$232.53 -3.48%
XMR · 5w

Asking for advice

block: [version] [index] [time] [transaction list] transaction: [version] [time] [previous block hash] [input list] [output list] ​ Block size depends of transaction count/demand. Minimum block size is xx transactions. Block is completed when capacity is full, \[time\] field of block is \[time\] field of transaction in block with greatest \[time\] field value. Each transaction received which not fitting into current block capacity, transaction will be rejected, so sender must renew transaction with new \[time\] and block hash. On each xxx blocks, block transaction capacity will be recalculated to fit into next xxx blocks by some oracle algorithm( block must be completed every few seconds) Rejected transactions will be recorded for next block capacity recalculation, so it is important to broadcast rejected transaction into network?? Each transaction must not have \[time\] field less then \[time\] field of previous block. Each new transaction must not have greater \[time\] field then expected difference in network time sync. Goal is to replace mining with no mining and keep security at least on same level and rise transaction speed flow. ​ Still hard for me to process whole picture and imagine how it would work in the wild. Still thinking how would be possible to do double spending and if this can prevent it anyway. ​ Let me know in the comment below, do you see why this can not replace mining?
Go to self.Monero
Recent news
XMR -3.48% · · Now

Tracing the WannaCry 2.0 Monero Transactions

Coindesk has reported more widely on the content of the slides and the new pieces of information contained therein. Here, I focus on one specific Monero-related claim. According to a translation of…
XMR -3.48% · · 14h

Free Giveaway To UK Residents MoneroUK on Twitter

Just Hit 500 Followers As A Random Thank You I Will Be Giving Away A Free Monero Mug + Beanie + CakeWallet Stickers To One Person In The UK That Comments On This Post! Like + Retweet Please!! #Monero ...