Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 17559. (Read 26713358 times)

That matters about as much as a bad analogy. I mean a fart, excuse me. Without any measurable impact on the network, not to mention the fact it wastes money if you are not mining at a profit, it's just another emotional rationalization, not a practical reason.

It depends. If they are users who are crying because they can't afford competition for fast confirmations, I doubt they are going to be running full nodes.


Same as above, I doubt those who want "cheap, fast" transactions are going to bother with the expense of running a full node.

This is how it has been except in the very earliest years. Again, nothing new under the sun and most future users won't be running full nodes either. Most current users don't.

I keep multiple coins on my phone. Walking around money for convenience. Bog-standard and cheap smartphone with no special precautions. No problems in several years of doing this. So please explain why you feel the need to use a full node if you are not going to mine with it.

Indeed, but technological resources are increased over time, thus allowing higher capabilities at same costs (over the years).

As I wrote a few posts ago, in 97, my bandwidth, cpu, storage, ram, was 1/1000th of what I now have.

My pc could probably process ...1kb blocks back then... now 1mb... in 20 years, maybe 1gb.

Satoshi never intended for the 1mb to be set indefinitely. He said, we'll raise it when needed.

Obviously you don't want to have too much, because then it hurts in decentralization and leaves the door open for spamming the blockchain.

It just needs a proper balance.

I think the choices that exist right now may not be enough to gather a good consensus (like 90%+) which may in turn create the need for a new proposal.

- BU is trash, nobody in their right mind wants it.
- Segwit will not get adopted because it increases "complexity" and it makes some miners uncomfortable (translation for: "I like the bitcoin I know, I don't want it to change, with the remote chance it introduces unknown risks")

So, given that neither will go ahead, we'll have to make some other arrangement like a 2mb upgrade in the short term, if we don't want to stick with 1mb. But this option doesn't exist right now and should be programmed and provided by core (=reputable source of code).

To cast my vote on every block and not allow Jihadi-sons-of-bitches destroy things without my consent? Is that good enough?

If users have to depend on others to run full nodes, Bitcoin is no longer censorship-proof.

would you agree that if bitcoin doubles its user base this will help decentralization?

would you agree that if a signficant % of its userbase start using the second layer this will incentivize them to run first layer nodes and second layer nodes.

Why run a full node if you are not mining, other than paranoia? What are the practical reasons?

Well, I guess we've found the problem.

If your premise is that wanting to run a full node is only for the paranoid, I guess you can justify larger blocks.

I'm going to have to disagree with your premise though.

I never said it was nice! 

I am talking about hardware to run a node and you are talking about mining. Not the same.

You are speaking of non-mining bitcoin users who use a full node as their wallet.

That's a personal choice, in no way a necessity. Is this really what you base your opposition to larger transaction volume on?

I'm not speaking of mining.

I'm simply responding to you. I sorry if that is making you tired. Feel free to stop discussing this at any point.

Only for the paranoid, or people who mine anyway.

A bad analogy is like a fart. Nobody likes it.

Are you suggesting that there aren't benefits to using a full node as your wallet?

I fully understand the drive to enable growth but we must be very careful.

I'll tell you a story that is not very nice but here it goes.


Children that are born early are kept in special hospital departments. Sometimes, under those conditions, their organisms try to grow very fast BUT their lungs are not mature enough to support a bigger body size. Doctors then try to inhibit growth to save them from their death. Very sad situation!  

It's very similar with the current situation of bitcoin.

Why would you even suggest that hardware doesn't much matter? Do we really need to go into the very basics of how mining works? Seriously?

It's already the people with the best hardware that make the most money. This is part of the design. It is not a flaw or anything new.

This is getting tired. Why don't you pick one quote tree and stick to it.