4 ms·

There's a new block every X minutes. Where's the exponential growth?

criddell 9y ago
I think you're being too literal. I'm not the person you replied to but I've also wondered how the unbounded growth is sustainable.
- thefalcon 9y ago
  Moore's Law/Kryder's Law ... advancement in technology outpaces growth.
  - Twisell 9y ago
    This is exactly the right mindset to build great software that is totally unable to run on modest hardware.
    - stale2002 9y ago
      Only if Moore's law turns out to be false. A hundred years from now, you could store the blockchain on current day hardware. And that is without talking about improvements in technology.
Twisell 9y ago
Well as far as I know X already tend to grow since Bitcoin introduction and it's a big point of discord between developers ("should we increase block size" argument as far as I know). Now to be more accurate it might rather be a growth according to a logistic curve. Right now Bitcoin is used only by early adopters, but should Bitcoin usage diffuse among general customers it will growth quasi exponentially before plateauing.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
Twisell 9y ago
Also found out this graph: https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all This is definitely not linear, and keep it mind it's only with a small amount of early adopter that they reached 125 Go mark. As a matter of comparaison the whole database of the earth map at openstreetmap.org is as of writing only 36 Go fat when delivered in compressed form. https://planet.openstreetmap.org/pbf/ https://planet.openstreetmap.org/pbf/ It seems absolutely ridiculous and a waste of ressource to expect that the blockchain shall never/ever use some rotating process to loose weight at some point. Blockchain like technology can be very usefull, but current implementation look like a very rotten seed. And if a newer version that solve those issue emerge why on earth would they want to give any value to a prototype currency driven by opportunistics "first in" miners? I desperately hope that no public fund was stupid enough to invest any real life saving to this mess because IMHO it's not a matter of if, but a matter of when it will collapse.

I think you're being too literal. I'm not the person you replied to but I've also wondered how the unbounded growth is sustainable.

thefalcon 9y ago
Moore's Law/Kryder's Law ... advancement in technology outpaces growth.
- Twisell 9y ago
  This is exactly the right mindset to build great software that is totally unable to run on modest hardware.
  - stale2002 9y ago
    Only if Moore's law turns out to be false. A hundred years from now, you could store the blockchain on current day hardware. And that is without talking about improvements in technology.

Twisell 9y ago

Well as far as I know X already tend to grow since Bitcoin introduction and it's a big point of discord between developers ("should we increase block size" argument as far as I know). Now to be more accurate it might rather be a growth according to a logistic curve. Right now Bitcoin is used only by early adopters, but should Bitcoin usage diffuse among general customers it will growth quasi exponentially before plateauing.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

Twisell 9y ago

Also found out this graph: https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all This is definitely not linear, and keep it mind it's only with a small amount of early adopter that they reached 125 Go mark. As a matter of comparaison the whole database of the earth map at openstreetmap.org is as of writing only 36 Go fat when delivered in compressed form. https://planet.openstreetmap.org/pbf/ https://planet.openstreetmap.org/pbf/ It seems absolutely ridiculous and a waste of ressource to expect that the blockchain shall never/ever use some rotating process to loose weight at some point. Blockchain like technology can be very usefull, but current implementation look like a very rotten seed. And if a newer version that solve those issue emerge why on earth would they want to give any value to a prototype currency driven by opportunistics "first in" miners? I desperately hope that no public fund was stupid enough to invest any real life saving to this mess because IMHO it's not a matter of if, but a matter of when it will collapse.