Re: [ANN][Datacoin] Datacoin blockchain start announcement (Minor code upd + logo)
Datacoin seems like a great idea for secure distributed storage. However i see couple design flaws with it and I think if these flaws are fixed we could have a really, really, really interesting coin to work with.
Current flaws:
Data is stored permanently. The problem with this is that the use of this chain for "secure temporary storage" is not applicable. I think it would be better if the "data contributor" had the option of overwriting the data, this way the chain would be useful for a much longer period of time.
The miner reward makes sense, but the final model for reward should be based on local storage and internet throughput of each client. Otherwise everyone will just use lite wallets and no one will store the data.
Data should be redundant, but each client should be able to specify the size of the chain he is going to store. This way if i choose to store 5,000TB of data chances are i will get more requests to serve that data to network, while someone who stores 100KB of data will have very few requests hence lower earnings.
Serving a block to the network "creates" a small amount of coin (100X) for the user.
Requesting a block from the network costs a smaller amount of coin (1X) to the user.
Requesting to overwrite a block with new data costs more coin (10,000X) to the requester. Only the block owner (data contributor) can request to overwrite the block.
Block owner can sell the block to a new owner via transaction like bitcoin etc.
When a new block is added to the network the miner who found the block gets a reward, say 100,000X. Then a user from "block purchase que" takes ownership of that block. This costs the new user 100,000X coins. This way new data storage can be bought via a purchase queue or existing blocks can be bought from current owners.
Part of the block stores transactions, just like bitcoin or litecoin; and another part of the block stores user supplied data. User supplied data portion can be overwritten by owner, but transactions are stored permanently.
Updating existing block is done at difficulty level much lower than current difficulty level; this way blocks can be updated with new information relatively fast, but addition of new blocks to the chain is done just like BTC or LTC.
I don't have all the answers and clearly defined protocols; rather I'd like to start a discussion on this topic to see if we, as a community, can come-up with something worthwhile...
What do yall think?
Current flaws:
Data is stored permanently. The problem with this is that the use of this chain for "secure temporary storage" is not applicable. I think it would be better if the "data contributor" had the option of overwriting the data, this way the chain would be useful for a much longer period of time.
The miner reward makes sense, but the final model for reward should be based on local storage and internet throughput of each client. Otherwise everyone will just use lite wallets and no one will store the data.
Data should be redundant, but each client should be able to specify the size of the chain he is going to store. This way if i choose to store 5,000TB of data chances are i will get more requests to serve that data to network, while someone who stores 100KB of data will have very few requests hence lower earnings.
Serving a block to the network "creates" a small amount of coin (100X) for the user.
Requesting a block from the network costs a smaller amount of coin (1X) to the user.
Requesting to overwrite a block with new data costs more coin (10,000X) to the requester. Only the block owner (data contributor) can request to overwrite the block.
Block owner can sell the block to a new owner via transaction like bitcoin etc.
When a new block is added to the network the miner who found the block gets a reward, say 100,000X. Then a user from "block purchase que" takes ownership of that block. This costs the new user 100,000X coins. This way new data storage can be bought via a purchase queue or existing blocks can be bought from current owners.
Part of the block stores transactions, just like bitcoin or litecoin; and another part of the block stores user supplied data. User supplied data portion can be overwritten by owner, but transactions are stored permanently.
Updating existing block is done at difficulty level much lower than current difficulty level; this way blocks can be updated with new information relatively fast, but addition of new blocks to the chain is done just like BTC or LTC.
I don't have all the answers and clearly defined protocols; rather I'd like to start a discussion on this topic to see if we, as a community, can come-up with something worthwhile...
What do yall think?
I agree with some of the improvements you are suggesting, specially the bit about being able to overwrite the files, I think that is a much elegant solution than simply storing all files permanently. First thing that came to my mind was: What if I save the wrong file? That would annoy me forever!
When I first came across DTC, I actually thought we would be able to use it as some sort of reference directory, which people could use to upload torrent files. For a moment, I got insanely excited about DTC because that would make DTC the most popular coin amongst the whole crypto-currency community. THAT would be really, really, really interesting!
I know what you mean, I have the same thinking some time back, but due to the structure of blockchain, temporary storage is not possible as this will break the chain.
To achieve what you suggested, the data will need to be stored at a third party location & transaction submitted into the blockchain, but that is like you buy storage space from an online storage vendor with DTC. Or there is a secondary chain that store the data, but even that, to achieve what you suggested, there will need to have a blockchain for every data storage. As far as I know 'personal chain' is work in progress, maybe that can shed some light into this.