imagine getting to see a 'unverified' balance within seconds of opening your node for the first time. via SPV methods(grab a rlatively fresh UTXO set from peers). and thus using a fresh UTXO set, then able to know you have imported the correct wallet by seeing aatleast a unverified balance and also then able to make transactions.. then the whole blockchain syncing becomes a background issue rather than a stare at the screen waiting issue
its like online gaming/phone apps these days. get to play with a small single level demo of a game whilst the whole game downloads in the background. people can the be instantly entertained and not be as concerned about waiting for the game to download, as that main download is treated as a background issue
Why not just use a lightweight client then? If you just want to send transactions and see your balance then you can just import that wallet in an SPV client. The assurance you get from verifying all TX's via your full node isn't meant to be an annoyance, we shouldn't be taking a full node and downgrading it to some kind of hybrid; there's a reason SPV exists.
its not about turning a full node into a SPV.. although. funnily enough core's prunned chain feature and stripped block featurs actually allow a core node to not be a full node.
its not about turning a full node into a SPV.. its about allowing users to still be full nodes. but also get some unverified upfront information to help them out straight away rather than waiting
the way i see it is that not everyone NEEDS to be a full node. so yea people can use lite wallets.
the way i see it if you only have balance to only b spending occassionally (once a week) you dont need to monitor every transaction there is all day every day, all you really care about is that your transaction exists. so being a full node is not an essential need.
where as businesses that NEED to monitor hundreds/thousands of transactions they are personally involved in have personal reasons to NEED to be a full node.
also those few people that have slow internet because they are home users actually bottleneck the propogation. and thus they are not helping the network. so just being a full node for the sake of thinking they are helping, is actually doing the opposite.
if people really want to be full nodes then they need to expect some sort of effort is needed by them by actually having hom broadband instead of borrowing starbucks wifi occassionally.
its like online gaming. wanting to play the latest game but not having the latest console to play it. if you really want to play the latest games then buy the latest console. rather than say that online gaming should be regulated down to only being sega megadrive(genesis)/n64 graphics purely to be universal
imagine it. the gaming community first saying online gaming should be regulated down to sega/nintendo specs.. and then saying that online gaming should then charge 20cents per 10 minute game round.. thus ruling out utility for the same group that only want sega/nintendo standards by way of fee's..
and then going further. having a special screen that offers HD standards but you need to sign a contract that locks your funds up with a custodian that then server streams you HD content to screen, purely so you can play hd games for sub-pennies without the need of a console.
there is just so much hypocrisy of flip flop arguements that it becomes amusing.
LN's design is for the fast microtransactions niche:
do you really think LN users will take their desktop computers running as masternodes to validate all the mainchains that are LN compatible into starbucks to LN purchase a coffee.. or just use a phone app linked to a LN factory/watchtower server..
as the answer will tell you that LN will be more centralised than people think
too many people think that the answer to bitcoin is just 2 debates
low utility high fee.. or gigabytes by midnight low fee
big server farms.. or everyone NEEDS to be fullnode