Quote from: brg444 on November 06, 2015, 09:19:32 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on November 06, 2015, 09:14:04 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on November 06, 2015, 08:57:24 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 06, 2015, 08:52:18 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on November 06, 2015, 08:46:07 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 06, 2015, 08:36:32 PM

To anyone reading these this "study" was based on flawed assumptions and rather broken understanding of how Bitcoin's gossip network operates.

TL;DR the claims in this post don't match reality

You and hdbuck add nothing to this debate. Nothing you've said in this post can be backed up. You retract from it. You're polluting the debate.

I can certainly point you to a whole thread filled with Adam's poor understanding of the networks' architecture... but you'll have to dig for it yourself if you really care

by all means do dip it up.

i recall being mostly right, except for the gossip network, but that too clearly needs improvements infact the very day i was talking about it, gavin was writing up a paper about the efficiency ( or lack thereof ) in bitcoin's current gossip network implementation.

bitcoin is not a holly ledger, and yes there is much improvements to be made at its core.

I'd love a link from either of you.

where to start....

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 17, 2015, 08:49:32 PM

1) making sure the gossip network actually does make every peer on average use 503Bytes to get everyone to hear about a 500Byte msg.
2) communicate new blocks by listing all the TX ID's in that block instead of in full.
3) has SOME trusted centralized nodes dedicated to allowing new nodes to sync fast ( probably don't even need to trust them using some fancy PGP or something)
4) and yes some SPV, and maybe different types of nodes, simi-full node, full node, super node, minner node.

wtv it takes.

"Whatever it takes"

my particular view on what should be done is besides the point here, point is things CAN be done.