Blockchain technology

DLOE · Nov 1, 2016

What do you guys think about blockchain technology?

Might actually be the wrong way of saying it, what are your views on blockchain?

Will it change the way we do things? Will it put businesses out of business and will it change the way we do our day to day things like passports, money transfers, buying houses...

I think it will, stuff like this makes me really happy: https://ddmca.nl/press-release-hardwell-first-dj-in-blockchain/

Are we at the beginning of a new era?

dee · Nov 7, 2016

I think its going to be huge. The whole point is that the ledger exist everywhere so cant be tampered with. I think as well a currency its going to take of in al kinds of areas.... copyright, contracts (already happening) banking. The list is endless.

accelerator · Nov 7, 2016

I'm certainly taking an interest in it. It is likely to be pretty disruptive. In general, it seems like a good thing to me but it's always hard to predict how things will pan out.

Edwin · Nov 8, 2016

Isn't it eventually self defeating in that, the more popular it becomes, the faster the blockchain grows and the longer it takes to transmit it to other nodes, and to validate it?

Admittedly I may have missed something...

dee · Nov 8, 2016

Edwin said:
Isn't it eventually self defeating in that, the more popular it becomes, the faster the blockchain grows and the longer it takes to transmit it to other nodes, and to validate it?

Admittedly I may have missed something...

I think there are different levels of node. As a bank client for instance you dont need to keep the whole ledger as the bank does it for you. I think the current bit coin is up to about 16GBs which is obviously more than most people want to deal with on a laptop.

I think you can if you want to though..... which kinda the point.

dee · Nov 8, 2016

Here you go:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability

Interesting (possibly

) stuff on transaction rates and scaleability of blockchain

Edwin · Nov 8, 2016

dee said:
I think there are different levels of node. As a bank client for instance you dont need to keep the whole ledger as the bank does it for you. I think the current bit coin is up to about 16GBs which is obviously more than most people want to deal with on a laptop.

Thanks for that, and the Scalability link. The fact that Bitcoin's block chain has grown to 16GB when it's capped at 7tps suggests that if a blockchain ever gets used for something really, really big (e.g. as a quasi-cash replacement) we would very quickly be looking at multiple terabytes of storage for the full chain, and growing by several GB a day. That sounds like a big "ask" when the things the blockchain tech are trying to compete with don't have even a tiny fraction of the overhead (nor do they keep growing like crazy all the time, which is what would happen to a popular blockchain)

But I see the point that it's theoretically "doable" - my issue with it is whether it will ever be worth it in practice to send TB of data back and forth 24/7 just to validate etransactions.

dee · Nov 8, 2016

Edwin said:
Thanks for that, and the Scalability link. The fact that Bitcoin's block chain has grown to 16GB when it's capped at 7tps suggests that if a blockchain ever gets used for something really, really big (e.g. as a quasi-cash replacement) we would very quickly be looking at multiple terabytes of storage for the full chain, and growing by several GB a day. That sounds like a big "ask" when the things the blockchain tech are trying to compete with don't have even a tiny fraction of the overhead (nor do they keep growing like crazy all the time, which is what would happen to a popular blockchain)

But I see the point that it's theoretically "doable" - my issue with it is whether it will ever be worth it in practice to send TB of data back and forth 24/7 just to validate etransactions.

Aaah ! but you wouldnt have to . Theres a concept called pruning that means at a given time if all the ledgers agree, then you could start a new "chunk" for want of a better work. Effectively splitting the chain into large blocks ( that could then be archive by the larger nodes) As long as all the ledgers agree nothing is changed then its fine.

Edwin · Nov 8, 2016

dee said:
Aaah ! but you wouldnt have to . Theres a concept called pruning that means at a given time if all the ledgers agree, then you could start a new "chunk" for want of a better work. Effectively splitting the chain into large blocks ( that could then be archive by the larger nodes) As long as all the ledgers agree nothing is changed then its fine.

I see. That would probably fix it, though you'd still be talking about very large amounts of network traffic (relative to the status quo). Though of course that will solve itself given enough time as network capacity keeps growing and growing.