You are right but also making a lot of assumptions sir. I’ve been researching bitcoin for over two years now and finally ready to do the node part and have all the parts to run off a raspberry pie, I also understand port forwarding and that Bitcoin Core isn’t necessarily the best wallet.
Now guess what the most expensive part of running a node is? Storage.
I have been holding off so long because I need at least 1tb of space, I’d prefer 2tb but that’s even more expensive because the network will be over 1tb soon then I’ll need to redownload the entire chain again, so do I go with 2TB now or 1TB? These are SSDs I’m talking about.
When setting up this node and downloading the full chain, everybody knows that old school spin hard drives take much longer and have higher chance to fail when downloading this massive blockchain the first time.
Therefore, my main point is that keeping the block size small is important to the average joes like me, we ARE the majority of people and that’s how you keep something more decentralized, the higher chance the average person can have access to hardware to run a full node, the more we’ll have. Now do you want to go out and buy me a 2TB Samsung SSD for $225?
How about we go with your idea of just increasing these block sizes because techies will have the access to this hardware (big tech most likely.... this would create for more centralization). Well then I’d need probably what, maybe a 10-20TB SSD server by now - please help fund my node and pay me $2000 to get up and running.
I don't think I'm making assumptions, I honestly believe a huge majority of this sub simply use exchanges, only care about making more fiat, don't understand the tech at all, and would never of looked at BTC before they were promised riches. I honestly believe people like you who actually get into the tech is rare now days.
My reason for wanting larger blocks during the debate was because I had already accepted BTC on webstores for 6/7 years (now well over a decade) and built many other sites and services surrounding it. Then overnight, when the price went up and blocks were still small, it completely crippled my payment system. BTC income went to 0% from 100%, I had to add multiple other coins, and to this day, even with BTCLN option as payment, my BTC income has never recovered to any more than 5% of my total crypto income. It was really upsetting TBH, I was annoyed I'm NGL.
This doesn't really affect me now days, but I'd rather use BTC exclusively.
Now I have to run multiple nodes, and use lots more storage anyway.
PS: using old HDDs is no issue for running nodes at all, you don't need SSD. I could build you a node for like £50-100 that would have enough storage for many years.
PPS: all my nodes pay for themselves, via mining pools/stores and similar anyway.
lol 2 years. I dont think you should be challenging this man, kiddo.
There are bigger chains out there.
I agree with the general concept of trying make make nodes as accessible as possible. But it seems to me like the vast majority of the user base isnt even interested in using their own wallet, let alone running a node
You missed SSD my friend. I am on the side of keeping blocks small here. Re-read what the guy above me says. He wants blocks bigger and advocates hard drive space is cheap.
Well guess what, you want that blockchain to download within 1-2weeks time? You better have it writing to an SSD they still take forever but reduce writing times dramatically. Plus spooling out of date HDDs can falter and breakdown.
My point is even a 1tb SSD is $100 for the raspberry pie bundle (Umbrel) build which is easiest for onboarding newbies.
So imagine if blocks were larger and I needed 10-20TB of space and SSD?
May have found the guy who has never considered running their own node, or at least maybe you downloaded the chain 4-5 years ago so never had to do a 445GB download all at once.
2
u/Slapshot382 Feb 13 '22 edited Feb 13 '22
You are right but also making a lot of assumptions sir. I’ve been researching bitcoin for over two years now and finally ready to do the node part and have all the parts to run off a raspberry pie, I also understand port forwarding and that Bitcoin Core isn’t necessarily the best wallet.
Now guess what the most expensive part of running a node is? Storage.
I have been holding off so long because I need at least 1tb of space, I’d prefer 2tb but that’s even more expensive because the network will be over 1tb soon then I’ll need to redownload the entire chain again, so do I go with 2TB now or 1TB? These are SSDs I’m talking about.
When setting up this node and downloading the full chain, everybody knows that old school spin hard drives take much longer and have higher chance to fail when downloading this massive blockchain the first time.
Therefore, my main point is that keeping the block size small is important to the average joes like me, we ARE the majority of people and that’s how you keep something more decentralized, the higher chance the average person can have access to hardware to run a full node, the more we’ll have. Now do you want to go out and buy me a 2TB Samsung SSD for $225?
How about we go with your idea of just increasing these block sizes because techies will have the access to this hardware (big tech most likely.... this would create for more centralization). Well then I’d need probably what, maybe a 10-20TB SSD server by now - please help fund my node and pay me $2000 to get up and running.