-snip-
may i ask why you are running 2 nodes. are they on 2 PC's in two locations.. or one of them on a datacentre one on pc.. or both data centre
Same someone also running 2 noes, one is in a datacentre running 24/7 without wallet, the other is a home node with a wallet.
my issue is that if everyone runs only bitcoin core, (no code diversity) and all run it from amazonaws, (no location diversity) where all nodes are pruned and unable to allow new nodes to sync.
bitcoin become limited to being just a relay network that begins to crumble when new nodes cant join because existing nodes dont allow full syncing or have inbound connections closed.
i see no point in people paying $20 a month to some data centre when out of 7billion people.. or even just 2 million that are using/have bitcoin. can easily run a full node from home.
yea theres a few hundred or a couple thousand that say they cant. but that doesnt stop the majority that can. its like saying lets not let activision or blizzard release any new online games because some people cant play the game
if core want to be the centre/core of bitcoin then they should concentrate on being a full node and stop all the wishy washy pruned/litenode stuff.. leave that for electrum/multibit to play with.
pretending that not upgrading, or running pruned mode, or not having inbound connections is 'fine' is putting people into a false sense of security and wasting their time.
people who want to be full nodes need to know the darn assed truth about what's involved.
teaching people that anything below say 18-74 connections means that some nodes wont be getting the block data in the next hop, so that the recipient from you might be having to pass it around because you have not passed it around as much yourself.
yes its minimal disruption.
but a healthy network is about being a strong network where its all uptodate and verified efficiently. and should one supernode go offline there are enough other supernodes to cover everyone getting the data efficiently.
i understand core want to dominate and be the centre so that users can just be crappy litenode relayers.. but thats stupidly centralizing the network where litenodes do not have independent network involvement but are just a shadow/false pretence illusions of decentralisation.
i dont see any reason to incentivise nodes if the only reason people want to run a node is for a pay day
i dont see any reason to incentivise nodes if people dont understand what a FULL node intels
i dont see any reason to incentivise nodes if core devs want to be the gate keeper main supernode and then have weak shadow nodes pretending to be full nodes even though they have not upgraded or have upgraded but then decided to turn off certain settings because they feel someone else can do the work for them