Quote from: Odalv on July 08, 2015, 07:47:39 PM

Quote from: Peter R on July 08, 2015, 07:34:14 PM

Quote from: Odalv on July 08, 2015, 07:29:36 PM

Spammer only spends money 1x during lifetime, but miner has to keep bigger disk-space forever (2 hard disc consume more electricity than single one)

OK. Provide me with your estimates for the following (and explain how you arrived at your numbers) and I'll update my table using your numbers:

1. The cost per node to store 1 GB of additional blockchain data for 5 years, assume the outputs are spent.
2. The cost per node to store 1 GB of additional blockchain data for 5 years, assuming the outputs are unspent.

I'm sorry, I have no estimates. I know that bloat-chain is not solution There are better solutions how to organize blockchain.

My full node just crashed ... all data are lost ... downloading 6 years 25 weeks. ... hmm I hope that it is only me and there will remain some copy of blockchain. :-) (not joking)

your data management systems need updating if you lost the data. Bitcoin is a $3B network and if you dont have an invested interest in keeping the blockchain to prove you own X coin or care enough to manage the responsibility you shouldn't be dictating how we should use it. not everyone who can't backup data or doesn't want to should be running a node. I have friends who dont trust digital photos because they trust paper copies more. I'm surprised to find you fit the profile.

I also think you're not weighting the cost and benefits correctly, the cost of 2 hard disc consuming more electricity than single one, is an inconsequential cost at the scale of executing this same attack with an 8MB block. (hell its inconsequential at the cost of the attack on the 1MB block.)

limiting block space is not going to save anyone except you a little bandwidth because you dont back up.