📅 Original date posted:2016-02-10
📝 Original message:> I love seeing data! I was considering 0.10 nodes as 'unmaintained'
because it has been a long time since the 0.11 release.
https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/net-p2p/bitcoin-qt
The Gentoo package manager still has 0.10.2 as the most recent stable
version. Getting a later version of the software on a gentoo setup requires
explicitly telling the package manger to grab a later version. I don't know
what percent of nodes are Gentoo 0.10.2, but I think it's evidence that
0.10 should not be considered 'unmaintained'. People who update their
software regularly will be running 0.10 on Gentoo.
> many of whom have privately told me they are willing and able to run an
extra node or three (or a hundred-and-eleven) once there is a final release.
I'm not clear on the utility of more nodes. Perhaps there is significant
concern about SPV nodes getting enough bandwidth or the network struggling
from the load? Generally though, I believe that when people talk about the
deteriorating full node count they are talking about a reduction in
decentralization. Full nodes are a weak indicator of how likely something
like a change in consensus rules is to get caught, or how many people you
would need to open communication with / extort in order to be able to force
rules upon the network. Having a person spin up multiple nodes doesn't
address either of those concerns, which in my understanding is what most
people care about. My personal concern is with the percentage of the
economy that is dependent on trusting the full nodes they are connected to,
and the overall integrity of that trust. (IE how likely is it that my SPV
node is going to lie to me about whether or not I've received a payment).
I will also point out that lots of people will promise things when they are
seeking political change. I don't know what percentage of promised nodes
would actually be spun up, but I'm guessing that it's going to be
significantly less than 100%. I have similar fears for companies that claim
they have tested their infrastructure for supporting 2MB blocks. Talk is
cheap.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160210/2aed4f42/attachment.html>;
David Vorick [ARCHIVE] /
npub14h…9yjx0
2023-06-07 17:48:50
in reply to nevent1q…62t9
Author Public Key
npub14h948ndawt32ps3y225sslch8344tmw8k5z0lxuxr6wq9tu6sl2qj9yjx0Published at
2023-06-07 17:48:50Event JSON
{
"id": "7175c8a239a8ca91b6acb3f0e91b71cd3deb283ac14744b83dba869e4d8630c8",
"pubkey": "adcb53cdbd72e2a0c22452a9087f173c6b55edc7b504ff9b861e9c02af9a87d4",
"created_at": 1686160130,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"299dc342b2928a854d3cdebebdfa1b5d7d113553560926ba6670328be5b1c1ce",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"b4315d18a03dac8085e00a8b8ca3450a0d1a002ce867ab8c3d0df972950a2030",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"857f2f78dc1639e711f5ea703a9fc978e22ebd279abdea1861b7daa833512ee4"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-02-10\n📝 Original message:\u003e I love seeing data! I was considering 0.10 nodes as 'unmaintained'\nbecause it has been a long time since the 0.11 release.\n\nhttps://packages.gentoo.org/packages/net-p2p/bitcoin-qt\n\nThe Gentoo package manager still has 0.10.2 as the most recent stable\nversion. Getting a later version of the software on a gentoo setup requires\nexplicitly telling the package manger to grab a later version. I don't know\nwhat percent of nodes are Gentoo 0.10.2, but I think it's evidence that\n0.10 should not be considered 'unmaintained'. People who update their\nsoftware regularly will be running 0.10 on Gentoo.\n\n\u003e many of whom have privately told me they are willing and able to run an\nextra node or three (or a hundred-and-eleven) once there is a final release.\n\nI'm not clear on the utility of more nodes. Perhaps there is significant\nconcern about SPV nodes getting enough bandwidth or the network struggling\nfrom the load? Generally though, I believe that when people talk about the\ndeteriorating full node count they are talking about a reduction in\ndecentralization. Full nodes are a weak indicator of how likely something\nlike a change in consensus rules is to get caught, or how many people you\nwould need to open communication with / extort in order to be able to force\nrules upon the network. Having a person spin up multiple nodes doesn't\naddress either of those concerns, which in my understanding is what most\npeople care about. My personal concern is with the percentage of the\neconomy that is dependent on trusting the full nodes they are connected to,\nand the overall integrity of that trust. (IE how likely is it that my SPV\nnode is going to lie to me about whether or not I've received a payment).\n\nI will also point out that lots of people will promise things when they are\nseeking political change. I don't know what percentage of promised nodes\nwould actually be spun up, but I'm guessing that it's going to be\nsignificantly less than 100%. I have similar fears for companies that claim\nthey have tested their infrastructure for supporting 2MB blocks. Talk is\ncheap.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160210/2aed4f42/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "9e81d6c72c2a3d274990ac04576569040b2eb052e1602c11809a475a4090a573238734b3bef48dcd6ce8904c2c7b935810a5c370e6e0d3ee2db585e09e3330ef"
}