From: Me <jimmyjack@gmail.com>
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Significant losses by double-spending unconfirmed transactions
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 09:41:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <A0CA5CBA-ADCC-4D6C-A419-4EA48ECDD143@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBgb6fGT524U4xi_GDrOio2uKMe4Z798699CknvtaBdcqw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1947 bytes --]
> It's such a misconception that running many nodes somehow helps. It's much better that you run and control one or a few full nodes which you actually use to validate your transactions, than to run 1000s of nodes in third party datacenters. The latter only looks more decentralized.
I guess we sort of disagree here, perhaps my word “strength” was not the right word. Yes, running 6000 vs 7000 nodes makes no difference for the network strength, but (a) running 50 nodes vs 5000 does make a difference. I would love to see how the number of nodes drop if companies like blockcypher turn off their servers. Obviously it would not go 50. (b) running different clients (if blockcypher runs non-reference-bitcoinD client) makes the network less open wide-spread bugs
I feel we are really derailing the original topic btw :-)
> On Jul 15, 2015, at 9:11 AM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Me via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
> Have you talk to them? If not, how can you be sure they don’t run large number of standard nodes and actually make the network stronger? Personally I never bring claims like this if I just assume. A lot of people in the community really trust you, do you realize you potentially hurt them for no reason?
>
> Running normal full nodes only provides extra service to nodes synchronizing and lightweight clients. It does not "make the network stronger" in the sense that it does not reduce the trust the participants need to have in each other.
>
> It's such a misconception that running many nodes somehow helps. It's much better that you run and control one or a few full nodes which you actually use to validate your transactions, than to run 1000s of nodes in third party datacenters. The latter only looks more decentralized.
>
> --
> Pieter
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3270 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-15 16:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-15 3:29 [bitcoin-dev] Significant losses by double-spending unconfirmed transactions simongreen
2015-07-15 14:35 ` Tom Harding
2015-07-15 15:18 ` Peter Todd
2015-07-15 15:49 ` Me
2015-07-15 15:53 ` Bastiaan van den Berg
2015-07-15 15:59 ` Peter Todd
2015-07-15 16:06 ` Me
2015-07-15 16:11 ` Pieter Wuille
2015-07-15 16:41 ` Me [this message]
2015-07-15 16:12 ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-07-15 18:25 ` Matthieu Riou
2015-07-15 19:32 ` Peter Todd
2015-07-15 19:57 ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-07-16 0:08 ` Matthieu Riou
2015-07-16 5:18 ` odinn
2015-07-17 11:59 ` Peter Todd
2015-07-17 12:56 ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-07-15 17:01 ` Adrian Macneil
2015-07-16 14:30 ` Arne Brutschy
2015-07-16 14:50 ` Me
2015-07-16 15:33 ` Greg Schvey
2015-07-18 11:43 ` Mike Hearn
2015-07-18 15:09 ` Peter Todd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=A0CA5CBA-ADCC-4D6C-A419-4EA48ECDD143@gmail.com \
--to=jimmyjack@gmail.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=pieter.wuille@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox