Comment: I agree downloading the blockchain is a problem

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Not true (see in situ)

I agree downloading the blockchain is a problem

but it's certainly not the problem everyone thinks it is. It's not an exponential growth curve. It's linear with transaction count. That's a huge difference, even if it's not enough.

To correct this, the obvious choice might be seen as reducing the amount of blocks that the miners need to download. This leaves the problem of maintaining a balance starting point to move forward from. I don't know if it's possible, but one way could possibly be to have every wallet generate a single transaction to transfer it's entire balance to itself. No idea how, but the point is that this would create a record in the current block of all wallet balances. With that in place, all transactions could be added on top of the new balance with past blocks archived away. If something like this is possible within the current framework (i.e. the coders can agree on how and get it implemented), then it may get a periodic size reset.

Perhaps the problem with this is that no one wants a public record of what the wallets currently hold? In that case, maybe this new balance-generating group of transactions could be added retroactively to a block that's 6 or more generations back (because that makes it untraceable, supposedly.)

Thnx for the link.