In Bitcoin, every node does more than just 'rely on others'—it independently validates all transactions and blocks against the full ledger. This isn't the same as saying 'my friend lifts weights for me.' It's more like being part of a gym where everyone lifts weights regularly. Each node in the Bitcoin network continuously checks for double spends, invalid blocks, or any deviations from the protocol, and nodes would reject such anomalies automatically. Yes, this process is automated, but it is still a form of active verification. Passive node runners are still contributing to the security and decentralization of the network by running this software.
Yes, there have been bugs and issues in Bitcoin's history, but the key difference is transparency. When a bug or double spend occurs, it's visible on the public ledger, and anyone can examine the blockchain to understand what happened. This isn't true for Monero due to its obfuscated transaction data. If a flaw exists in Monero's cryptographic assumptions, detecting it without transparency would be far more challenging, especially for passive users who can only rely on cryptographic proofs, not visible transactions.
Your argument suggests that because most Bitcoiners don’t manually audit transactions, they’re akin to Monero node runners. However, Monero node runners can't manually verify the total supply or audit individual transactions because the protocol doesn't allow it. The difference isn't about whether or not individual users actively engage in auditing; it’s about the system's openness and the ability for anyone, at any time, to verify the entire ledger if they choose.
So, while some Bitcoin users might rely on the broader network to audit the blockchain, they still could audit independently if they wished. This inherent capability provides a level of assurance and trust that isn’t dependent solely on cryptographic methods, unlike Monero. The option to verify independently or trust the network is a choice Bitcoin offers, while Monero, due to its privacy focus, inherently restricts this transparency."
BitcoinStu
npub1ua…dx9cn
2024-08-29 06:58:31
in reply to nevent1q…3pdc
Author Public Key
npub1uavkq2z6vqczd772ple0p0k44ncjcxv5lg4sq6r069aagvra47uq2dx9cnPublished at
2024-08-29 06:58:31Event JSON
{
"id": "3bbd299648cb8919a06bf8ff4ebc30987c8f869fee5e861d4a5f6e78cd9bf9f0",
"pubkey": "e75960285a603026fbca0ff2f0bed5acf12c1994fa2b00686fd17bd4307dafb8",
"created_at": 1724914711,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f6c33b30192129732c5bee4e879c2a0b336e9a2ccb2d498e2cf12de19eb9279e",
"wss://soloco.nl/",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"d78325c8ddf453c78af136780a7f6b7a3079e7ce7b93acebe6d45dbdbab37562",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"af740d198babb8c7b82d0a4718eb354bb3f6af9a98639b85d4a5cf1371caba85"
],
[
"p",
"e75960285a603026fbca0ff2f0bed5acf12c1994fa2b00686fd17bd4307dafb8"
],
[
"p",
"9d169b4da53a9c22455bc429639d113ed664ac0c4131f09ce25aa262a2d6a249"
],
[
"p",
"c3ab196962a53944afdc3525dbbadbae8b592dbb09b8ae16cac27f969911f5f5"
],
[
"p",
"00000001fc52245d2da96009b6827e896d583ee5189ae26509df7ec51e5eed21"
],
[
"p",
"b9e76546ba06456ed301d9e52bc49fa48e70a6bf2282be7a1ae72947612023dc"
]
],
"content": "In Bitcoin, every node does more than just 'rely on others'—it independently validates all transactions and blocks against the full ledger. This isn't the same as saying 'my friend lifts weights for me.' It's more like being part of a gym where everyone lifts weights regularly. Each node in the Bitcoin network continuously checks for double spends, invalid blocks, or any deviations from the protocol, and nodes would reject such anomalies automatically. Yes, this process is automated, but it is still a form of active verification. Passive node runners are still contributing to the security and decentralization of the network by running this software.\n\nYes, there have been bugs and issues in Bitcoin's history, but the key difference is transparency. When a bug or double spend occurs, it's visible on the public ledger, and anyone can examine the blockchain to understand what happened. This isn't true for Monero due to its obfuscated transaction data. If a flaw exists in Monero's cryptographic assumptions, detecting it without transparency would be far more challenging, especially for passive users who can only rely on cryptographic proofs, not visible transactions.\n\nYour argument suggests that because most Bitcoiners don’t manually audit transactions, they’re akin to Monero node runners. However, Monero node runners can't manually verify the total supply or audit individual transactions because the protocol doesn't allow it. The difference isn't about whether or not individual users actively engage in auditing; it’s about the system's openness and the ability for anyone, at any time, to verify the entire ledger if they choose.\n\nSo, while some Bitcoin users might rely on the broader network to audit the blockchain, they still could audit independently if they wished. This inherent capability provides a level of assurance and trust that isn’t dependent solely on cryptographic methods, unlike Monero. The option to verify independently or trust the network is a choice Bitcoin offers, while Monero, due to its privacy focus, inherently restricts this transparency.\"\n\n",
"sig": "1aee46367a407fe7aa3432c2342f3c35d5d7933f53cfa3ceca6f8d9c3216a7beea7f41741d19f32a251490211b7a42ffc64622ab00adaf90a36cbbce90b39742"
}