Correct. Only truly dedicated hobbyists and companies will run them.
Post by twetch#21877
That was always one of my biggest concerns about bitcoin from day 1. On the other hand, I always knew the decentralization that matters most would be the free market of many different cryptocoins to choose from.
What the chain says
- Block
- 634 708
- Time
- 2020-05-13T04:54:26Z
- Signer
- 16SgJCRH7fB5ny6wCHabmiGaa6wcbve6WS
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
- Name in tx
- twetch#21877
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
16SgJCRH7fB5ny6wCHabmiGaa6wcbve6WS VerifiedReplies (4)
I mean, not to be rude, but isn't it more realistic to say that the only financial incentive to run full nodes will be to launch a Sybil attack?
That, and different coins can have different use cases and you can exchange between them so easily. You don't need one network for everything. BTC is fine as a secure digital gold. That trust in itself enables other use cases on other chains.
That, and different coins can have different use cases and you can exchange between them so easily. You don't need one network for everything. BTC is fine as a secure digital gold. That trust in itself enables other use cases on other chains.
Indeed. In fact each chain can host on type of info and one currency used for that information, which is sorta how I thought things would play out back in 2010 before ethereum, when namecoin was the thing.
Still makes me sad how namecoin failed.