Sell stuff you don't need on OpenBazzar. Or offer your services on OpenBazzar.
2.2MB doesn't take terribly long to transmit. What percentage of the block's total graphene transmission size is that?
But I've seen other saying that Graphene saves 99%... So I'm not sure if I should trust that 10% that the whitepaper mentions. Maybe "compact blocks" is a form that is already comprsd.
It happened again. Can't post something from the main site, I switch to abc and I can post it, but I see the tx on the SV chain as well. wtf.
2.2MB doesn't take terribly long to transmit. What percentage of the block's total graphene transmission size is that?
Not sure. Very roughly, Graphene is 10% the size of compact blocks according to the whitepaper, and I think that a compact block would mean ~250bytes*1000200=238MB. So about 1%.
And you are using the abc domain with split protection off?
Actually no... This one is on both chains! Argh not sure what is going on. :-D
I think I run out of something, then switched to the abc site and I'm able to post again. But I have split protection and broadcast to both... Blockexplorers show txs only on abc now for me.
it would be stupid to taunt the SEC; crypto wins when government adopts it & is forced to play by the same transparent Bitcoin rules as you do
So you would be against adding privacy features to BCH because it would mean that governments would be able to use them as well, therefore not helping with transparency?
Globalims is about a lot more than immigration. That is just one little issue which is one of freedom. People should be free to go where they wish.
In other words, does the main website show only messages that exist on both chains? Or on either?
I'm wondering, if I run out of unsplit coins, and charge my wallet with coins only on the bch(abc) side, and disable the split protection in order to be able to use them, will my msgs be seen here?
So they would calculate more than 2.2MB of ordering info in the VISA example I gave above.
The mention n*log2(n) bits of info for ordering n transactions. This is the same as log2(n^n). I believe that's an overestimate, I think that you need log2(n!) which is always lower.
I'm not an expert or anything so it would be great if someone could doublecheck me btw. :-) Also I noticed that the Graphene whitepaper mentions a formula which would give even higher numbers.
So for VISA level of txs per second (1000200txs/block), CTOR will cut down about 2.2MB of ordering info from graphene if I get this right.
bytes! not bits, sorry. 2.5 bytes.
Nah I think I'm right. If you have about 1mil txs in a block, each extra tx will be adding 2.5bits of info to graphene.So the ordering info is quite linear in the block sizes that we have now.
Or maybe I have some mistake in my calculations. I'll double check later.
On the other hand, I'm not sure if those ordering bits will be a problem ever. In order for a tx to add 250bytes of ordering info to graphene, we need 2^2000 txs in a block.
Not pro socialism. Yes I am anti-Trump, and pro globalism, and pro open borders. That is mostly because I see how all those stances are beneficial.
The less causality chains there will be in a block between txs, since more people use the system. Which works against TTOR.
these bits then. Although to be completely fair, TTOR (the previous ordering) does not allow ANY ordering so ideally it wouldn't transmit all of those bits either. But the bigger the adoption
10 bits of info. Going to 11 txs and you need 26bits of info. 16txs->45bits. 21txs->66bits. 31txs->113bits. 36txs->138bits. You add more and more bits for every tx you add. CTOR gets rid of
