaining Bitcoin mining.

We can just dream. Sad

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Most answers show how much people don't know about the details of Bitcoin and the reasons the current features are like that. They try to reduce the confirmation time, because they imagine people waiting in the supermarket line for ~10 minutes, when in reality most transactions today are accepted with 0 confirmations, with little risk (proportional to the supermarket-type purchase, anyway).

fryarminer

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on April 08, 2015, 02:20:40 PM

Every time a block is found I'd have the official Bitcoin client send a command to a connected 3d pastry printer to print a dozen donuts. Then I'd crowd fund sending a specially designed pastry printer with a client built in to every federal law enforcement office in the USA. Then the Feds would kill to make sure the Bitcoin network is safe. You would start seeing "I Support Bitcoin" bumper stickers on the back of black unmarked SUVs all over the country.

THAT IS AWESOME!!!!

Btcvilla

sr. member

Activity: 1078

Merit: 270

Decrease block timer, decrease reward, it would still make the same amount of Bitcoin yearly, just need to adjust or inflation.

spooderman

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1029

Wary

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Who's there?

IMO, it's too late to make any changes in protocol. It have solidified and even minor changes would require tremendous efforts. For example, block size limit. At the time it was introduced it was interim, quick and temporary solution with random number (1MB). But even changing this number now takes multy-year discussion.

So we could assume that practically no changes will be made to the protocol.

Therefore, whatever we want to change, have to be done on top of the protocol. It's not easy. How can we decimate block time, how could we spread halving - all without changes in the core protocol? That's the challenge!

Pecunia non olet

full member

Activity: 882

Merit: 102

PayAccept - Worldwide payments accepted in seconds

I'd reduce rewards and replace halvings with smother reduction of rewards. I would also make it multialgo and implement KGW just in case.

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

IMO, the changes should not be on the protocol, but on the team that write the core nodes. In fact, only a few of core devs control the git hub, this means if these people are compromised, then the whole bitcoin project is down. They must get enough protection

Gavin also said that it is difficult to reach consensus between core devs. Since the decision of a protocol change is seldom a technical but a political one, they really need some kind of transparent decision making mechanism

In fact, infrastructure wise the bitcoin has many area to improve to become a truly trusted world currency, there are so many uncertainties in its security model. Today, people just download a software and pray for the rest part, but when a retirement fund wants to put billions of dollar in this currency for 20 years, the bitcoin network is still not enough robust in many aspects. The risk of ruin is still larger than our financial system today

dasource

hero member

Activity: 821

Merit: 1000

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on April 08, 2015, 01:00:09 PM

everything is perfect for now. the rest of the system will adapt changes if necessary.

Could not agree more

ensurance982

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Trust me!

Quote from: TheButterZone on April 08, 2015, 06:20:28 PM

I would change the protocol so that exchanges could no longer be "hacked" or flash crashed - every order would require a signature from the owner of the BTC made within the last block, before it fills.

Huh, interesting concept. I think a lot of the quick acting exchanges couldn't work that way anymore, though. I believe what you want is multisig-exchanges, so at least no one can withdraw the coins without the holder's consent. Also that isn't feasible in some case, though.

Kazimir

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1011

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on April 08, 2015, 02:20:40 PM

Every time a block is found I'd have the official Bitcoin client send a command to a connected 3d pastry printer to print a dozen donuts. Then I'd crowd fund sending a specially designed pastry printer with a client built in to every federal law enforcement office in the USA. Then the Feds would kill to make sure the Bitcoin network is safe. You would start seeing "I Support Bitcoin" bumper stickers on the back of black unmarked SUVs all over the country.

This. Best feature so far.

TheButterZone

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 1032

RIP Mommy

I would change the protocol so that exchanges could no longer be "hacked" or flash crashed - every order would require a signature from the owner of the BTC made within the last block, before it fills.

Meuh6879

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1012

in prefer "in the core" ... instead of in the web (that it can easly shutdown a domain name).

ensurance982

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Trust me!

Quote from: Meuh6879 on April 08, 2015, 04:55:58 PM

like edonkey network (or kad network) in emule software, if bitcoin core can integrate a counter of nodes (per hour) and number of BTC transmitted per hour ... it could be cool to see.

But those metrics are already inherently available already, you only need to gather those information and make them available to the person using your client. Don't think this is something that needs to be incorporated into the core protocol.

Meuh6879

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1012

like edonkey network (or kad network) in emule software, if bitcoin core can integrate a counter of nodes (per hour) and number of BTC transmitted per hour ... it could be cool to see.

ensurance982

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Trust me!

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on April 08, 2015, 02:20:40 PM

Every time a block is found I'd have the official Bitcoin client send a command to a connected 3d pastry printer to print a dozen donuts. Then I'd crowd fund sending a specially designed pastry printer with a client built in to every federal law enforcement office in the USA. Then the Feds would kill to make sure the Bitcoin network is safe. You would start seeing "I Support Bitcoin" bumper stickers on the back of black unmarked SUVs all over the country.

Ha, that's what I was aiming at with this thread: improvements and suggestions that aren't dead serious Cheesy

I like many of the ideas around here, but they are mostly pretty 'altcoiny', I want truly groundbreaking ideas.

ensurance982

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Trust me!

Quote from: GenTarkin on April 08, 2015, 12:48:50 PM

One change that I would implement first and foremost. Is a way to prevent the 51% attack from ever being carried out.
Dont ask me how I would go about it, but its something that should be at the top of EVERYONE's list whos interested in the survivability of Bitcoin longterm. As long as the 51% attack exists .. Bitcoin never stands to become a worldwide dominant currency, because its really not 'trustless' long as 51% attack is possible.

I believe that this is very very difficult to do. You effectively have to have some mechanism that can't be faked or fooled. You have to keep in mind that it's easy to pretend to be different persons/entities. The system won't even know!

Topic: What if YOU could put 1 feature, change, whatever, into the Bitcoin protocol? - page 4. (Read 3162 times)