{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2p","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2p","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-04-09\n📝 Original message:On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e The right way to start with this, if anyone cares, is to add\n\u003e instrumentation to existing SPV wallet apps to report back to home base how\n\u003e long they are running for, how much disk space / RAM they have, and\n\u003e possibly what kind of hardware.\n\u003e\n\u003e I *strongly* suspect that the vast majority of SPV wallets are not left\n\u003e running permanently, and run on laptops where battery life is at a premium.\n\u003e These people will never want to run full nodes.\n\u003e\n\nBitcoins stands or falls with people running full nodes.\n\nIf no one wants to volunteer resources to support the network anymore,\nwe'll have failed.\n\nSorry. I don't think it will ever make sense to run full nodes on consumer\n\u003e hardware again. Our time is much better spent on optimising so it's cheaper\n\u003e for full node operators to run them on cheap virtualised servers.\n\u003e\n\nMost consumer hardware is much more powerful than 'cheap virtualized\nservers'. More memory, disks are cheap, and at least in the Netherlands\nhome bandwidth is much cheaper than server bandwidth.\n\nAlso: any optimization that helps running on cheap servers will also help\nrunning it on consumer hardware. It's not the one or the other.\n\nWladimir\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140409/00a9ece0/attachment.html\u003e"}