Author: Aymeric Vitte 2017-03-30 10:13:21
Published on: 2017-03-30T10:13:21+00:00
The discussion revolves around the issue of running full nodes in the Bitcoin network. The author questions the credibility of organizations like Mozilla and W3C, stating that they are financed by big companies and promote their interests. He also highlights the lack of intrinsic incentive for users to organize P2P systems with peers and intermediate nodes, leading to the failure of such systems. The author suggests that crypto-currencies should first focus on rewarding/sustaining themselves before venturing into other systems. The discussion then shifts towards the subject of existing full nodes and who controls them. The author questions the absence of any plans or discussions about the role of full nodes in the Bitcoin network. Another participant in the discussion argues that relying on other nodes for verification of certain types of transactions is acceptable. They propose that companies could offer trustworthy verification services to users at a low fee per month. However, it is also suggested that some transactions require additional security and full-node verification.The debate also touches upon the consequences of keeping block size caps small, which leads to higher operational costs for running a node. A participant points out that Bitcoin consumes more than half of the limited storage space on a standard consumer computer, which discourages many people from joining the full node club. The discussion concludes with links to the author's GitHub page and various projects related to Bitcoin and Tor.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T22:41:39.852446+00:00