having coin on a privkey and thats it..  is meaningless.. no matter what the vote is your always going to have 'coin'
having coin makes no difference to the network structure direction or security.

it definitely doesnt make you as important as being a miner, pool, economic or active node.

EG if there was a split. even satoshi who has not been around for 7 years will have 'coin' on both sides

lol

hv_ you are mostly on the correct lines. but lets clarify things for those stuck in the past

1.
miners (ASICS) DO NOT CONTAIN A HARD DRIVE(that ended in circa 2013) nor do the see the blockchain. all they do is receive a block hash plus some very minimal data, to create the solved block hash.
they do not form blocks, do not validate transaction and do not collate transactions into blocks.. a miner just hashes a bit of blockheader data in simple terms.

2.
a POOL does the previous block validation, transaction validation, collate tx's for current block creation. but a pool does not directly create the hash of the block.. thats what miners(asics) do

3.
economic nodes are active nodes, but where the person running it has a economic part of the network by running a business/service/exchange that adds utility to bitcoin for users

4.
active users just run nodes that validate and relay blocks, validate and relay transactions (think of them like torrent seeds)

5.
users are mainly anyone with funds, whether they use any kind of wallet available and usually just leach off the network by not actively being part of the network security symbiotic relationship of the above 4 parts (these are prunned/outofdate/lite/no witness/cludgy/spv node users)


so if you want to be a fully vested and involved user, be part of all 5 elements of the symbiotic relationship (well atleast 1,3,4,5)

well lets take copper wire ADSL that the UK averaged a DECADE ago

0.5mb upload(2mb down)

0.5mbit/s = 5.4 GByte daily UP
2mbit/s = 21.6 GByte daily down

because of bits to bytes and then 1second to 24hours.. easy maths is to take whatever mbit speed you have and multiply it by 10800 to get the mbyte per day
(x / 8 * 60 * 60 * 24)=10800

thats mbytes per day.. or more simply multiply your xmbit per sec by 10.8 to get gbytes per day...

so say you had 1mb up on fibre
10.8gbyte of data can be sent from your pc per day

unless your a brand with many platforms / games/ software packages that can be interconnected via a singular currency
unless there is a purpose / NEED to use a coin that fiat or bitcoin cannot handle. then there is no point.

EG
imagine walking into a store and being told if you want to buy microsoft office you need to first buy MS coin. most people will think WTF and just walk out the store.

however if the store had 1000 software packages then you could offer allowing people to buy one of those packages using coin due to some discount it may offer or because it automates registration of the software licence or some other advantage.. then people would happily buy the coin because it has more than just a one time use

been tried and dumped

seems people dont research and are instead just trying to grab any empty excuse for an ICO which eventually wont even bother making an end product because they finally realise the issues of past attempts

reporting this to be thrown in the altcoin section along with the other altcoin failures

says the guy that thinks someone paying 40 hours minimum wage labour for 1 tx is 'normal' and 'bitcoin is running fine',  'just pay appropriate fee'  and 'just pay more'

now to wake you up:
cost of using bitcoin (tx fee) is more of a curse than running a node cost

lets first address the sidechains (i facepalm)
sidechain is an altcoin.. go play with litecoin or zcash or ethereum if you want that..
go support and protect a differnt chain/network...
honestly if another chain can handle 10mb then bitcoin can too.
simple reason: altcoins use computers.. altcoins use the internet so whatever an altcoin can handle bitcoin can too..

lets address the other part of ur comment
stop sniffing the reddit scripts of "gigabytes by midnight"

i continually laugh at the dooms dayers that know 32mb is manageable and any number below that is more then manageable
yep even 8mb is "RaspberryPi +ADSL (0.5mb upload /s)" safe.. so now the doomsdays try shouting
stay at 1mb or else gigabytes per block because they cant argue about 2-32 so have to exaggerate to 'gb by midnight' to scare people

this is not nor ever has been gigabytes by midnight proposal nor has there ever been a proposal for GB in hours days or months.
the main progress proposals onchain have been, natural growth over time that will eventually be xxmb IN DECADES
the stupid thing the "gigabytes by midnight" FUD scripters forget is that nodes choose what blocks are acceptable and so will not make such stupidly high leaps too soon. the nodes will challenge things going too fast. thus there is no problem. its self regulating because if the nodes cant handle it, they wont allow it. its the most fundamental part of bitcoins true consensus!!!


the reality is that TODAY 8mb is safe.. actually alot more than that is safe, but to calm down the doomsdayers it was suggested 16mb instead
of 32mb
then 8mb instead of 16.. then 4mb instead of 8mb then 2 instead of 4.. but then then the doomsdayers still cry they want 1mb

their explanations for 1mb are empty. no logic, no meaningful reason, apart from crying

every time i see a small blocker demand 1mb stays in effect all i read is
"no Call of duty/twitch live streaming due to ATI server rack data centres"
"no HDTV on demand due to server farms attached to household tvs"
in short they are stuck in the 90's


what im talking about is instead of core syncing and then prunning, no witnessing, stripping to become lite.
im talking abut core run in litemode. making the syncing part a background thing.

imagine it this way
imagine if microsoft instead of loading windows for people to use and then do updates in the background, microsoft decided that all windows updates needed to be done before letting people log into their computer.

people would hate waiting hours just to send an email or access a web page..
same goes for core and other nodes.

let people open the client and quickly get a utxo st of the keys they use to see a balance and be able to spend, and then the full sync just occurs in the background while people are using the node.

its not about turning off syncing. its about allowing users to use their node on the same day they download it..
because thats the part people are really peed off with.. not being able to do a thing for a couple weeks

BTCC used to offer free transactions to its customers as did xapo. all because they had control/links to pools, so could name their own price of what gets accepted into blocks.

obviously IF other pools were causing issues BTCC would still of remained the cheapest pools.. still offering free transactions and helping... but...

when looking at the stats.. it wasnt BTCC being "conservative".. it was actually Via and bitmain which had the average cheapest blocks. meaning while BTCC decided to get greedy and go for the highest tx's and screw even their own customers as well as being part of the "just pay more" crowd.. there were other pools still offering blockspace for free or even blocks with no fee's

btcc- DCG portfolio and BScartel supporter

when bscartel and their fanboys use the word conservative, you can tell they read reddit but never read a dictionary.

core are NOT conservative

"averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values."

segwit: NEW key pairs, new network topology, new block template
nothing traditional about that.

as for segwit being 'innovative' pfft.
their fixes/promises are empty and cannot be fully forfilled

there are many ways to solve the problems but core decided to go with the political definition not the literal definition
"just pay more"

LN will become paypal2.0
go check out the idea of hubs.. then check out the meaning of multisig and then check out CLTV (3-5business day maturing after confirm) CSV revoke (chargeback)

lauda please research the finer details. stop relying on reddit scripts

sounds like some people are stuck in 1999 trying to scream at twitch/skype that their business model of live streaming just wont work

anyway onto other points


the synchronisation is not a problem. the actual headache is that cores UI is not set up to function until synchronisation is complete.
as thats the real headache people gripe and moan about in regards to syncing
EG
no user balance or being able to spend until node has downloaded certain blocks that contain the users UTXO.
this can be fixed by having the UI function in Lite mode where it grabs a UTXO set first. or even just requests UTXO from peers of the keys the user owns. and then synchronisation becomes a background issue that can be done as and whenever the user pleases.

thus making a node spendably functional from the first hour

again the mindset is not about hinder bitcoin growth for the 99% purely for the 1% with limitations,
if it was the case, then core should not have removed fee controls that have wiped out utility for about 33% of the world*

(analogy time of dumb mindsets)
whats next. scream that employment wont work because most jobs are more than a mile from people houses and not everyone has decent transport
whats next. scream that retail shops wont work because most shops are more than a mile from people houses and not everyone has decent transport

*i do love the snobbery
"bitcoin should not grow because americans might need to pay 3 hours of minimum wage labour more PER MONTH to use it
but dont worry about tx fee, just pay more, it doesnt matter if cuba, india, africa have to pay 40 hours of labour PER TX!"

solution for users independantly
(same solution for torrent seeds)
reduce number of leachers(connections) = less bandwidth draw*

solution for dev implementations
reduce sigops and max txbytes = less ram/cpu demand

afterall with todays 4ktxsigops with 20k max block sigops
and segwits 16k txsigops 80k blocksigops.. that means a base block can be filled with just 5 tx's

and the max tx bytes of 100kb = 10 tx fills base block..

WHO THE F*CK deserves to have 10%-20% of the blocksize for just 1 tx..!!!!
reduce the greedy stupid, artificially high numbers, meaning transactions become leaner. and you will find that bloat, bottlenecking and processing time REDUCE all while allowing the block size to increase.

*i see many people with 'capped' internet that have 50+ connections. i facepalm them and tell them to learn "6 degree's of separation" and reduce their connection count.
not everyone needs to be a 'supernode' (multiple dozens of connections)

there can be side services to handle the niche market of 'instant spend' .. but that is no reason to try doomsday the blockchain using propaganda to stifle natural growth.

segwit cannot solve the promises it promises. and you cant segwit a segwit after segwiting it.. so the last 2 years of promoting and pushing for segwit has been nothing more then an empty gesture

itss time we move passed "segwit hope" and realise the trths about it.. and start actually getting bitcoins real and productive code running such as dynamic blocks (there are many different brands with different proposals so dont shout BU as your doom cry)

lol the stats lauda / bitfury have are out of context

firstly its stupidly silly maths to promote "sgwit linear"

without segwit, changing things like
maxtxsigops to 4k has REDUCED the ram cpu usage

in the future dropping it again to 2k can further reduce the ram/cpu usage, yet even with 'bigger blocks' you can reduce cpu/ram usage aswell as over time having an average computer that has more ram in it. EG Raspi1 vs Raspi3.. vs todays basic desktop pc

the real reason people dont run full nodes is not about restrictions of technology.. its about their crap GUI (user interface) and the social use of not needing to have something running 24/7 if they only personally use it once a day.

its about UTILITY that makes being a full node not attractive.
if bitcoin gained utility they would use it more often

current tech limitations is not the problem. its the fact that core dont seem to care about utility or care about users. all they care about is leadership and dominance

10mb per ~10 minutes

lol
i remember 1999 where two mp3 songs (10mb) took 10 minutes... now its seconds..

does anyone see MILLIONS of people crying that Call of Duty cannot function bcause online gameplay just cannot work due to hardware/internet
does anyone see MILLIONS of people crying that skype ....
does anyone see MILLIONS of people crying that youtube Livestream ....
does anyone see MILLIONS of people crying that twitch ....

here we go again..
nonsense propoganda from the bscartel* that the only future is hubs..

bscartel want LN hubs and cry that blocksize increases = centralised upstream nodes (hubs). in their mind all they can see is centralisation
all because they want people to believe that everyone wants to run bitcoin on a raspberryPi 1a board(about a decade out of date nearly) and a memorystick


boring fools like that are stuck in the past. the internet has got faster since 2009, hard drives have got bigger and the average ram on basic home computers is more then the past.

real funny part is data for data of a fully validating full archival usernode is the same.
4200 tx's is still ~2mb whether using segwit or legacyx2

what will actually kill the network is the pruning and -nowitness options that then kill off the amount of full nodes (analogy: torrent seeders) and just leaves a cludge of a network of SPV/prunned/no-witness nodes (analogy: torrent leachers)
meaning what Gmaxwell called downstream nodes and what luke JR calls stripped nodes.. become the lower tier (cludgy leacher nodes)

meaning what Gmaxwell called upstream filters and what luke JR calls bridging nodes.. become the higher tier (full seeder nodes) hubs

maybe its time those that adore gmax and core actually do the research, yes some of you i have actually told to do this research atleast a year ago, but yet you still cant get your head passed the buzzwords, gmax and co have spoonfed.. and that leaves you unable to understand it.

segwit causes more breakdown of the full node count.
wake up

*bscartel(barry silbert, blockstream, core, btcc,litecoin, and DCG portfolio, (all loving segwit))

---

as for the mempool bloat graphs.. all the spam spikes relate to times the bscartel want their new bips activated by drumming up how change needs to be made ASAP
check out june 2016, october/november 2016 and then more recently when the other segwit activating bips popped up..

its all just drama to try getting segwit activated

and core wanted a november code activated by christmas without giving a damn about usernodes symbiotic relationship validating said blocks..

so pereira4 is crying because garzic is running tests on btc1 on a separate testnet.

well there are thousands of devs, who can just run btc1 on a public testnet.
lol
it doesnt need everyone to sit on their hands and wait for garzic to test it on his own.. anyone can
so if you want to cry about someone privately testing something, go run the code and test it publicly

..
but anyway i mentioned it before in another FUD topic by pereira4. so here is a summary
using a separate testnet specifically for a new bip is not new, and not garzic setting a precedent

hint: SegNet

have a nice day

pump and dump is not simply about making the price go up artificially(pump) with empty reason or making the price go down artificially(dump) with empty reason

its about making it go extremely high and then extremely low in a short period. usually only really happens with the pointless crap coins that have no utility that can be pumped and dumped easily.

for coins with utility they are usually referred to as speculative spikes and dips. rather than pump and dumps.