The telepod idea does seem very interesting, especially if the anonymity scheme it uses is better than coin mixing and ring sigs. I had a brief look at the way it works and it is pretty hard to understand, the white paper could use some diagrams. But I would be interested in seeing how compatible it is with the mini-blockchain scheme, keeping in mind that the mini-blockchain scheme does not use scripts at all and BTCD apparently has full turing complete scripting.
EDIT: ok well I think I understand it a bit better now, but I can't really understand why this isn't just a long winded way of making a normal tx. It seems to ensure that a new address will always be made for receiving payments, which is great for anonymity, but generating new addresses for receiving payments isn't exactly difficult to do without an elaborate system like this. Maybe I'm still not fully grasping the concept.
EDIT: also worth noting is that we actually discourage the use of sending coins to addresses which haven't been seen by the network before, because it increases the size of the account tree. To help prevent dust from bloating up the account tree we don't allow the output value to be lower than the tx fee if the receiving address doesn't exist in the account tree.
Sounds like syncing issues are taking over the thread but I x-post this anyway from the XCN (mini-blockchain coin) thread as I begin to think about the teleport tech more. It has been interesting to re-read the teleporting paper and re-think how teleport will actually happen. Not to introduce skepticism but to better understand is why I ask.
I wonder how BTCD and teleport will deal with the possible massive blockchain bloating issue that can occur with all of the proposed multi-level sigs? Also how to deal with all of the "dust" from sending to addresses that have not been seen by the network? (these ideas are from bitfreak! from XCN thread but I too am curious how teleport will handle these issues) Please correct me if I am way off.
The the M of N fragments are constructed and reconstructed offblockchain
the usage of addresses will not change the blockchain as BTCD isnt doing the miniblockchain thing. When you send to an address it takes the same space on the blockchain whether it is a new one or not. Now, if we are leaving behind utxo, there could be some extract RAM usage, but cloning totally spends all inputs, so this is not an issue.
The one thing that does increase the size a bit is using standard denominations, so sending 8 would be 5 + 1 + 1 + 1 or 4 inputs and outputs instead of 1 input, 1 outputs (incl change). But if you are sending 10 then it will actually save a bit of space due to not needing change output
