📅 Original date posted:2015-08-07
📝 Original message:On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > If the incentives for running a node don't weight up against the
> > cost/difficulty using a full node yourself for a majority of people in
> the
> > ecosystem, I would argue that there is a problem. As Bitcoin's
> fundamental
> > improvement over other systems is the lack of need for trust, I believe
> > that with increased adoption should also come an increased (in absolute
> > terms) incentive for people to use a full node. I'm seeing the opposite
> > trend, and that is worrying IMHO.
>
> And you do the same thing again; you dismiss the need factor.
>
Of course there is a need. It's the primary mechanism that keeps Bitcoin
secure and immune from malicious influence.
Of course not everyone needs to run a node. But that leaves the
responsibility on us - the community - to help the situation by not making
it too hard to run a node. And I see the block size as the primary way
through which we do that.
If the impact of the system goes us, so should the - joint - incentives to
keep it secure. And I think we're (slowly) failing at that.
--
Pieter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150807/96f446eb/attachment.html>;
Pieter Wuille [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tj…jtl6r
2023-06-07 17:33:25
in reply to nevent1q…6raw
Author Public Key
npub1tjephawh7fdf6358jufuh5eyxwauzrjqa7qn50pglee4tayc2ntqcjtl6rPublished at
2023-06-07 17:33:25Event JSON
{
"id": "8f05e60a1ec8d16cca164f87f66a8aad7a9ac723bcbbbb307035a177b27fad8d",
"pubkey": "5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6",
"created_at": 1686159205,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"4deabe9530dac91ab385b061de076df50eef16a544ec75d3606e252ede36fcc0",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"c383099184e269901c0e69a8fd8c2ecb01cf6c2af76d22a17cab142a686bc2ee",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"6f226bd1c86c22aed12ec82cd2dab4b5e2f77fd662ac4e1f881170a12da87bd6"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-07\n📝 Original message:On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e \u003e If the incentives for running a node don't weight up against the\n\u003e \u003e cost/difficulty using a full node yourself for a majority of people in\n\u003e the\n\u003e \u003e ecosystem, I would argue that there is a problem. As Bitcoin's\n\u003e fundamental\n\u003e \u003e improvement over other systems is the lack of need for trust, I believe\n\u003e \u003e that with increased adoption should also come an increased (in absolute\n\u003e \u003e terms) incentive for people to use a full node. I'm seeing the opposite\n\u003e \u003e trend, and that is worrying IMHO.\n\u003e\n\u003e And you do the same thing again; you dismiss the need factor.\n\u003e\n\nOf course there is a need. It's the primary mechanism that keeps Bitcoin\nsecure and immune from malicious influence.\n\nOf course not everyone needs to run a node. But that leaves the\nresponsibility on us - the community - to help the situation by not making\nit too hard to run a node. And I see the block size as the primary way\nthrough which we do that.\n\nIf the impact of the system goes us, so should the - joint - incentives to\nkeep it secure. And I think we're (slowly) failing at that.\n\n-- \nPieter\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150807/96f446eb/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "d8e682d9b87d894f4b7d7f246048349263a7d400aa160f66e22be1348f2abbf4b7412517d9669b914fdaf2e93bc8de6f313df2c2fe9fc490dc30be08e4f25070"
}