@@mallorcablockchaindays No you don't. It would be the first time in networking history that edges has control over network which goes to show how ridicules your statement is. Nodes "collects new transactions into a block", read the whitepaper, they and only they enforce and contribute to the network. Your home "node" is noting but a participant in a marketing ploy. And "good for the network" is not having low grade machines that are poorly connected, capping network throughput capacity, it is a huuuuge net-negative. How about you stop listening to Peter Todd and learn about bitcoin instead?
@@selectedroll-vj4hw So what about the power of the nodes in an UASF (User Activated Soft Fork) ? - the activation time of a blockchain soft fork is enforced by the full nodes.
@@mallorcablockchaindays I was there when it happened and I can tell you the truth about it. In February 2016, Adam Back and five Core developers gathered in a Hong Kong hotel with a group of Chinese miners representing a significant chunk of Bitcoin’s hash power. A deal was struck (1000 Bitcoins for each operator) in which the miners agreed they would “only run Bitcoin Core-compatible consensus systems … for the foreseeable future.” So the deal was already sealed long before the UASF. But of course truth was ugly as F, dirty backroom deals and centralisation, so they hade to pretend that it was a user driven grassroot movement and that is why they launched the "UASF". And most of their 'users' was sybils hosted on AWS Cloud....
A node is defined in the bitcoin whitepaper ." Each node collects new transactions into a block." No need to listen to Peter Todd's rambling.
By running your own node, you contribute to enforcing bitcoin’s ruleset, which is good for both you and the bitcoin network.
@@mallorcablockchaindays No you don't. It would be the first time in networking history that edges has control over network which goes to show how ridicules your statement is. Nodes "collects new transactions into a block", read the whitepaper, they and only they enforce and contribute to the network. Your home "node" is noting but a participant in a marketing ploy. And "good for the network" is not having low grade machines that are poorly connected, capping network throughput capacity, it is a huuuuge net-negative. How about you stop listening to Peter Todd and learn about bitcoin instead?
@@selectedroll-vj4hw So what about the power of the nodes in an UASF (User Activated Soft Fork) ? - the activation time of a blockchain soft fork is enforced by the full nodes.
@@mallorcablockchaindays I was there when it happened and I can tell you the truth about it. In February 2016, Adam Back and five Core developers gathered in a Hong Kong hotel with a group of Chinese miners representing a significant chunk of Bitcoin’s hash power. A deal was struck (1000 Bitcoins for each operator) in which the miners agreed they would “only run Bitcoin Core-compatible consensus systems … for the foreseeable future.” So the deal was already sealed long before the UASF. But of course truth was ugly as F, dirty backroom deals and centralisation, so they hade to pretend that it was a user driven grassroot movement and that is why they launched the "UASF". And most of their 'users' was sybils hosted on AWS Cloud....