Quote from: Ucy on Today at 03:21:16 PM

I believe the "small amount" is relative. What is consider small to you may be consider large amounts to certain people. A farmer who considers $300 as large amount should be able to easily run full nodes and properly secure the amount rather than doing that with online custodial wallet. It's a big risk to such farmer considering the amount involve.
The online custodial wallet should be for what Bitcoin users consider small and can afford to risk.
Nothing stops Network members from making it possible for all/most users to easily run full node and secure their very valuable assets.

By the way, I believe Bitcoin should be Multi-chains like this:
✔ Interesting way to get millions of people run full nodes: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5224657.msg53809244#msg53809244

Satoshi spoke about the idea of Sidechain (probably the first to mention the word), but wasn't detailed.

His mention of the word Sidechains (and interestingly, Masterchain)

He is probably not the first to mention the word for crypto project

Quote from: satoshi on December 09, 2010, 10:46:50 PM

The incentive is to get the rewards from the extra side chainsalso for the same work.

While you are generating bitcoins, why not also get free domain names for the same work?

If you currently generate 50 BTC per week, now you could get 50 BTC and some domain names too.

You have one piece of work. If you solve it, it will solve a block from both Bitcoin and BitDNS. In concept, they're tied together by a Merkle Tree. To hand it in to Bitcoin, you break off the BitDNS branch, and to hand it in to BitDNS, you break off the Bitcoin branch.

In practice, to retrofit it for Bitcoin, the BitDNS side would have to have maybe ~200 extra bytes, but that's not a big deal. You've been talking about 50 domains per block, which would dwarf that little 200 bytes per block for backward compatibility. We could potentially schedule a far in future block when Bitcoin would upgrade to a modernised arrangement with the Merkle Tree on top, if we care enough about saving a few bytes.

Note that the chains are below this new Merkle Tree. That is, each of Bitcoin and BitDNS have their own chain links inside their blocks. This is inverted from the common timestamp server arrangement, where the chain is on top and then the Merkle Tree, because that creates one common master chain. This is two timestamp servers not sharing a chain.

.