rich1.0npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwethttps://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2014-04-09 📝 Original message:On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Justus Ranvier <justusranvier at gmail.com> wrote: > If the security of the network depends on a broken incentive model, > then fix the design of the network so that economics works for you > instead of against you. Who says anything about a broken incentive model. You've made past claims about resource requirements that I think made no sense and then failed to defend them when they were challenge. With suitable software improvements running a full node could be done in as little as a few gigabytes in disk space (e.g. cost 25-50 cents), and as 50-100kbit/sec bandwidth in and out ongoing, and a moderate amount of ram. Power costs are already just a few cents per month. By far the greatest cost is the figuring out and setting up part, which bundling could fix. The exact resources could be tunable to what the users are willing and able to contribute. If improved marginal security and privacy in addition to supporting the network is not enough incentive to overcome costs like these then Bitcoin is already doomed. I think that fundamental costs aren't an issue at all, just implementation warts and education are. Part of asking the question is feeling out which improvements need to happen first, and what the prospects of getting the bundling going once those improvements are made.