Is running a full Bitcoin client worth it?

[pandalion98]

For an average user, is the trouble of running and maintaining a full client worth it?

For me, considering that it requires a ton of storage space and considerable bandwidth (at first), plus electricity, I'd rather use SPV.
What about you?

[1713924143]

1713924143

[1713924143]

1713924143

[1713924143]

1713924143

[1713924143]

1713924143

[1713924143]

1713924143

[NorrisK]

I guess you have to define "worth it" better.

In terms of helping and maintaining the bitcoin network, it is definately worth it. But if you look at it from a personal effort vs rewards point of view, it is definately not worth it as you personally gain nothing from running a full node currently.

I don't have the recources available to run a full node, but if I had, I would probably run one for the sake of helping the network.

[Lauda]

For an average user, is the trouble of running and maintaining a full node worth it?

There's no "trouble maintaining it". Once you set up a full node, there's basically nothing that you have to do, besides occasionally check that the system isn't down (for whatever reason, e.g. power outage). It should run on its own.

For me, considering that it requires a ton of storage space and considerable bandwidth (at first), plus electricity, I'd rather use SPV.ž

If you're living in a first world country, the storage space should be trivial these days (~80GB). Most of your bandwidth will not be spent on the initial download, but rather later propagating blocks and transactions to other nodes. A average of 1 mbit/s upload per day will spend about 300+ GB per month.
Are you sure that you aren't talking about 'full clients', as in just running Bitcoin Core as your primary wallet as opposed to running a full node?

[pandalion98]

If you're living in a first world country, the storage space should be trivial these days (~80GB). Most of your bandwidth will not be spent on the initial download, but rather later propagating blocks and transactions to other nodes. A average of 1 mbit/s upload per day will spend about 300+ GB per month.
Are you sure that you aren't talking about 'full clients', as in just running Bitcoin Core as your primary wallet as opposed to running a full node?

Oh yeah. Seems I've made a mistake. I meant "full clients".

[Lauda]

Oh yeah. Seems I've made a mistake. I meant "full clients".

Then, most of the bandwidth will indeed be spent on that initial download. It all comes down to privacy and security. With SPV you're essentially letting a third party node provide you with the "right information", whereas with full clients you don't have to do that as you're verifying everything yourself. Here's another explanation (in addition to some links with further elaboration) of a SPV wallet:

A Bitcoin implementation that does not verify everything, but instead relies on either connecting to a trusted node, or puts its faith in high difficulty as a proxy for proof of validity. BitCoinJ is an implementation of this mode.

Simplified payment verification
Thin Client Security

[disconnectme]

It doesn't worth it, that is why I use electrun wallet

[~Bitcoin~]

It will be worth only in case you are operating some bitcoin related service and talking about bandwith and storage running bitcoin client over VPS become easy and cheap. For average user, running bitcoin client/node will be only to support whole bitcoin network.

[Lauda]

It doesn't worth it, that is why I use electrun wallet

This post is pointless as it doesn't provide any elaboration whatsoever.

It will be worth only in case you are operating some bitcoin related service and talking about bandwith and storage running bitcoin client over VPS become easy and cheap. For average user, running bitcoin client/node will be only to support whole bitcoin network.

Obvious spam is obvious. I can't even decipher the point behind this, obviously flawed, statement.

I'm sure average user don't bother use bitcoin core or run full nodes as well because connection speed, electricity or storage problem.

It really isn't a problem for people in 1st world countries. I don't understand how someone can claim to be a "Bitcoin supporter" and not run a node. Nodes are the backbone of the Bitcoin network. Electricity isn't really an issue, as (dependent on the system) it would consume only a few bucks more per month. However, a lot of bandwidth will be spent if you don't limit the software. Luckily you can maximize the number of connections or use 'blocksonly' mode (for example). As far as storage is concerned, you can always run a pruned node.

I don't run full nodes or use bitcoin core, but if i have solid reason to run my computer 24/7 or have VPS with big data transfer, i would run full nodes

Just assemble a small machine and make it run 24/7. There's no reason to run a node on your main system.

[NeuroticFish]

While the only thing to do to "maintain it" is to keep your computer running with internet on and enough storage, it's not worth it for the end user in most cases.
Yes, it is the safest. But keeping a full node to make transactions worth 0.001 BTC each month don't need that safety.
Yes, it helps the network. But exchanges, mining pools and many others already do that.
People say that miners need to run full node. This applies if you do solo mining, which most don't do.

So imho it's not worth the hassle. If anything happen you need full sync. If you stop the computer for holiday, the sync still needs some time.
I use SPV. I always have. I used once or twice Bitcoin Core only to do some tests to learn things.

[ElpadroBitcoin]

For an average user, is the trouble of running and maintaining a full node worth it?

There's no "trouble maintaining it". Once you set up a full node, there's basically nothing that you have to do, besides occasionally check that the system isn't down (for whatever reason, e.g. power outage). It should run on its own.

For me, considering that it requires a ton of storage space and considerable bandwidth (at first), plus electricity, I'd rather use SPV.ž

If you're living in a first world country, the storage space should be trivial these days (~80GB). Most of your bandwidth will not be spent on the initial download, but rather later propagating blocks and transactions to other nodes. A average of 1 mbit/s upload per day will spend about 300+ GB per month.
Are you sure that you aren't talking about 'full clients', as in just running Bitcoin Core as your primary wallet as opposed to running a full node?

Off course is running a full bitcoin client worth it because bitcoin clients will only help you trade or imvest just even better becuase they know what is running right now exactly with the bitcoin.

[lol3c]

Not worth the bandwidth , hard drive space or the time to set it all up.

It feels like working in the stone ages when you think about it really.

[CoinsRoyal]

For an average user, is the trouble of running and maintaining a full node worth it?

There's no "trouble maintaining it". Once you set up a full node, there's basically nothing that you have to do, besides occasionally check that the system isn't down (for whatever reason, e.g. power outage). It should run on its own.

For me, considering that it requires a ton of storage space and considerable bandwidth (at first), plus electricity, I'd rather use SPV.ž

If you're living in a first world country, the storage space should be trivial these days (~80GB). Most of your bandwidth will not be spent on the initial download, but rather later propagating blocks and transactions to other nodes. A average of 1 mbit/s upload per day will spend about 300+ GB per month.
Are you sure that you aren't talking about 'full clients', as in just running Bitcoin Core as your primary wallet as opposed to running a full node?

Off course is running a full bitcoin client worth it because bitcoin clients will only help you trade or imvest just even better becuase they know what is running right now exactly with the bitcoin.

Off course is it use full to use the client because clientrs will only help you by giving more information about the time when youi want to use it you know where you stand at that time you know.

[avikz]

a full blockchain requires around 280 GB of space. It you want to help maintain the network, you can certainly download it. But if it is for personal interest, then it's not a very good idea.

If you are holding serious amount of money in bitcoin, then it is recommended that you use a bitcoin client only, but if it is just for saving a few bucks, use blockchain or coinbase wallet. 

[coinzat]

it depends on where you are from. running node is using a lot of bandwidth and in many countries the internet is so slow and limited so why would I loose my GBs on something someone else is doing already

[Kotone]

For an average user, is the trouble of running and maintaining a full client worth it?

For me, considering that it requires a ton of storage space and considerable bandwidth (at first), plus electricity, I'd rather use SPV.
What about you?

Yes blockchain need a ton of storage to cover up trasaction everday if you can see there are hundred  thousand of trasaction are made everday and more investors or miners are still keep using bitcoin and theres no need to maintaining a full client i think everyday is secured for using bitcoin @blockchain

[Lauda]

Off course is running a full bitcoin client worth it because bitcoin clients will only help you trade or imvest just even better becuase they know what is running right now exactly with the bitcoin.

This doesn't make sense and is wrong.

a full blockchain requires around 280 GB of space. It you want to help maintain the network, you can certainly download it. But if it is for personal interest, then it's not a very good idea.

Bullshit. Stop posting misleading information. The blockchain is currently around 90 GB. Downloading the blockchain != maintaining the network.

If you are holding serious amount of money in bitcoin, then it is recommended that you use a bitcoin client only, but if it is just for saving a few bucks, use blockchain or coinbase wallet.  

No. Using Blockchain.info or Coinbase as your wallet is horrible advice.

-snip- theres no need to maintaining a full client i think everyday is secured for using bitcoin @blockchain

This post is flawed and does not make any sense.

[beerlover]

If you're only looking for personal gains, it depends, but it more likely leans to the 'not worth it' side because of the considerations that you mentioned. However, it's not really that hard to set it up because once it's done, it's done.

[calkob]

I have ran a full node now for over 8 months and i havnt even noticed an increase in my electricity, my broadband is unlimited i have 2 TB storage which i only use a fraction of.  So yeah considering i am holding bitcoin then it is a good thing to help secure the blockchain record and the consensus that we require.

i was reading the other day on bitcoin.org that if we dont secure the blockchain by using are own nodes then eventually big corporations can change the consensus rules and make bitcoin what they want.  we the average user must secure it.  if i have to pay a little extra every year to do that then i will.

[yayayo]

What is an "average" user? What do you mean by "worth it"? And especially to what kind of "trouble" are you referring to?

In my opinion, running a full node is always worth it, because it is the most secure way to use Bitcoin. Clients that are not fully validating transactions, or (even worse) are relying on external servers can lead to security issues (we already had an SPV-related incident in the past). In addition, the whole currency Bitcoin is more decentralized and secure when there are a lot individual full nodes in operation. So if you own Bitcoin it makes sense to run a full node to strengthen the network and thereby also contributing to secure the value of your own holdings.

I think a full node is quite easy to run and the costs are low. You can also limit bandwidth use somewhat or run the node only half a day. In my opinion the only argument for not running a full node is laziness...

ya.ya.yo!

[Yakamoto]

For an average user, is the trouble of running and maintaining a full client worth it?

For me, considering that it requires a ton of storage space and considerable bandwidth (at first), plus electricity, I'd rather use SPV.
What about you?

For the average person, probably not. There simply isn't a good enough tradeoff when it comes down to it, and having a full suite set up doesn't really mean anything for most people and it really isn't necessary. If there are some people who are dedicated enough to run the full setup then let them, but the average person shouldn't be concerned with such things and they should just use whatever else they'd have.