OK yeah that's a good point. Makes it near impossible for any spinoff chain to have value, I guess there would need to be a network effect that creates inertia but getting there is a tall and/or expensive task.In my opinion, no they can not.
I anticipated this response, and attempted to respond to it in these sections:
http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and- ... o-problems
http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-chea ... -mr-right-
The thing is, if it is 'free' to create a spinoff, then it will be hard for ownership to ever diverge from the main Bitcoin chain...everyone will be spinning off. If the new chain always = the old chain, then there's no point to having the old chain at all. It is consequentially equivalent to only ever being able to run a single full node of each chain type.
I suppose it would take some system of miners paying nodes to accept and propagate their blocks? And the fee would be larger for larger blocks. I can only imagine that such a service would be valuable in the seconds after a block is found while the orphan risk is real, and I suppose that doesn't solve the entire externality issue,I'm very excited for Bitcoin creating a kind of 'buyer-side net-non-neutrality', which I think will be a great, great thing for everything, including Bitcoin itself. The vision is a high-speed, reliable TOR, which allows content creators (ie servers) to (micro)charge for serving content. This would help Bitcoin privacy and security immensely.
It seems, from Justus' article, that he feels that the blocksize is a kind of production quota which serves no long run purpose. He would like to remove the blocksize altogether. However, I couldn't understand how any of his proposals solved the core externality problem: that nodes must store all transactions, yet get no transaction fees (and yet, miners get all transaction fees, and don't even need to store all transactions).
Clearly, he (like everyone) would like to "internalize the externality" which is the best (and only) long run solution, but a solution which does this would involve miners paying all node-operators to offset the total cost of starting up a new full node. I don't think anyone has figured out how to do this. In fact, I don't think anyone really knows a way of measuring the total cost of starting up a new full node.
I've never had any issues at all in close to 2 years, just my 2 cents.That was based on my subjective assessment of the site when I wrote that section in mid-2014. It was based on my browsing the site, reading comments and asking around.
They have some association with a university in NZ for legal reasons I believe, but they only serve US customers and have physical offices in DC. I've seen them, actually.I'm virtually certain that that is New Zealand based. I will add it to the list, however.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests