300 full nodes in total is pretty bad
Post by twetch#2020
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.
What the chain says
- Block
- 623 963
- Time
- 2020-02-28T02:43:40Z
- Signer
- 1G7oKHQe8sCCtvpGs9rXbshAqdPeCo8e2g
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
- Name in tx
- twetch#2020
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
1G7oKHQe8sCCtvpGs9rXbshAqdPeCo8e2g VerifiedReplies (20)
end user's should be encouraged to run their own full node's, the whole point of bitcoin is sovereignty
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.
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
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.