Topic: What to know of Nodes and Running a Node (Read 766 times)

No mate, I don’t think this applies the same way. I understand this is an attempt to make inferences with what is more common to the uncommon but, phone call records gets wiped out after some time and nodes don’t.
Also, nodes have replicas on other nodes as this is an interconnection to create a chain link which ensures security to the entire network and its integrity too, coupled with the data stored on it but, when we relate this to phone call records, it’s not the case, the records are unique to the device and possibly the network provider.

That's quite a broader explanation about node, but in layman sense, i still think phone is a perfect example of node funtionality, as phone keeps all your call records and also messages, so also the node, though, node is wide as it processes global data, so therefore, its definitely going to require larger memory disk than phone.

Oh wow! That’s says a lot on the project as it’s seemed self centered and focused on those with a core in its foundation and these possibility simply means, there any anything that can’t be done to the detriment of the public and of advantage to the pioneers behind Ethereum, all they need is a name to call it and some lame excuse. That’s bad!

Not to mention the fact that Ethereum had a huge pile of coins pre-mined and pre-awarded to a selected list of wallets, including the co-founders and the Ethereum Foundation. That's rubbish!
The current circulating supply of ETH is 120,077,426 tokens. But, 72,000,000 tokens were pre-mined and pre-allocated to the founders and the Foundation.
It's very fair, indeed I wish Ethereum never happened, but it did...

Ethereum has never been user-centric. Their philosophy is worlds apart from that of Bitcoin. It has always been a network where a selected few who belong to the Ethereum Foundation has the say on the future. Just remember the big DAO hack of many years ago when these 'big' players lost. What did they do? They simply clicked the restart button, and it never happened. That same button would never have been hit if you and me lost that money or anyone else of less importance to them. 

That's because of the conservative design decisions made by the Core developers. Because IF they did what the Ethereum developers are currently doing, it will definitely be harder to run Bitcoin using consumer hardware, then the network will centralize towards the entities who could afford to run full nodes, weaking Bitcoin's value proposition. How then would the community validate the blockchain for themselves?

I sound like a broken record, but it's posted for the newbies who might read the topic.

One usually follows the other. If I can afford or want to purchase a PC/laptop with good amount of RAM and a CPU, I can do the same with storage. And I can also invest in an internet package that supplies me with the bandwidth that I need to run my full node. But you are right in stating that there are areas where all this is unfortunately still a luxury. 

But on other hand, you don't have to buy newest generation of RAM/GPU and both RAM/GPU still getting faster over time. Bandwidth isn't big problem either, since blockchain size increase only about 10GB or less per month.

👍

Many people keep repeating that nodes need more storage, but it's not the actual concern. Storage is cheap. It's bandwidth that's currently the potential problem because in some regions they are more expensive. RAM and CPU are also getting more expensive, and that might also be another concern if network consensus allows more transaction throughput.

A significant difference is the type of data nodes have and distribute. Your phone keeps records of YOUR calls, YOUR messages, and other history about you. Nodes process global data of everyone that interacts with the network.

And a lot of free space to store the blockchain data if you intend to run a full node. Alternatively, you can run a pruned node with much less needed disk space.

I could go on and give you an elaborate details on the subject  topic "node", but since your questions are specific, i'll be concise.
Node are more or less a medium of communication that sends, receive or processes bitcoin data. Node performs two main task:
(i)keeps duplicate copy of the blockchain, just like your phone keeps records of your calls in "call logs" and messages in "message inbox", and with this information your node has, it can perform it second task which is.
(ii)validate those information and relay or carry out new transactions and blocks.
All you need to run a bitcoin node is a computer and an internet connection, just as all you need to make a phone call or send a text message is a phone and a SIM card.
Follow the link below to start your bitcoin program
https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-26.0/bitcoin-26.0-x86_64-apple-darwin.zip

That has nothing to do with nodes, but it concerns the miners and the cumulative proof-of-work and that ensures that it is computationally difficult to rebuild the blockchain for a 51% attack for example. Longest chain is always one that has the longest cumulative proof-of-work and thereby expensive to attack. It is not impossible, just very expensive and possibly infeasible without tons of resources.

There are several node specific attacks, Sybil attacks and Eclipse attacks are examples but Bitcoin Core has certain safeguards for it.

You should also include the developer guides from bitcoin.org in your list, https://developer.bitcoin.org/devguide/block_chain.html

It's a more well-explained, newbie-friendly version of the white paper in my opinion.

For other technical matters, go to Bitcoin Stack Exchange, https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/

Plus be careful and always verify each and every new information that you learn, especially when the discussion becomes more philisophical than technical. There are people that will make themselves sound sort of right, but what they're actually doing is gaslight you.

In my continued research in trying to understand the much I could of the technicals about the Bitcoin technology, I’ve been reading some books are suggested by users on the forum and even the referenced links or books or links as provided when chanced for that which I felt necessary. I have a topic about my adventure here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/book-quest-and-start-up-enquiries-5484462
I hope it doesn’t count for duplicates but, I was hoping I could bring it here even.

While I did quote this response, it’s because I think I found some information that somehow clears on attacks on nodes not been possible which is somehow what was being talked about in quote and it states that:

Though it might be possible for nodes to be subject to attack, the attacker must redo all the works that have been done on the node and the works done on the later blocks that have been attached or chained to the previous.
This is where the impossibility comes in given the fact that, it’s a system that largely depends on the majority and the number of users running nodes have ran into thousands if not millions and priority is always given to the longest chains which is impossible for any of such attacker to have therefore, the chances of taking control over the computation isn’t possible.

Hope my interpretation to this is correct.
This piece of information is from the Bitcoin white paper as referred to me from my having to read on Mastering Bitcoin… in progress with the book though.

In addition, you could just enable UPnP either by adding upnp=1 on bitcoin.conf or tick "Map port using UPnP" on GUI setting. Of course, i assume the router support and enable UPnP.

To run a node, you don't need to open any port. Connections appear to be outgoing or incoming, depending on who initiated them. For example, if we both run a node, then a connection that I have initiated between us, will be outgoing for me and incoming for you, but once the connection is established, it doesn't matter.

To allow incoming connections, yes, you must open a port, but this is definitely not an obstacle to run a node. I run a node without even bothered with ports and firewalls.

You can also use Tor and allow incoming connections over it, and you will still avoid all the networking hassle.

Finally, Bitcoin Core runs as a node instantly. After installing it and setting it to look at a specific location in your storage, then Bitcoin Core will (1) download the blockchain, (2) "talk" to other nodes transmitting information regarding blocks and transactions and (3) verify the validity of new blocks and transactions.

I am not sture if this information is still correct, but as far as I know bitcoin core does not work as a full node right from downloading it. I thin you have to open some ports in order for other people to connect to your node. This information can however be outdated and best is to simply follow a manual on this.

And the difference between that, and BIP-148 as proposed by shaolinfry, is that it has no upgrade - Segwit- that the majority of the community wanted to be activated. The "fork" would just be ignored by both the miners and the economic majority. Exchanges today won't waste precious resources to list the forked shitcoin.

Actually firewalls doesn't stop DDoS, or at least to the extent that you think it does. ISPs and server providers are more keen to blackhole your traffic than to deal with the traffic.

Consensus rules isn't defined by the proportion of the nodes. Each node would have the set of consensus rules to follow, and you can't change the rules by spawning a whole bunch of nodes enforcing another rule. It'll just be labelled as misbehaving and they would have their own fork.

Plus one of the main strengths of the system is, although OP's concern that a disruption of the network is probable, the nodes could always connect back to the network and sync to the current state of the blockchain, then continue like the disruption didn't happen.