Quote from: brg444 on October 09, 2015, 05:00:30 PM

Quote from: Holliday on October 09, 2015, 04:59:14 PM

Quote from: brg444 on October 09, 2015, 04:44:25 PM

Quote from: Holliday on October 09, 2015, 04:34:04 PM

Quote from: sgbett on October 09, 2015, 04:22:17 PM

Does purely peer-to-peer refer to every single user, or just the bitcoin payment network? My reading of that statement is that purely peer to peer refers to the nodes that make up the payment network, not that every end user needs to run a node.

Every end user does not need to run a node. Surely Bitcoin enthusiasts who are willing to spend money on dedicated hardware and top tier home internet should be able to run a full node though, right?

Or is it OK if it requires business level infrastructure and resources to be a fully validating peer on the network?

Fuck that.

Don't be twisting words you as well. It has nothing to do with "enthusiasm" but financial responsibility and sovereignty.

If you are to use Bitcoin as truly a local, peer-to-peer user, there is absolutely no exception but to run a fully validating full node.

You might have your reasons to do so, yes you may choose not to do so. Indeed you don't "need" to run one...unless you care about monetary sovereignty which is where Bitcoin's true value resides.

But by all means go ahead use spv wallets, web "portals" (as in: and...it's gone), and other various Hearnias just make sure it don't come at no cost to me.

I don't need to pay from my own freedom to be free from trusted authority for these "users" inability to stuck sucking from the tit and always ask for a "supporting" hand to move forward.

I think you are misunderstanding what I've said. Let me try to explain.

Every user does not need to run a full node, yet every user who wants to run a full node should be capable of doing so.

Kind of like... every driver does not need to wear a seat belt, but every driver should be capable of wearing one if they want.

This

It's already not the case. Now what? Is bitcoin broken?