#thoughts
When the blockchain first appeared, it copied data of itself to all nodes in the network. Each participant had its own copy of all transactions. This ensured data integrity. You can't fix in one place and cheat, you have to fix at each participant.
Some utopia that was shattered by trivial maths. Because each participant can't keep a copy of the blockchain if the blockchain is several years old (every citizen can't keep a state archive in his flat - it won't fit there).
Now the blockchain nodes of many blockchains are already cut down and do not contain all copies of the data (prune state). And networks are centralising.
Full copies of blockchains are now 8 terrabytes and growing every day. Servers with 8 terabytes of SSD storage are almost never widely available.
By default, the operating system does not support such drive sizes. Blockchain developers have not yet come up with mechanisms to split a folder with data into several discs.
And in principle, from what I have seen there are only two real blockchains: Bitcoin and Ethereum, the rest are copies of varying degrees of quality and variability.
The greedy desire of Ethereum and its forks (Binance Smart Chain, Matic Polygon, etc.) to take on board blockchains of any projects makes nodes up to 8 terrabytes split so quickly.
One could say that these blockchains are being devoured by their own greed.
Right now, a standard Ethereum "full" node cannot retrieve information about a transaction that is two years old. It is not stored there.
So it's a blockchain with truncated nodes.
In another 5 years, it will be like in a bank, when you go to a branch of the bank (as if it is a blockchain node), and they tell you that you have to go to the central branch with a statement (to address another blockchain node, which will occupy 70 terrabytes).
So, I predict the arrival of blockchains in which this problem would be solved.
When the blockchain first appeared, it copied data of itself to all nodes in the network. Each participant had its own copy of all transactions. This ensured data integrity. You can't fix in one place and cheat, you have to fix at each participant.
Some utopia that was shattered by trivial maths. Because each participant can't keep a copy of the blockchain if the blockchain is several years old (every citizen can't keep a state archive in his flat - it won't fit there).
Now the blockchain nodes of many blockchains are already cut down and do not contain all copies of the data (prune state). And networks are centralising.
Full copies of blockchains are now 8 terrabytes and growing every day. Servers with 8 terabytes of SSD storage are almost never widely available.
By default, the operating system does not support such drive sizes. Blockchain developers have not yet come up with mechanisms to split a folder with data into several discs.
And in principle, from what I have seen there are only two real blockchains: Bitcoin and Ethereum, the rest are copies of varying degrees of quality and variability.
The greedy desire of Ethereum and its forks (Binance Smart Chain, Matic Polygon, etc.) to take on board blockchains of any projects makes nodes up to 8 terrabytes split so quickly.
One could say that these blockchains are being devoured by their own greed.
Right now, a standard Ethereum "full" node cannot retrieve information about a transaction that is two years old. It is not stored there.
So it's a blockchain with truncated nodes.
In another 5 years, it will be like in a bank, when you go to a branch of the bank (as if it is a blockchain node), and they tell you that you have to go to the central branch with a statement (to address another blockchain node, which will occupy 70 terrabytes).
So, I predict the arrival of blockchains in which this problem would be solved.
#Thoughts
Crypto and projects should be invested in when nobody believes in them. If you run to buy when everyone around you believes in it, you are already too late.
Crypto and projects should be invested in when nobody believes in them. If you run to buy when everyone around you believes in it, you are already too late.
If your ultra-secure messenger delivers messages via push notifications on your phone, then any developer of a third-party notification server can read them. For example, many apps on your phone send messages in plain text (unencrypted) to OneSignal, one of the largest push notification processors.
Example:
You send a private key to your friend via WhatsApp. At that moment, your friend doesn’t have an active chat open with you. So, WhatsApp (hypothetically) takes your message in plaintext and sends it to a notification server. That server reads it, processes it (possibly steals it, hands it over to the FBI, or gets hacked itself), then forwards it to Apple/Google, which finally delivers it to your friend's phone.
You think you're protected, but in reality, anyone who needed access to your private key may have already taken it.
This is why security should always be understood in detail, not just on a surface level. Otherwise, it’s nothing more than marketing slogans for the average user.
#thoughts
Example:
You send a private key to your friend via WhatsApp. At that moment, your friend doesn’t have an active chat open with you. So, WhatsApp (hypothetically) takes your message in plaintext and sends it to a notification server. That server reads it, processes it (possibly steals it, hands it over to the FBI, or gets hacked itself), then forwards it to Apple/Google, which finally delivers it to your friend's phone.
You think you're protected, but in reality, anyone who needed access to your private key may have already taken it.
This is why security should always be understood in detail, not just on a surface level. Otherwise, it’s nothing more than marketing slogans for the average user.
#thoughts