đź“… Original date posted:2017-08-27
đź“ť Original message:Regarding storage space, have you heard about pruning? Probably you should.
On 27 Aug 2017 12:27 am, "Adam Tamir Shem-Tov via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Thank You Christian for your response.
>
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=473.0 : I dont see the relevance.
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=52859.0 : This idea does not seem
> to talking about trimming the full node. Trimming the full node is the key,
> the full node is what keeps us secure from hackers. If it can be trimmed
> without losing security, that would be good, that is what I am proposing.
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12376.0 : Same answer as 505.0.
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74559.15 : I think his proposal
> is similar to mine, unfortunately for us his predictions were way off. He
> was trying to fix this problem while believing that in the year 2020 the
> blockchain would be 4GB!!! It is not his fault, his prediction was in 2011.
> But you can see, by his prediction, which was rational at the time, was way
> off. And it stresses my point, we need to fix this now. Too bad, no one
> took him seriously back then, when the block chain i was 1GB.
> *https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56226.0
> <https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56226.0>;*: Another guy with a
> valid point, who was first acknowledged and then apparently ignored.
> .
> To summarize, this problem was brought up about 6 years ago, when the
> blockchain was 1GB in size, Now it is about 140GB in size. I think it is
> about time we stop ignoring this problem, and realize something needs to
> change, or else the only full-nodes you will have will be with private
> multi-million dollar companies, because no private citizen will have the
> storage space to keep it. That would make bitcoin the worst decentralized
> or uncentralized system in history.
>
>
> On 27 August 2017 at 00:42, Christian Riley <criley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There have been a number of similar (identical?) proposals over the
>> years, some were discussed in these threads:
>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56226.0
>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=505.0
>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=473.0
>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=52859.0
>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12376.0
>> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74559.15
>>
>>
>> On Aug 26, 2017, at 5:01 PM, Adam Tamir Shem-Tov via bitcoin-dev <
>> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> <B>Solving the Scalability Problem Part II</B>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> <BR>
>> In the previous post I showed a way to minimize the blocks on the block
>> chain, to lower the amount of space it takes on the hard drive, without
>> losing any relevant information.
>> I added a note, saying that the transaction chain needs to be rewritten,
>> but I did not give much detail to it.<BR>
>> Here is how that would work:<BR>
>> <B>The Genesis Account:</B>
>> -----------------------------------------<BR>
>> The problem with changing the transaction and block chain, is that it
>> cannot be done without knowing the private key of the sender of the of the
>> funds for each account. There is however a way to circumvent that problem.
>> That is to create a special account called the “Genesis Account”, this
>> account’s Private Key and Public Key will be available to everyone.<BR>
>> But this account will not be able to send or receive any funds in a
>> normal block, it will be blocked--blacklisted. So no one can intentionally
>> use it. The only time this account will be used is in the pruning block,
>> a.k.a Exodus Block.<BR>
>> When creating the new pruned block chain and transaction chain, all the
>> funds that are now in accounts must be legitimate, and it would be
>> difficult to legitimize them unless they were sent from a legitimate
>> account, with a public key, and a private key which can be verified. That
>> is where the Genesis account comes in. All funds in the Exodus Block will
>> show as though they originated and were sent from the Genesis Account using
>> its privatekey to generate each transaction.<BR>
>> The funds which are sent, must match exactly the funds existing in the
>> most updated ledger in block 1000 (the last block as stated in my previous
>> post).<BR>
>> In this way the Exodus Block can be verified, and the Genesis Account
>> cannot give free money to anyway, because if someone tried to, it would
>> fail verification.<BR>
>>
>> <BR>
>> Now the next problem is that the number of Bitcoins keeps expanding and
>> so the funds in the Genesis Account need to expand as well. That can be
>> done by showing as though this account is the account which is mining the
>> coins, and it will be the only account in the Exodus Block which “mines”
>> the coins, and receives the mining bonus. In the Exodus Block all coins
>> mined by the real miners will show as though they were mined by Genesis and
>> sent to the miners through a regular transaction.
>>
>> <BR>
>>
>> Adam Shem-Tov
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170827/9a7e5ee0/attachment-0001.html>;
Jorge TimĂłn [ARCHIVE] /
npub1fx…cl2d8
2023-06-07 20:05:03
in reply to nevent1q…jg9p
Author Public Key
npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8Published at
2023-06-07 20:05:03Event JSON
{
"id": "106b126cbaa973781cd0a05e841624a03264d26fa7d54bd576983d1f3c8a61db",
"pubkey": "498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84",
"created_at": 1686161103,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0c13e91ae3dd52e93c3e0b94748a7765f8d6aa9f3d87e8afb95404722d415e12",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"416b351cb49aed869b46987ee1cf2d05b6a51200f45a15ba9964a88e8e10abef",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"ddab60ab07cfd499e98f10c97115e429bbf06c4ac228b59c612f057a293ee388"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-08-27\n📝 Original message:Regarding storage space, have you heard about pruning? Probably you should.\n\nOn 27 Aug 2017 12:27 am, \"Adam Tamir Shem-Tov via bitcoin-dev\" \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Thank You Christian for your response.\n\u003e\n\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=473.0 : I dont see the relevance.\n\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=52859.0 : This idea does not seem\n\u003e to talking about trimming the full node. Trimming the full node is the key,\n\u003e the full node is what keeps us secure from hackers. If it can be trimmed\n\u003e without losing security, that would be good, that is what I am proposing.\n\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12376.0 : Same answer as 505.0.\n\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74559.15 : I think his proposal\n\u003e is similar to mine, unfortunately for us his predictions were way off. He\n\u003e was trying to fix this problem while believing that in the year 2020 the\n\u003e blockchain would be 4GB!!! It is not his fault, his prediction was in 2011.\n\u003e But you can see, by his prediction, which was rational at the time, was way\n\u003e off. And it stresses my point, we need to fix this now. Too bad, no one\n\u003e took him seriously back then, when the block chain i was 1GB.\n\u003e *https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56226.0\n\u003e \u003chttps://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56226.0\u003e*: Another guy with a\n\u003e valid point, who was first acknowledged and then apparently ignored.\n\u003e .\n\u003e To summarize, this problem was brought up about 6 years ago, when the\n\u003e blockchain was 1GB in size, Now it is about 140GB in size. I think it is\n\u003e about time we stop ignoring this problem, and realize something needs to\n\u003e change, or else the only full-nodes you will have will be with private\n\u003e multi-million dollar companies, because no private citizen will have the\n\u003e storage space to keep it. That would make bitcoin the worst decentralized\n\u003e or uncentralized system in history.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On 27 August 2017 at 00:42, Christian Riley \u003ccriley at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e There have been a number of similar (identical?) proposals over the\n\u003e\u003e years, some were discussed in these threads:\n\u003e\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56226.0\n\u003e\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=505.0\n\u003e\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=473.0\n\u003e\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=52859.0\n\u003e\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12376.0\n\u003e\u003e https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74559.15\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e On Aug 26, 2017, at 5:01 PM, Adam Tamir Shem-Tov via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003cB\u003eSolving the Scalability Problem Part II\u003c/B\u003e\n\u003e\u003e --------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\u003e \u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e In the previous post I showed a way to minimize the blocks on the block\n\u003e\u003e chain, to lower the amount of space it takes on the hard drive, without\n\u003e\u003e losing any relevant information.\n\u003e\u003e I added a note, saying that the transaction chain needs to be rewritten,\n\u003e\u003e but I did not give much detail to it.\u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Here is how that would work:\u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003cB\u003eThe Genesis Account:\u003c/B\u003e\n\u003e\u003e -----------------------------------------\u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e The problem with changing the transaction and block chain, is that it\n\u003e\u003e cannot be done without knowing the private key of the sender of the of the\n\u003e\u003e funds for each account. There is however a way to circumvent that problem.\n\u003e\u003e That is to create a special account called the “Genesis Account”, this\n\u003e\u003e account’s Private Key and Public Key will be available to everyone.\u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e But this account will not be able to send or receive any funds in a\n\u003e\u003e normal block, it will be blocked--blacklisted. So no one can intentionally\n\u003e\u003e use it. The only time this account will be used is in the pruning block,\n\u003e\u003e a.k.a Exodus Block.\u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e When creating the new pruned block chain and transaction chain, all the\n\u003e\u003e funds that are now in accounts must be legitimate, and it would be\n\u003e\u003e difficult to legitimize them unless they were sent from a legitimate\n\u003e\u003e account, with a public key, and a private key which can be verified. That\n\u003e\u003e is where the Genesis account comes in. All funds in the Exodus Block will\n\u003e\u003e show as though they originated and were sent from the Genesis Account using\n\u003e\u003e its privatekey to generate each transaction.\u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e The funds which are sent, must match exactly the funds existing in the\n\u003e\u003e most updated ledger in block 1000 (the last block as stated in my previous\n\u003e\u003e post).\u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e In this way the Exodus Block can be verified, and the Genesis Account\n\u003e\u003e cannot give free money to anyway, because if someone tried to, it would\n\u003e\u003e fail verification.\u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Now the next problem is that the number of Bitcoins keeps expanding and\n\u003e\u003e so the funds in the Genesis Account need to expand as well. That can be\n\u003e\u003e done by showing as though this account is the account which is mining the\n\u003e\u003e coins, and it will be the only account in the Exodus Block which “mines”\n\u003e\u003e the coins, and receives the mining bonus. In the Exodus Block all coins\n\u003e\u003e mined by the real miners will show as though they were mined by Genesis and\n\u003e\u003e sent to the miners through a regular transaction.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003cBR\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Adam Shem-Tov\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170827/9a7e5ee0/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "9f02adce695d3dcef914b775216ce3b1bdb94b77be4d500caa3507ff7e3ada90d67004452dc59aa00ea1efefb372d98cbf68ebbafb911ff1777db9a7831994cf"
}