2017-07-12 5:03 GMT+08:00 CryptAxe <[email protected]>: > In order to be able to verify transactions without trusting anyone else. If > you're handling a bunch of customer money or selling services / products > then you want to be very sure that everything is kosher. > > The ability to operate without trusting anyone is well worth the cost for > anyone operating a business. > > So, security and trustlessness are the incentive. > > Also TX fees are only for miners not everyone operating a full node. Back > when the whitepaper came out it wasn't much extra work for your full node to > be mining. You need a warehouse now so the term full node has a slightly > different meaning nowadays.
Many thanks! Then is it true to say, even though a regular node, which is not full node, also have to store full metadata of the whole block chain history? I mean, even if they don't have to store all the transaction log, they have to store all the block metadata (which contain the roots of Merkle tree) to determine determine whether a transaction is valid. Is that true? Thanks, Yubin > On Jul 11, 2017 1:56 PM, "Yubin Ruan via bitcoin-discuss" > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> As in the subject, I am wondering what are the incentives for people >> to run full nodes which cost them lots of disk space and network >> bandwidth. >> >> In section 6 of the original bitcoin paper[1], the author stated some >> incentives which allow the whole network to work >> automatically/spontaneously. For example, the transaction fee adds >> incentive for nodes to support the network. Are there any similar >> incentives for running full nodes? >> >> [1]: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf >> >> Regards, >> Yubin >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-discuss _______________________________________________ bitcoin-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-discuss
