Will bitcoin nodes be able to exist on the safe network and stay in consensus? And, if so would it make bloat irrelevant?
The blockchain file could be stored on the safe network. At least this would prevent it being cloned over and over.
1 Like
On maidsafe.net page about Distributed Network Features it mentions
Real time data de-duplication, reduces amount of data stored
Would the blockchain automatically be de-duplicated?
3 Likes
You could store the blockchain on the network. You then would have clients which use that blockchain to store, send and receive.
1 Like
Yes, it would.
5 Likes
As Fraser has confirmed, yes it would. Ironically, Maidsafe actually solves one of the scalability issues with Bitcoin.
3 Likes
Would the bitcoin devs have to create a client specifically for maidsafe. And, do you think that’s likely
Actually that is a good question. The answer is yes and yes.
Blockchain bloat could become irrelevant if SAFE Network scales.
Example:
http://www.blockcypher.com/
No they would not. It would be as simple as you choosing to store your directory in the SAFE Network folder.
This basically would allow the blockchain to grow to an infinite size and solve the blockchain bloat possibility. It would also solve the problem for Ethereum with all their contracts.
With my limited knowledge of Bitcoin, I have some questions.
-
Who would be the original uploading author of the blockchain?
-
Who would have authority/right to add the new block data to the file?
-
How would people know the blockchain on the SAFE Network is synced with the Bitcoin network?
1A. I suppose anyone can upload their current blockchain file for public viewing.
2A. Security of the blockchain relies on POW (Proof of Work) to determine which miner gets to add a new block. That POW is also cross-checked by other miners, which is where confirmations come from. The miners keep each other honest. By default, the uploading author on SAFE is the only one who can edit the blockchain file they uploaded. This alone would make people nervous.
2B. The uploading author could make the file a public share but “add only” which would prevent any backlog changes. But it does not prevent another author from adding a “bad” block to the file. I believe this could cause a fork in the chain if enough users are relying on this file source. Or it could be intentionally sabotaged.
2C. A well known author like (blockchain.info) could keep all rights to themselves. Then it would be based on trust/faith. Users gain the benefit of not having to keep a personal copy of the blockchain, but would have to rely on blockchain.info to remain honest. Not sure if people are comfortable with that idea. But then again, they trust banks not to steal their fiat…
3A. A theoretical solution is to connect the SAFE Network to the Bitcoin Network and whenever a new block is added, the broadcast would also update the file on the SAFE Network. This would require a special QT client that runs autonomously on the SAFE Network without any interference from people, even the uploading author.
3B. The autonomous client would also need to wait for other miners to confirm the new block before updating its chain file. Again this is needed to make sure it doesn’t get a bad broadcast and jump the gun.
As I said, I only have a limited knowledge of Bitcoin and the best people to tell us what is possible would be the Bitcoin Foundation. Maybe I’m wrong and it would be easier than I think…
I would really love to see Bitcoin and Ethereum and many other projects work together.
- Vires in Numeris
It’s really easy. Set it up so that Bitcoin, Bitshares, Ethereum, in the install process also install SAFE Network. Then let them access it with a thin client.
I’m sure there are some technical aspects I haven’t thought of but it seems like it would be a perfect fit.
2 Likes
You don’t need to go through all these stuff.
Just as @luckybit mentioned :
Nothing else need to be done.
The current bitcoin client app can stay as what they are now.
6 Likes
Is a shared ledger possible or will everyone have to upload their own copy to get it meta tagged for de-duplication?
When a new Bitcoin miner joins the network, it takes several days to sync with the blockchain. It would be nice if they could just point their client to a shared ledger on SAFE and start mining right away.
I understand the SAFE Network de-duplication provides a way to save hard drive space. This is already incredible. I was just hoping we could go further than that.
@dirvine talked about farming/mining on mobile phones in the future. A trustless shared ledger would bring us and many other projects a step closer to that future.
1 Like
I was hoping we could too. If maidsafe solves a problem for bitcoiners and is used it would put maidsafe squarely in front of people that would quickly see its value and potential.
4 Likes
- it wouldnt matter who the original uploader is, just as you’ve stated. as long as its public.
- everyone could (and should) update “their own” file. it will get deduplicated on the network. I’m wondering if this would be any faster because you just hash and check if the hash exists instead of uploading the whole file? That would be an awesome feature that may or may not already exist.
- If their data file for the their bitcoin client is hooked to the network, they would know its updated just the same way as if their local fliesystem was tracking it. my understanding is that is how the NFS will work, just like a local FS.
2b. Miners would upload their own version. If it matches, its deduplicated. If it doesn’t match, it makes its own version on “their” drive. I’m not sure how evident this is to the end user whether its been deduplicated or not, but if it is, could be used as an early warning sign of an issue.
I think there may be a middle solution to this. As stated in my previous post. Every new miner has to play catch up, including those that have gone offline. This is the part I’m trying to improve. Saving hard drive space is a given. 
Say we actually have a shared public ledger on SAFE. But that ledger is autonomous and only updates after a new block receives X confirmations. Instead of a new miner starting from scratch (block 0), they just “meta tag” the shared ledger to a certain point and start from there. This would eliminate a lot of sync time, regardless of the chain size. As you said, if the newest block does not match their own mining POW, they will create a fork in their chain.
Example
Current block 312733
SAFE shared ledger block 312728 (5 blocks back)
Instead of the miner downloading/uploading the entire chain, they just meta tag the shared ledger up to block 312728 and start working from there. So even if the blockchain gets to 10TB in size, the sync time will still be the same. In addition, a mobile phone could start mining without actually having the chain data to begin with. It may not apply to Bitcoin because the hash difficulty is so high, but there may be other blockchains where it would be viable.
After some more thought this idea seems like to an autonomous mining pool.
1 Like
Maybe this is the best use case we should promote for SAFE Network early on. It’s absolutely perfect.
Agreed, if this is workable it would be a massive boost, in fact massive isn’t a big enough word…humongous probably nearer the mark.
1 Like
Vitalik confirmed with me the other day that this was one of Ethereum’s solutions for scalability. Seems like Safe net will be live just before Ethereum so it would be great timing!
4 Likes
An old conversation but worth reviving, I think,
Firstly are the assumptions made in this thread about it being relatively easy to host a blockchain on SAFE still valid? Now that we have Structured Data, what implications does that have?
Secondly, if that was the case, then would there be a fee payable to the authors of any wallet that accessed that blockchain?
1 Like