BitcoinSV has much bigger blocks than Bitcoin, which is probably why this idea is possible.
While the same idea could be applied for the original Bitcoin network, that is far more popular, it would be highly impractical as blocks are smaller and transaction costs are higher.
I don't want to start another big/small blocks debate but if this idea gets popular, I doubt there will be many nodes that want to host the insane amount of data that will be accumulated, and the incentives for hosting a full node cost-effectively is the main reason why Bitcoin blocks are small.
I also sense a malicious intention with the website not making any reference to the fact that this is not the BTC network that 99.9% of visitors associate with the word Bitcoin.
BSV is a project almost entirely propped up by a billionaire gambling tycoon named Calvin Ayre who is promoting a known con-artist named Craig Wright [3] as the inventor of Bitcoin. They promote BitcoinSV, which came into existence last November as the "One True Bitcoin". They are invested in massive astro-turfing for publicity and to lend themselves perceived legitimacy.
[1] https://twitter.com/_unwriter/status/1143599992667590656
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/c5eg27/its_t...
But don't masquerade as Bitcoin and intentionally confuse people. That's not cool.
And if you build new things on top of this foundation, and you also intentionally conflate the names with an intent to deceive people, then you certainly don't have my best interests in mind.
I'll stay far away from this project.
BTC is just one version of the BitCoin experiment.
BSV is the pure capitalist, maximalist version of the BitCoin experiment. If they're correct and it works, things are going to get very interesting soon.
Yes.
A Bitcoin "transaction" is actually a short Forth-like program running on a stack-based, non-Turing complete virtual machine. When Bitcoin has been sent to an address, the output script of a transaction is something like this:
let HASH = "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
if (check(HASH, pubkey, signature) == True)
return 1;
return 0;
This method was controversial in the early days, as it created a lot of not-actual-transaction garbage in the blockchain. Bitcoin developers later introduced opcode "OP_RETURN", which is seen as a standard and less-evil way to post data. In this case, the script is something like:
let DATA = "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
return 0;
The limitation of using Bitcoin blockchain as a data storage medium is the astronomical transaction fee. The larger the transaction (i.e. the script), the higher the fee. Typically, nobody can afford to store more than a few hundred bytes.
> Bitcoin developers later introduced opcode "OP_RETURN", which is seen as a standard and less-evil way to post data.
This is not true and an error in the Mastering Bitcoin book. OP_RETURN was introduced by Satoshi in the very first version of bitcoin.
> Typically, nobody can afford to store more than a few hundred bytes.
This depends on the artificial constraints put on the network. Bottle operates on top of BSV which comes without a cap on supply and offers cheaper fees when compared to BTC.
See example of weather data stored on chain https://whatsonchain.com/tx/6dac238576e9778458bb62a2f7d936fd...
>are there fees to host this data (as we need to pay miners to include data in a block)?
Yes, current fees are about 1 sat/byte.
This is really a write once, read many type of system.
Fell down the rabbit hole and found these:
If everything is hosted on the Bitcoin blockchain then every node in the Bitcoin network will need to keep a copy of every file uploaded. I would prefer the DHT model used by IPFS and DAT where each node only hosts part of the network.
Amusing really, because the "SV" stands for Satoshi's vision. The founder, Craig Wright has been bamboozling people for a long time with his nonsense.
It's so long ago that most have forgotten, but the real Satoshi weighed in on a pretty heated argument about whether the Bitcoin block chain should be used to store DNS records. Satoshi was against it due to scaling concerns.
The project went on to create its own network and blockchain called Namecoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28917#msg289...
I would take this project in the same spirit. Someone created a block chain and network for mass data storage. At least that's the goal. The result is what you see, but it's not Bitcoin.
It is simply the original bitcoin protocol, ie. with all the stupid things that were added to "BTC" since 2009 removed.
... that makes it infinitely scalable and useful like bitcoin was supposed to be, not just for money, for data storage, and for computation.
No Segwit No RBF No block size limit No limits on scripts or data sizes
BTC is useless in comparison... and the 'ad hominem' will only cover this up for so long.
Bitcoin SV clearly introduced many changes. But those changes are backward-incompatible for Bitcoin nodes, meaning that every one of them will reject an SV block.
It really doesn't matter what you think about the wisdom of what was added since 2009. All that matters is that Bitcoin nodes will ignore the blocks.
Experimentation is all well and good. But fringe groups breaking the protocol willy-nilly then claiming the result as Bitcoin is misleading at best.
That's what I was pointing out. It's a tactic used repeatedly by SV advocates including Wright. His involvement is relevant given the extraordinary nature of his claims and the deliberately misleading nature of his proof.
> No Segwit No RBF No block size limit No limits on scripts or data sizes
Scaling is so very easy when users are scarce.
> Someone created a block chain and network for mass data storage.
I don't like the phrase of storing data on the chain. The blockchain is not a storage medium but a network that incentivised connectivity and data propagation.
> Did you know that you can upload files directly to the Bitcoin network, as permanent, immutable, and monetizable Bitcoin transactions?
There's a really high noise to signal ratio right now, I'd love to see how this comment ages over time.
Only concern to me is that "lack of distributors" if you compare against public web so what do you put in here? That depends though, someone has to host, you(pay bills), or big company that has free hosting like a forum.
It just renders all MIME type img files that are stored as OP_RETURNs. Oh, also you can tip to the sender out of the box (because the uploader's address is just a bitcoin address!)
Check this out: https://c.bitdb.network/
OP said nothing about how closely it follows the whitepaper.
Some see Bitcoin exactly as shown here. A new way of thinking about our internet. One where money is embedded in the protocol.
Don't get misguided thinking that the more people validate your transactions, the more secure the network is. Decentralisation is not a matter of how many validator nodes the network has. Decentralisation truly exists where/when no single entity can control the protocol, including developers! Attacking Bitcoin is an economically unwise move, as long as miners are getting more rewards in mining than they would in attacking.
This is where projects like Bottle really showcase the true destiny of Bitcoin. It's almost like the internet that ARPANET would like to have built :D
This might take years (10-20 ? who knows) to fully catch on, and other Bitcoins will exist in the meantime of course. But if you think about it, eventually they will just be rendered useless, as any good first prototype of a new technology is. Very important, uncharted grounds, but once matured, the prototypes are just that. Museum pieces.
How can content be monetized foreved if it costs something to upload (send a transaction to create the block) but nothing to browser (navigating through the blockchain costs nothing)?
A satoshi = 0,00000001 bitcoin and 1 bitcoin recently crossed 10k dollars. So being conservative, 10 bucks would allow you to publish a very simple website.
Bitcoin's blockchain is a terribly inefficient place to publish websites, unless you're looking for censorship resistance. The Bitcoin blockchain is secured by the strongest network on the planet by far. So once you publish it you can be pretty sure it won't be easily taken down.
Navigating the blockchain in the sense I think you mean wouldn't cost anything. You'd just need to interpret the encoding of the text that was published.
I also seriously doubt the willingness of most people to install yet another battery-guzzling Electron app.
Why a standalone browser instead of building as an extension for existing browsers, or waiting for mainstream browser support?
1. Build for the future
Many things we take for granted in the old "web browsing" experience--including the security model--no longer apply in the new world of Bitcoin.
The thing is, Bitcoin is NOT "the next web". In many ways it's completely opposite of what the WWW is, which is why Bitcoin is so powerful.
That's why it's more beneficial to start from scratch instead of forking an existing full-fledged browser built for the existing WWW, with many legacy features that can constrain future directions. We can create a new user interaction model optimized for the new Bitcoin world order.
2. Bitcoin-Native
Bitcoin has a fundamentally different architecture than the old web in many different ways, with built-in immutability, a self-contained authentication model, and natively monetizable/traceable files.
Instead of thinking from the old WWW mindset, we should think from a Bitcoin-native mindset.
Bottle can discipline us to publish Bitcoin-first documents, build Bitcoin-first apps, each interconnected to one another in Bitcoin-native ways.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/b/eonhdpmmjdekgnmc...
https://www.yours.org/content/blockchain-computing-on-ethere...
Bitcoin can do all the things people typically go to Ethereum for, smart contracts, token, 'on chain computation, etc. Bitcoin can do them even better.
How could you be traced if you are on an anonymous network and create an anonymous one-time-use wallet?
I madly respect the creator of Bottle for wasting your time on something wondrous and original.
ethsites TLDR: host unstoppable censorship resistance websites that can be accessed anywhere in the world (as long as you can remember a small JS snippet or print it on a tshirt or something)
This is awesome.
Read Bitcoin whitepaper https://bitcoinsv.io/bitcoin