Node count is not a good metric to measure strength of the network, hashing power is better. End users should only need to run SPV's at most if that.
Post by twetch#14723
end user's should be encouraged to run their own full node's, the whole point of bitcoin is sovereignty
What the chain says
- Block
- 623 963
- Time
- 2020-02-28T02:43:40Z
- Signer
- 1DgpULqStGMt77MUitMwycjyHwzifcQifN
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
- Name in tx
- twetch#14723
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
1DgpULqStGMt77MUitMwycjyHwzifcQifN VerifiedReplies (20)
Not everyone wants to run a full node. Most people are just going to want to buy, trade, or spend BSV without being forced to participate in its operation.
everyone has to run their full node for bitcoin to succeed, reason why keeping the cost of running a full node low is important. which is part of the small block argument
how many humans do you know that run a full node?
And that is exactly why BTC will fail (small blocks). BSV doesn’t need everyone to run a node, has large blocks and can scale... without forcing everyone to run a node.
BTC having small blocks is the reason why it will succeed and allow people in developing countries to participate by running their own full node.
how is there any sovereignty in that? it gates so many potential users by default. The whole point in the sovereignty of bitcoin is being able to send to any other user without the possibility of seizure, hence peer-to-peer.
You got trolled.
not trolling
You keep talking about everyone running a full node... look, it’s not our fault that BTC screwed up by only allowing small blocks and now it can’t succeed unless they force all their users to run a node. They shouldn’t have turned away from the protocol.
Do you know why full nodes are important to bitcoins network ?
This thread is longer than one page shows. Open a reply to see what follows it.