On 10/7/2017 8:20 AM, James A. Donald wrote:
Scaling, however, is the hard problem. Making enormous amounts of
storage actually useful and effective is the problem. The amount of
storage per client is absolutely insignificant. The amount of
bandwidth per client is absolutely insignificant.
On Sat, 7 Oct 2017 00:56:29 +0300
George Violaris wrote:
> On 10/6/2017 10:13 PM, juan wrote:
> > well supposedly the lightning network will add more capacity
>
> Supposedly, LN will allow nodes to store only the transactions that
> concern them. Which to me sounds like a way to mess with the
On 06/10/2017 21:36, George Violaris wrote:
On 06/10/2017 2:01 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
Suppose a cryptocurrency substantially replaces the US dollar and the
existing banking system, and suppose we need to keep a year or so of
transactions in active storage.
How many transactions are full p
On 10/6/2017 10:13 PM, juan wrote:
well supposedly the lightning network will add more capacity
Supposedly, LN will allow nodes to store only the transactions that
concern them. Which to me sounds like a way to mess with the original
double-spend prevention mechanism. What if the nodes witnes
On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 14:36:23 +0300
George Violaris wrote:
>
> Bitcoin doesn't scale AT ALL.
well supposedly the lightning network will add more capacity
On 06/10/2017 2:01 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
Suppose a cryptocurrency substantially replaces the US dollar and the
existing banking system, and suppose we need to keep a year or so of
transactions in active storage.
How many transactions are full peers going to need to store?
Or to say the s
On 06/10/2017 16:03, George Violaris wrote:
I believe the issue with this, such as in Bitcoin and any coin, is that
the blockchain eventually grows to an enormous size. It's all nice when
it's at around 200GB of data and it only takes a few days to synchronize
to the network. But think about a
On 06/10/2017 8:31 AM, James A. Donald wrote:
Generating this proof is inconveniently slow, and the data that has to
be stored is inconveniently on the fat side, but verifying it is
reasonably fast.
I believe the issue with this, such as in Bitcoin and any coin, is that
the blockchain eventua
On 05/10/2017 20:30, George Violaris wrote:
In short my question is, how does zero knowledge proof compare to ring
signatures employed i.e. by Monero?
A proof is created that previous transactions equivalent in value were
marked as consumed, without revealing which ones.
Generating this proo
On 01/10/2017 7:42 AM, grarpamp wrote:
Rethreading these two former threads into a more General: Item...
1: Zerocash: Addressing Bitcoin's Privacy Problem GoogleTechTalks
2: Why I can't sleep soundly with blockchain, being the cypherpunk
##
https://zcoin.io/zcoins-privacy-technology-com
Rethreading these two former threads into a more General: Item...
1: Zerocash: Addressing Bitcoin's Privacy Problem GoogleTechTalks
2: Why I can't sleep soundly with blockchain, being the cypherpunk
##
https://zcoin.io/zcoins-privacy-technology-compares-competition/
> Blockchain privacy
11 matches
Mail list logo
