Bitcoin Forum
August 29, 2025, 08:43:38 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 29.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Why do average people run full nodes  (Read 2562 times)
Kluge
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1015



View Profile
September 02, 2014, 09:03:55 AM
 #41

I would think that these limits would prevent you from relaying unconfirmed TXs as your node would spend much of it's time downloading recently found blocks (if the average block is close to the limit).
It seems to prioritize bandwidth for this, or it's just that unconfirmed Txs are so relatively small in size, it's not an issue, but this is how I've run Core in the past. Since, they've upgraded a cell tower nearby, so I let it upload without limits unless I'm doing something where I need a bigger share of the 40kb/s up I can snag. NetLimiter's supposedly adding a feature to give programs bandwidth minimum grants, which'd be great since I could let Core run in the background and then give minimums to web browser (as is, it semi-frequently causes timeouts since Core likes to suck everything down unless it's explicitly restricted, with an odd exception to these timeouts being this forum, I'd guess due to an unusual configuration I'd be interested in learning about).

I wouldn't recommend these kinds of limits for a service using the daemon frequently, of course, but for personal use, it's been a great configuration when I've needed it, and also permits those on harshly capped plans to have the advanced functionality a full node client provides since the majority of post-sync bandwidth Core and other full clients use is not strictly necessary.
pandalion98 (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
September 02, 2014, 10:57:25 AM
 #42

Yes, I just learned from here that disk space, ram, and cpu are no problem for ***some*** people.

I also learned that bandwidth is a big factor here.

I'm seeing people with crappy ISP's that run a full node. Does that hurt the network (no matter how small)?
Buffer Overflow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1019



View Profile
September 02, 2014, 11:10:48 AM
 #43

People want to be part of the whole experiment. They love Bitcoin and thus want to contribute to it. Running a full node is the easiest way of doing that. If you want to mine, you have to invest a lot in mining hardware, also you're paying a lot for electricity. Running a full node is the perfect trade-off for many people, I guess!

Yes, I think this is the best reply to thread.

giveBTCpls
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 250


View Profile
September 02, 2014, 11:22:23 AM
 #44

These profitless nonego driven people is who keep bitcoin alive, not other.

I can't possibly run a node due my shitty PC specs.

Kluge
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1015



View Profile
September 02, 2014, 11:59:48 AM
 #45

Yes, I just learned from here that disk space, ram, and cpu are no problem for ***some*** people.

I also learned that bandwidth is a big factor here.

I'm seeing people with crappy ISP's that run a full node. Does that hurt the network (no matter how small)?
It shouldn't, if I'm remembering an old discussion right. Core tries to pick the peer with the most unlimited upload bandwidth for downloading since it doesn't download multiple blocks simultaneously (or didn't). If that's correct, then, it should only be downloading blocks from a slow peer if, compared to other options, they're the fastest available (not to be confused with sharing the Txs, where I'd imagine any significant upload bandwidth is helpful).
stryker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 02, 2014, 12:04:42 PM
 #46

Also whenever I run a lite client such as on my mobile... I point it exclusively at my own trusted node!
pandalion98 (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
September 02, 2014, 12:41:19 PM
 #47

People want to be part of the whole experiment. They love Bitcoin and thus want to contribute to it. Running a full node is the easiest way of doing that. If you want to mine, you have to invest a lot in mining hardware, also you're paying a lot for electricity. Running a full node is the perfect trade-off for many people, I guess!

Yes, I think this is the best reply to thread.

I agree here.
pandalion98 (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
September 02, 2014, 12:42:02 PM
 #48

These profitless nonego driven people is who keep bitcoin alive, not other.

I can't possibly run a node due my shitty PC specs.

I feel ya  Smiley
HELP.org
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 510
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
September 02, 2014, 01:15:44 PM
 #49

Also whenever I run a lite client such as on my mobile... I point it exclusively at my own trusted node!

That is an interesting topic, the concept of a trusted node.  Not sure where it will go in the future but I registered TrustedNodes.com last year for some kind of possible service in the future.

Certified Bitcoin Professional
Bicoin.me - Bitcoin.me!
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!