{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwet","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwet","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-04-09\n📝 Original message:On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Justus Ranvier \u003cjustusranvier at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e If the security of the network depends on a broken incentive model,\n\u003e then fix the design of the network so that economics works for you\n\u003e instead of against you.\n\nWho says anything about a broken incentive model. You've made past\nclaims about resource requirements that I think made no sense and then\nfailed to defend them when they were challenge.\n\nWith suitable software improvements running a full node could be done\nin as little as a few gigabytes in disk space (e.g. cost 25-50 cents),\nand as 50-100kbit/sec bandwidth in and out ongoing, and a moderate\namount of ram. Power costs are already just a few cents per month.  By\nfar the greatest cost is the figuring out and setting up part, which\nbundling could fix. The exact resources could be tunable to what the\nusers are willing and able to contribute.\n\nIf improved marginal security and privacy in addition to supporting\nthe network is not enough incentive to overcome costs like these then\nBitcoin is already doomed.  I think that fundamental costs aren't an\nissue at all, just implementation warts and education are.\n\nPart of asking the question is feeling out which improvements need to\nhappen first, and what the prospects of getting the bundling going\nonce those improvements are made."}