Memory is cheap -

[Ultrafinery]

... 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.

Can you explain how you're getting 140 GB per 6 days (~24 GB/day)? Serious question.

[1714753940]

1714753940

[1714753940]

1714753940

[Lauda]

Can you explain how you're getting 140 GB per 6 days (~24 GB/day)? Serious question.

Here you go:

Your node could easily send out terabytes of data in 1 month if you don't restrict it.
This node has been up for only 6 days and has already sent out 144 GB.

-topic questions, etc.).

[Ultrafinery]

Assuming that his node is misconfigured just because it spent a lot of data within 6 days is foolish at best.

Your node could easily send out terabytes of data in 1 month if you don't restrict it.

I added some color for you. Misconfiguring a node with some ridiculous maxconnections (running it wide-open) is possible, and even a nice thing to do if you have unlimited bandwidth. It's also nice to tip your waiter $500 when you go out for lunch.
Doing so is in no way a prerequisite, for running a node or eating out.
Hope this helps

[CryptoDatabase]

I think the larger problem is network bandwidth rather than hard device capacity. Even with high speed Internet connection (> 20 Mbit/sec) it can take a couple of days to download the block chain from scratch.

lol.  You only have to download the chain one time - forever.  

People sit in their living room all over the planet streaming movies every night and you worry about 2MB every ten minutes?  Clearly you failed your math A levels.  

Here is some math for you, I really like math.

2 MB per 10 mins = 12 mb/hr

12 mb/hr * 24 hours = 288 mb/day
288 mb/day * 365 days = 105,120 mb

105,120 mb = 105.12 gb/yr

The math above should be pretty simple to understand, just basic multiplication with a small case of division at the end to turn mb into gb.

Storage shouldn't be an issue for most computers (right now anyway) as the standard laptop has 500 gb and a desktop usually has 500 gb - 1 tb of memory.

But, lets say that the 2 mb blocks are added and 2 years go by and I discover BTC. I download the core wallet and start to sync. The blockchain is already around 68 gb so we can do some more math here yay.

105.12 * 2 + 68 = 278.24 gb I would have to download. Now lets take into consideration the price of internet right now.

I pay $94/month for 500 gb of bandwidth. Roughly $0.19 per gb.

Now lets add up that cost with the size of the blockchain a couple years from now. Granted this won't be accurate as internet prices in my area have been increasing as the years go by but it will be close enough.

$0.19 * 278.84 = $52.98

It would cost me over $50 to download the btc wallet which is ridiculous. On top of that it would use 3/5 of my laptop hdd to download it. Now storage becomes a problem. Not only is it expensive to download one program but it will use up almost all of my available storage.

This isn't even taking power usage into factor. It is going to take some electricity to get that massive blockchain synced so will only increase the cost more.

Glancing through some of the other posts on this thread I saw unlimited bandwidth mentioned a few times. Here's some news for those that think unlimited will last forever. It won't. It costs ISP's too much money to let their customers just use what they want.

My ISP is one of the largest in the US (Suddenlink) and we used to have unlimited internet. Well, not anymore we don't and I foresee unlimited bandwidth going away for computer users in the near future.

[Ultrafinery]

...
It would cost me over $50 to download the btc wallet which is ridiculous.

And how much would it cost you to download the wallet if the blocks remain @1MB? Could you help me out with the math?

[Lauda]

Anything is possible if you misconfigure a node, yes. Is that where you're getting your data, from username: Soros Shorts?

You are starting to lead a unhealthy discussion. The only concrete data provided was either his or mine (numbers), and there is nothing more that could be referenced from within the thread. Assuming that his node is misconfigured just because it spent a lot of data within 6 days is foolish at best. It doesn't have to be his node, let's look at Shorena's node:


5 days = 247.21 GB. Case closed.

[CryptoDatabase]

...
It would cost me over $50 to download the btc wallet which is ridiculous.

And how much would it cost you to download the wallet if the blocks remain @1MB? Could you help me out with the math?

Obviously 1/2 the cost of the proposed which is only $26.. Use your brain man don't rely on other humans to guide you step by step through life. I learned this math in elementary school 20 years ago..

[Ultrafinery]

Assuming that his node is misconfigured just because it spent a lot of data within 6 days is foolish at best.

Your node could easily send out terabytes of data in 1 month if you don't restrict it.

I added some color for you. Misconfiguring a node with some ridiculous maxconnections (running it wide-open) is possible, and even a nice thing to do if you have unlimited bandwidth. It's also nice to tip your waiter $500 when you go out for lunch.
Doing so is in no way a prerequisite, for running a node or eating out.
Hope this helps

Edit: Still waiting for halp

...
It would cost me over $50 to download the btc wallet which is ridiculous.

And how much would it cost you to download the wallet if the blocks remain @1MB? Could you help me out with the math?

[mirana12345]

Only need to invest few dollars to store bitcoin's blockchain, but you need to use lots of money if you want to run full nodes at your PC.
Really fast internet connection, good processor and lots of RAM to store incoming transaction

By what comparison is that a lot of money? All the things you listed we already have, and the price of the said things in only falling down with advancement
of the technology that's happening litleraly every day forward. imho, arguments for consumption and prices of maintaining nodes are small enough and
even larger blocks pose no real expense.

[Lauda]

I added some color for you. Misconfiguring a node with some ridiculous maxconnections (running it wide-open) is possible, and even a nice thing to do if you have unlimited bandwidth. It's also nice to tip your waiter $500 when you go out for lunch.

Allowing more users == misconfiguration for you? That is not correct and the data that I've provided fits (50-80 connections). The analogy does not fit either.

lots of RAM to store incoming transaction

This depends on min fee parameters.

[pereira4]

I think you didn't memory, but megabytes of space?
Anyway, the main problem with raising the block size is that you inevitable centralize nodes because the countries that need nodes the most are usually countries with impoverished technology with shitty economical situation venezuela. It's important that nodes are run all over the planet, not only the total node count. I hope that eventually we can hard fork for a higher MB block size, but it is not a priority at all.

[Ultrafinery]

I added some color for you. Misconfiguring a node with some ridiculous maxconnections (running it wide-open) is possible, and even a nice thing to do if you have unlimited bandwidth. It's also nice to tip your waiter $500 when you go out for lunch.

Allowing more users == misconfiguration for you? The analogy does not fit either.

Do you honestly not understand what I'm telling you? Tipping your waiter $500 on a $20 meal is also, technically, not a mistake (misconfiguration), but only if you understand that you're leaving an unusually large tip & can afford to do so.

For those of us living in third world countries, on <$1 a day, OTOH, leaving a $500 tip would be a mistake.
In all honesty tho, I doubt they go out to fancy restaurants anyway. So the entire issue is as moot as the cost of running the node which they do not run anyway (because they can't afford to use bitcoin).

[Holliday]

Assuming that his node is misconfigured just because it spent a lot of data within 6 days is foolish at best.

Your node could easily send out terabytes of data in 1 month if you don't restrict it.

I added some color for you. Misconfiguring a node with some ridiculous maxconnections (running it wide-open) is possible

What are you talking about? Running a node with the default configuration will easily use this much bandwidth.

[Lauda]

-snip-

Still doesn't fit. You've chosen to ignore the data again:

50-80 connections
5 days - 247 GB

Running a node with the stock configuration will easily use this much bandwidth.

Apparently stock configuration means that your node is misconfigured.  

[CryptoDatabase]

Edit: Still waiting for halp

...
It would cost me over $50 to download the btc wallet which is ridiculous.

And how much would it cost you to download the wallet if the blocks remain @1MB? Could you help me out with the math?

I don't have time to deal with trolls or people who are stupid trying to act smart. If you want to actually have a discussion then I would suggest reading and not posting nonsense.

[Ultrafinery]

Edit: Still waiting for halp

...
It would cost me over $50 to download the btc wallet which is ridiculous.

And how much would it cost you to download the wallet if the blocks remain @1MB? Could you help me out with the math?

I don't have time to deal with trolls or people who are stupid trying to act smart. If you want to actually have a discussion then I would suggest reading and not posting nonsense.

It would have taken you far less time to say "It would cost me a ridiculous sum of money *regardless of blocksize*, because I pay $94/month for 500 gb of bandwidth." I would commiserate, and say something like "I hope that's a tv/phone/internet deal, or you live in some God-forsaken wilderness, 'cos otherwise you're paying way too much."

Had you chosen to elaborate, you could have also mentioned that you can't into math, because confusing 2MB blocksize limit with every block being 2MB, something that has, roughly, zero chance of being the case.

At that point I would have taken pity on you, and helped you with your math.

[Ultrafinery]

What are you talking about? Running a node with the default configuration will easily use this much bandwidth.

Getting ~3GB/day here : http://213.165.91.169/

[Lauda]

Getting ~3GB/day here : http://213.165.91.169/

That is unusually low. Are you limiting your connection or something else somehow? What are your internet speeds? At this very moment my node has about 4-5 times more unconfirmed TX than your node.

[italianobitcoin]

Irony alert lol. Cheap RAM is an argument for Lightning channels, not Gavin Andresen BloatCoin. Duh, OP. Duh.

Exactly.

The BloatCoiners love to make fancy charts. They are experts at linear extrapolation with very limited real data or by showing data irrelevant to the issues that are being debated. Remember that alarming graph that showed hitting the block limit with all painted red and drama? Guess what: Nothing happened.

To repeat it here for the 100th time: Memory is not the bottleneck. The bottleneck is the network.

Also in general, assuming that capacity increases of the past decades can be extrapolated into the future without any decrease in the growth rate is science fiction. There are physical limits in miniaturization. We are already very close to these limits.

ya.ya.yo!

Memory in the past wasn't cheap but because people can make smaller chips with more memory on it. The
old ones will become very cheap. And after a year the newer ones gets cheaper because there is a new
generation.

[ultimatesky]

Irony alert lol. Cheap RAM is an argument for Lightning channels, not Gavin Andresen BloatCoin. Duh, OP. Duh.

Exactly.

The BloatCoiners love to make fancy charts. They are experts at linear extrapolation with very limited real data or by showing data irrelevant to the issues that are being debated. Remember that alarming graph that showed hitting the block limit with all painted red and drama? Guess what: Nothing happened.

To repeat it here for the 100th time: Memory is not the bottleneck. The bottleneck is the network.

Also in general, assuming that capacity increases of the past decades can be extrapolated into the future without any decrease in the growth rate is science fiction. There are physical limits in miniaturization. We are already very close to these limits.

ya.ya.yo!

Memory in the past wasn't cheap but because people can make smaller chips with more memory on it. The
old ones will become very cheap. And after a year the newer ones gets cheaper because there is a new
generation.

In the past memory was pretty expensive but know with technology improving it is allot cheaper then before. They can now store more memory in a smaller platform which is ideal in most situations.