Topic: Your bets for 2014 (Read 6867 times)

Bump.

January 17th, and we're almost at 15$ already.

You sound like an IT guy with no understanding of the underlying algorithms and methodologies.  What do you think people did back when each bit of RAM was literally a magnetic torus hand-threaded with wires and data was stored in a big linear magnetic tape that took minutes to "seek" to the proper position?  I didn't live it but have read about it.  There are clever algorithms (btree being one) that minimize uncached key lookup time.  Holding all the database keys in RAM is a very new technique only recently made possible due to how cheap RAM has gotten.  Also, all unspent txn don't need to be held.  Lots of coins out there don't move at all (~90%) which is why some people think a lot of hoarding is going on.  So the RAM need only cache the acts/txns that are "in play".

And if bitcoin becomes incrediably popular, imagine a network that dynamically creates new blockchains among commonly-transacting user groups (regional, for example) spends BTC from the main blockchain into this new chain and then after a few months (or whatever) merges the chain back.  This technique that would make it so that the main blockchain does not see every microtransaction in the entire world, and subchains could have either smaller or longer settling times depending on the requirements for that chain.  Sure it would take a lot of effort to implement.  No point doing it until there really is a problem with the system as it exists today.

As for my prediction, atleast above $100 by end of 2014.

You've seen it here first.

I agree with you that if the unspent output stops fitting in RAM, then we have an issue.
Regardless of algorithm used ,O(1) or O(log n), disk seek is slow.

But as many have pointed out and which you refuse to acknowledge, current unspent outputs will have to grow by atleast 30x before that is an issue with TODAY's RAM sizes.
And unspent output size should grow parallel to bitcoin adoption. So we are looking at a 30x increase in Bitcoin adoption before we even have to worry about today's client.

Also stop basing your arguments with v0.72 which we all know has issues with disk seek.
Go download v0.8, use it, sync it once in 2 weeks before coming here to spread FUD.

No problem? You fokin kidding me? If I use Bitcoin for payments once a week or two, and need to wait hours for sync each time I launch client - its not a problem? My PC hangs for that time - its not a problem?

Don't offer me crunch! Imagine I am regular stupid user - not Satan slave. Is it not a problem? Where is log(n) in this formula? Clever blind bulls.

Allright   You laugh me a lot here.

I saw databases above 4G with good btree indexes (on integer field!) and know what is it for single SATA HDD.

I'll check your 0.8 version

No, you're being theoretical too.  There is currently no problem, and you are imagining usage levels that will take decades to arrive.  I'm being much more practical than you about adoption rate, yet somehow I'm more bullish .

Looks you are completely theoretical, while I'm practical.

With your optimism paypal can run their processing on raspberry PI 

1 trillion? And PC will survive? LOL.

Right, once we reach the 1 trillion unspent transactions in a decade or 3.  And all advances in storage technology will stop from today forward.

That is what i said. Regular user will expirence difficulties, including HW incompatibility to run bitcoin. At least vanilla bitcoin.

All other - empty bubble talk.

Oh grondilu... he just helps run the boards.  You should know bitcoin has no staff, and forum staff don't really have any more weight with the bitcoin community than anyone else.

But I imagine if SSD becomes necessary (it isn't even close now) that is what people will recommend.

Here is a guy with "Staff" near nickname talking to me.

I have no staff.

Yeah. Haha. I dont too close familiar with BDB, but afaik MySQL uses BTREE in indexes also. I didnt noticed your log(n) formula works there.

So you staff going to announce that good highend SSD needed for using bitcoin? My 7200 is not the cheapest HDD.

Sorry, I read "stats under running bitcoin" and mistranslated your gibberish as stats with bitcoin running.  I already agreed that 100 IOPS was correct, I thought we were moving on.

 

I dont talk about the code - I show you HDD capabilities. Where are 2000 seeks?