shows since 2023 many blocks almost fully reach block size weight limit. So from that angle, it won't become worse.
Fair point. If blocks already sit near the cap, the limit is what bounds node costs, whatever the content. So this supports defending the weight limit rather than being a separate risk.
Do tell me how a node can prevent a miner from censoring and invalidating transactions!
It cant, and I overstated that earlier. Nodes enforce validity, not inclusion. What they stop is miners rewriting the rules (inflating supply, spending without a signature, etc.). Censorship of transactions is a separate problem that nodes dont solve.
So, can you please elaborate next time the "costs" of running a node if we move to let's say 10vMB blocks?
10 MB*144 blocks*365 days is about 525 GB per year (assuming blocks are always full). That would cost around $50–80 per year using SSD storage at today’s prices.
Bandwidth: about 1.4 GB per day to download, and around 350 GB a month to upload (assuming 8 peers on average). For an unmetered connection that’s a few beers a month. On capped or metered connection it can eat up the whole data allowance. Thats the group I meant, not average German.
I think we have covered the main points. Nodes enforce validity, not inclusion, and cost of verifying is still real tradeoff if blocks get bigger. I will leave it there.
