Quote from: ranochigo on January 26, 2018, 06:53:58 AM

Quote from: Anti-Cen on January 25, 2018, 09:40:40 PM

See https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactionfees.html
Says the fees are $12.56 for just storing 256 bytes of data and it's not my fault that 20,000 fulls nodes
repeat the same work because I did not ask for them all to be here and 1000 would do the trick

If you interpret it that way, yeah it would be true. The problem here is that if you're not running a Bitcoin node, Bitcoin won't be trustless. You're basically relying on someone else to help you verify the transaction and blocks. You would have to run a node too and it wouldn't be fair for people to spam as much transactions as possible to occupy all your storage space.

Unless you somehow come up with a method to ensure decentralisation and redundancy with 1000 nodes, then its impossible to blame it on others running a node.

when you follow the entries of Anti-Cen in the forum, you naturally come to the conclusion, that he is trying to throw his fud on bitcoin/Lightning. He references webpages with 12$ to store 220bytes of data. And also wants to measure Satoshi/Byte in Megabytes. Well, he is free to do so (IMHO a good laugh). He is trying to through his torsioned view at the community. He can do so, it's a free world (somehow)! From the posts one can derive a limited level of comprehension of the underlying logic (well, as every low level people). In his view Lightning shall be used for large amount tx, and the number of hosts shall be reduced to 1000. Which in his logic proofs, that the system cannot work Grin

.
I haven't seen a single constructive proposal. He is probably paid by government to disturb fruitful discussions. Those who got it, understand the fud. @ruletheworld got it... the others discuss at the same level. Kind of hopeless.