{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1du3xh5wgds32a5fweqkd9k45kh30wl7kv2kyu8ugz9c2ztdg00tqqvyg93","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1du3xh5wgds32a5fweqkd9k45kh30wl7kv2kyu8ugz9c2ztdg00tqqvyg93","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-07-29\n📝 Original message:On Wednesday 29. July 2015 05.03.45 Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Point is…processing blocks requires computational resources that someone\n\u003e needs to put up. Unless the people who are putting up these resources are\n\u003e properly incentivized to continue doing it, the network will fail.\n\nThis assumption is proven wrong by history.\nTake a look at the RC5 challance, and its related cousins like the folding-at-\nhome or seti-at-home.\n\nNext to that, there is incentive for running a node. It is that you don't have \nto trust someone else. This incentive has in business always been a very \nstrong motivator. See how many companies run Outlook on their own intranet \ninstead of using Outlook.com or similarly in the cloud. \n\nIn my own opinion, its waaay to early to call failure on running nodes. Maybe \nyou want to actually help merchants/chains/individuals run them by making \nbitcoin-core more useful for them.\n\nWhat is the reason people don't run it? Well, reddit says its because of the \nupstream bandwidth not being able to be throttled. What about you try working \non that instead of giving up on it?\n-- \nThomas Zander"}