Is Running a Full Node Still Meaningful for Average Bitcoin User?

[I_Anime]

Firstly running a full node is often seen as one of the strongest ways to support decentralization and bitcoin network . It allows users to verify their block and transactions without relying on any third party’s.

Same time running a node involves rising storage demand, High bandwidth usage, and a level of technical commitment that may be unrealistic for many average bitcoin users .  Though I haven’t personally run a full node yet , base on discussion have came across  and base on research, operating a node is not just superficial, it requires effort.

Base on some information have gathered concerning full node , full node matters because they verify transactions and keep network secure and stuff , but still decentralization doesn’t need every users to run a node , it only needs enough node to run independently by independent folks .

It would be interesting to hear from members who have some familiarity with full node , as well as those who currently run them.  Do you think encouraging universal node operation is realistic, or is it better to focus on users who are able and willing ?

[Mia Chloe]

Firstly running a full node is often seen as one of the strongest ways to support decentralization and bitcoin network . It allows users to verify their block and transactions without relying on any third party’s.

It depends on how privacy conscious that user you are referring to actually is and for a true bitcoiner that wants to maximise privacy, it's a big YES. When you connect to other nodes to broadcast a transaction, they can see all your transactions and your public key which ain't private if you ask me and running a node helps you avoid that.

Using a VPN or Tor alone isn't full privacy if you are broadcasting a transaction as you are only securing your IP and not your public keys.

Don't forget to keep your keys safe

[Mahiyammahi]

It would be interesting to hear from members who have some familiarity with full node , as well as those who currently run them.  Do you think encouraging universal node operation is realistic, or is it better to focus on users who are able and willing ?

I run a bitcoin core node in prune mode , it has disadvantage and advantage both. For me if you're enthuasist enough to be fully decentralized, then try to run the bitcoin core node. Let me tell u a advantage, if bitcoin fees feels like expensive you can run a Lightning node with which could save you lots of fee by off chain transaction.

If you need full logs of transaction record you should run full bitcoincore node . But if you don't need the transaction record pver time and you're short of storage than you can go for pruned mode

[Amphenomenon]

It would be interesting to hear from members who have some familiarity with full node , as well as those who currently run them.  Do you think encouraging universal node operation is realistic, or is it better to focus on users who are able and willing ?

It will be better for all to run a node if we can but that's feasible for many and aside from the fact that some might see it as a complex thing. Although I doubt it's really that complex maybe depending on the Operating system and requirements needed, can influence the complexity.

The cost of running it (Internet cost can be really expensive in some regions or countries) and not really seeing any key risks or reasons for doing so is something that still affects the numbers node runners but those who sees a need either for personal benefits or the Bitcoin Network overall will often go for it.

As more campaigns or publicity are made about the need for Bitcoiners to run their node, many are seeing this and these set of individuals are not just those who were once unwilling but also some who may thought it was not entirely feasible for them, maybe looking at cost or complexity.

[Cookdata]

Same time running a node involves rising storage demand, High bandwidth usage, and a level of technical commitment that may be unrealistic for many average bitcoin users .  Though I haven’t personally run a full node yet , base on discussion have came across  and base on research, operating a node is not just superficial, it requires effort.

What do you mean by effort?

Other than the initial block download and fast internet(unlimited internet), you can run a node with your PC and fully sync under 5 days( starlink does it in 2~3 days). After the full sync, you can off the node and computer and put it on again when you feel like using the node. You only need to download the blocks you missed between the time you put it to off and when you put it back online.

Base on some information have gathered concerning full node , full node matters because they verify transactions and keep network secure and stuff , but still decentralization doesn’t need every users to run a node , it only needs enough node to run independently by independent folks .

You just said full node matters because they verify transaction isn't it. If you don't validate and verify transaction on by yourself, there is another person doing it for you with less privacy, you don't need much node for decentralization but you need it to verify your transaction if you care about privacy and censorship.

Some nodes have local rules that filters out some transactions, if you don't have your node, you will have to look for a way to get that transaction accepted by another node. You either run it or depend on another node and give up your privacy.

It would be interesting to hear from members who have some familiarity with full node , as well as those who currently run them.  Do you think encouraging universal node operation is realistic, or is it better to focus on users who are able and willing ?

if you have your node, you are encouraging decentralization. When everyone depends on few nodes then the whole point of decentralization is defeated. We have an ongoing war between nodes runners on restriction of certain transactions like Op_return, imagine that 70% of all node have this policy that filters OP_RETURN, that means we are becoming too centralized, it's not going to help the community.

[Oshosondy]

It would be interesting to hear from members who have some familiarity with full node , as well as those who currently run them.  Do you think encouraging universal node operation is realistic, or is it better to focus on users who are able and willing ?

The gigabyte to complete downloading the full blockchain is not small at all, I think it is heading to 900 gigabyte by now. If you used the prune node, the data required for receiving and sending information about verified blocks and transactions is huge which can be discouraging. Although if you want privacy or/and you want bitcoin decentralized network, you can run full node.

[DaveF]

You really don't need much in terms of a PC to run a node.

I posted the other day I pulled a pair of 4th gen I7 PCs out of the trash.
Had some DDR3 ram sitting around so they both now have 8GB of RAM and a 1TB 7200 RPM drive
Took about 4 days to sync.* With some reboots in there since I installed WIN10 from scratch and while downloading the blockchain it was downloading and installing updates on the PCs.

Biggest hurdle for some people would be the 800GB download. Since I had some other nodes on the same lan I was having them pull from of the IBD from those too.

-Dave

* Not sure when they actually finished, when I left the office yesterday they were sill syncing, just looked now and they were done.

[Taurox]

Firstly running a full node is often seen as one of the strongest ways to support decentralization and bitcoin network . It allows users to verify their block and transactions without relying on any third party’s.

Same time running a node involves rising storage demand, High bandwidth usage, and a level of technical commitment that may be unrealistic for many average bitcoin users .  Though I haven’t personally run a full node yet , base on discussion have came across  and base on research, operating a node is not just superficial, it requires effort.

Base on some information have gathered concerning full node , full node matters because they verify transactions and keep network secure and stuff , but still decentralization doesn’t need every users to run a node , it only needs enough node to run independently by independent folks .

It would be interesting to hear from members who have some familiarity with full node , as well as those who currently run them.  Do you think encouraging universal node operation is realistic, or is it better to focus on users who are able and willing ?

dyor on the prune mode if you are worried about storage, you can run a node with like 10gb nowadays

[Tinubu]

Running a node is good and meaningful too....but not everyone buy the idea because they feel it's not necessary...but if you trade a lot and really keen on privacy you might want a nose...on the other hand,if your using a good wallet or you're really not that an active user,a node wouldn't be all that necessary...but in all, everyone still have Access to all the benefits associated with Bitcoin...node or no node😊

[I_Anime]

Thanks guys for the responses, they are all impacting one way or the other

You really don't need much in terms of a PC to run a node.

I posted the other day I pulled a pair of 4th gen I7 PCs out of the trash.
Had some DDR3 ram sitting around so they both now have 8GB of RAM and a 1TB 7200 RPM drive
Took about 4 days to sync.* With some reboots in there since I installed WIN10 from scratch and while downloading the blockchain it was downloading and installing updates on the PCs.

Biggest hurdle for some people would be the 800GB download. Since I had some other nodes on the same lan I was having them pull from of the IBD from those too.

-Dave

* Not sure when they actually finished, when I left the office yesterday they were sill syncing, just looked now and they were done.

You are right that the hardware requirements themselves aren’t as demanding as many folk seen it to be , especially if someone already has spare equipment and a decent internet connection.  In your ground having free hardware and other nodes on the LAN ,  clearly made the initial setup quite easier .

Though the gap still exist for many average users , when come to bandwidth limits , long initial sync times,  and technical comfort . Your setup is a good example of how accessible node operation can be for users who are willing and able , which actually support the idea that decentralization benefits most when capable users choose to run nodes .

[NotATether]

Yes.

You would run a Bitcoin node for the same reason you run a Tor node or a Folding@Home node - to help support the project. If you just want to get a wallet, there are plenty of other applications for that. Everybody doesn't need to run a node in order for the network to work.

[Zaguru12]

Some nodes have local rules that filters out some transactions, if you don't have your node, you will have to look for a way to get that transaction accepted by another node. You either run it or depend on another node and give up your privacy.

Aside the recent OP_Return war between nodes, there is also a local rule like Full RBF been enabled. Some nodes actually do not have this. So not having your own node running means you have to just stick with the rules of other or simply be switching from one Server to another. But with your own node you set your own rules. With all the little difficulties in running a node I have always said that without running your own you are definitely not enjoying the full benefits of the bitcoin network

[Cricktor]

dyor on the prune mode if you are worried about storage, you can run a node with like 10gb nowadays

You apparently didn't any DYOR in this particular case when spamming the forum with such false statements.

The chainstate directory (current UTXO set) alone is currently 11GiB large, a chosen prune size comes on top of it. Are you suggesting to use the minimum prune size of 550MiB yielding around 12GiB of storage needs, not even accounting for any indexes? How useful would such a small prune size be to barely meet your claim "with like 10gb nowadays"? Bullshit...