While we wait to see the market open (which won’t be nearly as exciting as yesterday when things were down more than 500-points on the Dow at one point), I happened to be reading through the latest press releases out of the IMF. This one on Virtual Currencies caught my eye:
Virtual currencies (VCs) and especially their underlying technologies are a potentially important advance for the financial sector that could increase efficiency and financial inclusion, but can also serve as vehicles for money laundering, terrorism financing, and tax evasion. Achieving a balanced regulatory framework that guards against risks without suffocating innovation is a challenge that will require extensive international cooperation, says a new staff paper, “Virtual Currencies and Beyond: Initial Considerations,” released today by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) during the World Economic Forum.
A good bit has been made lately about the limitation of Bitcoin to about 3-transactions per second and being a possible stumbling block and end of the experiment.
But then the inventor appeared.
What IF a new layer were added to Bitcoin that would process financial transactions based on their size? In other words, if you buy something with a Bitcoin worth the equivalent of $1 dollar, it would process on a server over in, oh, say Connecticut. But, if the purchase was for $1.01, then that with route to a different server, say one in Hawaii.
In background, each of these servers would move money between themselves, and life would go on.
Right now, it appears the overhead of Bitcoin (processing all transaction as they are) tops out at $6-billion (in dollars) worth of BTCs sloshing about.
But with Ure’s option, slicing up the BTC servers to automatically load-balance by transaction size, might see the increase in capacity massively increased..
Just on whole dollar (or BTCs), the implementation of multiple blockchain processing by transaction size between 1 BTC and 1,000 BTC would add a 1,000-times increase to processing. Instead of limited at 3-transactions per second, this tiered server approach would allow 3,000 transactions per second.
Not enough horsepower? Route at one-half a BTC levels, which doubles capacity, again to 6,000 transactions per second. At one USD per transaction, what is that? $36-trillion of capacity?
Of course, there would be overhead and a continuously updated clearing table to deal with, and there would be a fair bit of monkey-motion between servers (and that’s power and cost) so that would tend to limit things. But, on the flipside, you look at going down to Satoshi-level clearing and now you multiply the clearing capability by one million times!
Pretty soon, derivatives could go BTC.
This might not be practical, but I was sitting here looking at the IMF paper and thinking about the Hearn comments on the speed bump and with one architectural change in software design, the whole process could be “opened up” – or so it seems to an old software geek like me.
If you want to run this up the flagpole with the BTC folks, that’d be fine. My consulting fee is two BTCs….I’ll send the wallet details when the payment for this rather elegant solution is ready.
Or, more likely, I’m failing to properly comprehend the problem.
Meantime, Back in Dollars
The Dow futures are down about 80 (or were when I looked). Our Peoplenomics readers have been in cash or short for weeks.
And the most exciting thing to look forward to today is waiting to see if the market will go all the way down to the major support around 1,740-1,760 before we get the next rally.
Once the coming rally gets organized, the critical level will be the bottom of the trend line, and if turned back there, we should all be starting to attend religious services. You’ll want to pray that the modern equivalent of the Roaring Twenties hangs on another couple of years – which it should.
Still, fifth wave failures are not terribly uncommon, and if it comes, we will be able to run out some numbers on “How far is down?”
It’s like the bass singer who used to be on the Lawrence Welk Show…”Howe low can you go?” [I haven’t seen a deep-voice play on South Park or the Symptoms (sic), or a more contemporary analog would have been cited.)
But speaking of missed comedy, we do have the Phlly Fed Business Outlook to deal with:
“Manufacturing conditions in the region contracted modestly this month, according to firms responding to the January Manufacturing Business Outlook Survey. The indicator for general activity remained negative this month; however, it rebounded from a lower reading in December.
Read More