rich1.0npub149tvqh6gesh22h60jrehl5clrxscx6q65wznq9ty6pae8sxq00esg5vasyhttps://nostr.ae/npub149tvqh6gesh22h60jrehl5clrxscx6q65wznq9ty6pae8sxq00esg5vasynjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2017-03-29 📝 Original message:> Perhaps you are fortunate to have a home computer that has more than a single 512GB SSD. Lots of consumer hardware has that little storage. That's very poor logic, sorry. Restricted-space SSD's are not a cost-effective hardware option for running a node. Keeping blocksizes small has significant other costs for everyone. Comparing the cost of running a node under arbitrary conditons A, B, or C when there are far more efficient options than any of those is a very bad way to think about the costs of running a node. You basically have to ignore the significant consequences of keeping blocks small. If node operational costs rose to the point where an entire wide swath of users that we do actually need for security purposes could not justify running a node, that's something important for consideration. For me, that translates to modern hardware that's relatively well aligned with the needs of running a node - perhaps budget hardware, but still modern - and above-average bandwidth caps. You're free to disagree, but your example only makes sense to me if blocksize caps didn't have serious consequences. Even if those consequences are just the threat of a contentious fork by people who are mislead about the real consequences, that threat is still a consequence itself. On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 9:18 AM, David Vorick via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Perhaps you are fortunate to have a home computer that has more than a > single 512GB SSD. Lots of consumer hardware has that little storage. Throw > on top of it standard consumer usage, and you're often left with less than > 200 GB of free space. Bitcoin consumes more than half of that, which feels > very expensive, especially if it motivates you to buy another drive. > > I have talked to several people who cite this as the primary reason that > they are reluctant to join the full node club. > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170329/24dbcac6/attachment-0001.html>