4 ms·
Anybody working with Bitcoin should really avoid services like this just for their own sanity. You've a wealth of freely accessible data in the form of the 20GB
by nwh 12y ago
Anybody working with Bitcoin should really avoid services like this just for their own sanity. You've a wealth of freely accessible data in the form of the 20GB blockchain, why rely on trusting a third party for their uptime, privacy and security?
It sort of already shows in the Bitcoin ecosystem, every time Blockchain.info (the biggest API provider) glitches up, all of the services relying on it die as well. Last time it went down there were people complaining that their ATMS could no longer work without Blockchain.info functioning.
- saurik 12y agoLast year it was a 10GB large blockchain. Next year it will be a 40GB large blockchain. I think the argument is that no normal user considers it reasonable that you have to download tens of gigabytes of data to every single client, with at least another gigabyte every month to "keep up", in order to get relatively basic functionality. Many devices don't even have 20GB of storage in the first place :/.
- runeks 12y ago> You've a wealth of freely accessible data in the form of the 20GB blockchain, why rely on trusting a third party for their uptime, privacy and security? Except an address index, which is the added value that most of these types of services provide (balance of an address, transactions associated with a particular address, etc.).
- nwh 12y agoNobody except for people running block explorers really needs this information. If you think you need it then you're probably using Bitcoin completely wrong. Address based indexes don't scale, which is why it doesn't create or even need one.