Quote from: realr0ach on December 25, 2017, 01:10:47 AM

Quote from: Peter R on December 25, 2017, 12:56:03 AM

Quote from: bones261 on December 24, 2017, 04:39:20 PM

Quote from: Wekkel on December 24, 2017, 04:37:12 PM

Thats right.

Just introduce 10GB blocks and call it a night. Problem solved.

Let's just hope people who can actually run a node don't get the bright idea to charge subscription fees to let your SPV wallet connect to them.

This is inevitable. It cost time and money to run a node which serves headers and Merke-branch proofs to SPV clients. Eventually, businesses will charge for this service, perhaps using payment channels. I'd suspect the cost would be well under $1 per month, as it would be a high-competition / low-margin type business.

An income stream for non-mining nodes would be a positive development, as it means we're not relying on altruism. Do you disagree?

You're kinda admitting bitcoin is a system built on multiple levels of usury when that's *SUPPOSEDLY* something it defeats. If I "own" a bitcoin, I don't really own it, I'm required to pay a ransom/usury fee to a miner if I want to do anything with it (unlike physical silver or gold). Now you're talking about adding even MORE additional usury levels on top of that. Why would anyone use some *permissioned*, multiple levels of usury system like this when they can use a usury-free, permissionless system like physical silver and gold?

BTC as "digital gold" for "holding" is pretty pointless in my opinion, and I suspect it will collapse if it cannot fix the extremely high fees.