Memory is cheap -

[Adrayrd]

Memory will only gets cheaper and cheaper because there are so many new things coming up.
Why are you not happy about it is better then paying the biggest price.

[Lauda]

Memory will only gets cheaper and cheaper because there are so many new things coming up.
Why are you not happy about it is better then paying the biggest price.

You didn't read a single post in the thread, did you (e.g. "why are you not happy about this")? Designing software with an optimistic view on growth rates ends up with disaster.

[TKeenan]

25 years ago when circuit feature size was 1 micron - we were saying the exact same thing.  I really don't know how anyone is doing 14um.  That seems totally impossible.  But - whatever, they are doing it.  

The problem arises when you reach the size of 1 atom.

Not a problem at all.  One atom has many electrons.  Electron 'spin' has been used as a memory in the past.  So, the lower limit actually goes lower than the atomic level.

I don't think memory capacity will continue to go down like the chart for the last 20 years.  It will go down however.  Now, memory is so fucking cheap it is shocking.  I once paid $100 / Megabyte (RAM).  Now when I buy 128GB flash for $30 I laugh my head off.  

As for bandwidth - the arguments here are hard to accept.

Again, it comes down to where the user is from. While $30 might seem like a small amount in the US, it is a big amount in remote places in the world. It comes down to whether and by how much you want to restrict node usage. Do you want nodes only to be run by people in 1st world countries?

I don't care one bit if poor countries can't keep up with the cost to make a reliable network.  If only first world countries can afford to make nodes, and those nodes enable a successful cryptocurrency network, I just don't care that Zimbabwei is left out of participation.  Bitcoin is not here for the purpose of advancing socialism.  I don't like a network designed so that it will run on 'shit' hardware for the purpose of assuring everyone can participate.  It is not an important aspect of cryptocurrency that we assure all the downtrodden can have an equal chance to contribute to the network. 

[TKeenan]

25 years ago when circuit feature size was 1 micron - we were saying the exact same thing.  I really don't know how anyone is doing 14um.  That seems totally impossible.  But - whatever, they are doing it.  

The problem arises when you reach the size of 1 atom.

The good news is we have a long way to go.  14nm is 140 angstrom.  An atom is only about 1 angstrom in diameter.  So, there remains tons of room for size reduction before we get to the atom.  Looks like memory is going to be even cheaper. 

[Ultrafinery]

Again, it comes down to where the user is from. While $30 might seem like a small amount in the US, it is a big amount in remote places in the world. It comes down to whether and by how much you want to restrict node usage. Do you want nodes only to be run by people in 1st world countries?

Just curious, how many people who consider $30 a large sum of money currently run nodes? How would it matter if Angola got a few? Describe in detail plz.

[eyeknock]

The good news is we have a long way to go.  14nm is 140 angstrom.  An atom is only about 1 angstrom in diameter.  So, there remains tons of room for size reduction before we get to the atom.  Looks like memory is going to be even cheaper. 

exactly, cheaper and with a lot more of capacity, so in the end, there will be no excuse to run a node, yes? well now we just need that our isp cheapen prices also with better bandwith and bitcoin nodes will grow up like it deserve

[Lauda]

The good news is we have a long way to go.  14nm is 140 angstrom.  An atom is only about 1 angstrom in diameter.  So, there remains tons of room for size reduction before we get to the atom.  Looks like memory is going to be even cheaper.

Depending on who you quote you have: (so yes)

"The diameter of an atom ranges from about 0.1 to 0.5 nanometer."

There is still room for improvement indeed. However, I don't have to tell you that it becomes more and more difficult to manufacture them (as you probably know this).

Not a problem at all.  One atom has many electrons.  Electron 'spin' has been used as a memory in the past.  So, the lower limit actually goes lower than the atomic level.

You make it sound like switching to that would be easy.

I don't care one bit if poor countries can't keep up with the cost to make a reliable network.  If only first world countries can afford to make nodes, and those nodes enable a successful cryptocurrency network, I just don't care that Zimbabwei is left out of participation.  Bitcoin is not here for the purpose of advancing socialism.  I don't like a network designed so that it will run on 'shit' hardware for the purpose of assuring everyone can participate.  It is not an important aspect of cryptocurrency that we assure all the downtrodden can have an equal chance to contribute to the network.

So you want to restrict nodes to only developed places (1st world countries)? So the end result is even further centralizing Bitcoin than it already is, correct? The reasoning is that you hope that: more capacity = more users = higher prices, right?

Just curious, how many people who consider $30 a large sum of money currently run nodes? How would it matter if Angola got a few? Describe in detail plz.

If X amount of people consider Y to be a large sum of money and Y is required to run a node, then obviously people from X would not be running a node in the first place. I'm not sure why you posted a map of the nodes though. As for that $30 example, take a look at any country where the minimum daily wage is <$1.

bitcoin nodes will grow up like it deserve

No. There's no financial incentive to run one. While it might be true that: more users == more nodes, we would be just in the area of speculation.

[Ultrafinery]

If X amount of people consider Y to be a large sum of money and Y is required to run a node, then obviously people from X won't be running a node. I'm not sure why you posted a map of the nodes though. As for that $30 example, take a look at any country where the minimum daily wage is <$1.

So people living on <$1 a day will never run a node, not even if we cut the blocksize in half.
Further, those living on <$1 a day have less interest (or use for) bitcoins than they do for 20% discount on Bentleys or Panamanian shell corporations.
These people are not a part of the Bitcoin ecosystem, certainly not as far as nodes are concerned. So why are we even talking about them?

[Lauda]

These people are not a part of the Bitcoin ecosystem, certainly not as far as nodes are concerned. So why are we even talking about them?

You're the one who started talking about them, not me. I was making an example of subjective view on money, the figure $30 is arbitrary. Re-read my initial statement.

[raphma]

Again, it comes down to where the user is from. While $30 might seem like a small amount in the US, it is a big amount in remote places in the world. It comes down to whether and by how much you want to restrict node usage. Do you want nodes only to be run by people in 1st world countries?

Just curious, how many people who consider $30 a large sum of money currently run nodes? How would it matter if Angola got a few? Describe in detail plz.

My point either...
if they cant afford 30$, they probably dont have internet or even a computer, so... whats the point? they wont be using bitcoin anyway.

[Ultrafinery]

These people are not a part of the Bitcoin ecosystem, certainly not as far as nodes are concerned. So why are we even talking about them?

You're the one who started talking about them, not me. I was making an example of subjective view on money, the figure $30 is arbitrary. Re-read my initial statement.

So you're not talking about poor people in third world countries?

Again, it comes down to where the user is from. While $30 might seem like a small amount in the US, it is a big amount in remote places in the world. It comes down to whether and by how much you want to restrict node usage. Do you want nodes only to be run by people in 1st world countries?

What are you trying to say?

[Lauda]

What are you trying to say?

I was making an example of subjective view on money, the figure $30 is arbitrary.

Which was followed up by questions to OP and his views. I don't see myself talking about people that are not part of the ecosystem, nor people for which $30 is a lot in particular (aside from replying to you). Focusing on a single sentence or figure will lead up to a misinterpretation of the post.
This is becoming off-topic.

[raphma]

So you want to restrict nodes to only developed places (1st world countries)? So the end result is even further centralizing Bitcoin than it already is, correct? The reasoning is that you hope that: more capacity = more users = higher prices, right?

Well... that i dont agree.
Wouldn't be centralization because a lot of places can afford that so would still be decentralized.

right now the main problem with bitcoin centralization seems to be energy for mining, where is way more profitable to do in china... so all big farms are there.

[jak1]

bandwidth or memory ?

[Ultrafinery]

What are you trying to say?

I was making an example of subjective view on money, the figure $30 is arbitrary.

That was followed up by questions to OP and his views. Focusing on a single sentence or figure will end up to a misinterpretation of the post. I don't see myself talking about people that are not part of the ecosystem, nor people for which $30 is a lot in particular (aside from replying to you).
This is becoming off-topic.

OP is is addressing the costs of "bloating" the blockchain with 2MB blocks, suggesting that cost increase would be trivial.
You, if I understand you correctly, counter by saying that trivial sums are not trivial for everyone the world over, and higher costs of running a node may adversely affect decentralization, limiting nodes to first world countries.
You punctuate your point by asking OP: "Do you want nodes only to be run by people in 1st world countries?"

Is this reading not accurate?

[Lauda]

Is this reading not accurate?

More-or-less, yes. However, I'd rather that you PM me about my posts than us further spiral into off-topic discussions.

Well... that i dont agree.
Wouldn't be centralization because a lot of places can afford that so would still be decentralized.

You can't really disagree with it. I never said that the network would be centralized, I said "more centralized" which is quite different.

Bandwidth is very cheap also.

I don't understand where people get this impression from? Bandwidth is not that cheap.

[Ultrafinery]

Bandwidth is very cheap also.

I don't understand where people get this impression from? Bandwidth is not that cheap.

Dunno, probably pictures like this:


Sure, "cheap" needs to be qualified, and people living on <$1 a day most likely consider current prices prohibitively expensive, but until we have socialized internet access, this can't be helped. The point is prices are falling, so the one meg that cost us X a few years ago now costs us X/2.

[TKeenan]

Bandwidth is very cheap also.

I don't understand where people get this impression from? Bandwidth is not that cheap.

Where do you actually live Lauda?  Bandwidth is fucking nearly free.  Unlimited bandwidth for $10/month at many providers.  Of course 'unlimited' is nonsense, but it is so fucking cheap they don't bother to measure it any longer.  Most hosting providers stopped bandwidth limits a long time ago.  Even heavy bandwidth users aren't over loading the system.  Only Netflix and Brazzers is hard to handle. Bitcion nodes are FUCKING TINY in comparison.  

Bandwidth is very cheap also.

I don't understand where people get this impression from? Bandwidth is not that cheap.

Dunno, probably pictures like this:

Exactly.  It is now too cheap to even meter.  So 'unlimited' can be purchase on the shittest hosting plans.

[BombayChicken]

Memory is getting pretty cheap these days because we are getting farther which technology. It is now possible to store memory on smaller space. I wonder how the memory is going to be in the future when we are even further.

[Lauda]

The point is prices are falling, so the one meg that cost us X a few years ago now costs us X/2.

That is true, yes.

Where do you actually live Lauda?

That does not matter. I'm not making these statements because I would run into bandwidth problems (my node is on a unlimited plan, and so am I). I'm not exactly sure how much the internet package costs for my node.

Bandwidth is fucking nearly free.  Unlimited bandwidth for $10/month at many providers.  

I'm still waiting for examples of these providers (at decent speeds!). Are you talking about residential internet or servers?

Only Netflix and Brazzers is hard to handle. Bitcion nodes are FUCKING TINY in comparison.  

I'd like to see data and a comparison chart (maybe someone could create it). However, if you're saying that 140 GB in 6 days is tiny in comparison to Netflix usage (of a single person?) in that time period then that is strange.