Quote from: Rayser on January 22, 2024, 03:52:51 PM

Quote from: Upgrade00 on January 22, 2024, 03:45:08 PM

It doesn't

With a hard drive of 2-4 Tb, you'll have no issue storing blockchain data for a long, long time. And it doesn't cost you up to $50

Remember on top of that, I'm paying a higher fee on the mempool because of that Ordinals/NFT.

50$ is a lot in poor countries and we need people running nodes in all parts of the world, not only North America and Europe.

If running Bitcoin full node burden their financial, then IMO they should doing that and focus to improve their financial condition.

Quote from: Rayser on January 22, 2024, 04:10:39 PM

Quote from: Upgrade00 on January 22, 2024, 04:03:41 PM

With a 1Tb hard drive, anyone would be able to run a full node now. Bitcoin has been around 15 years and the total data space it's taking is just above 500gb

I used the 2-4TB to show that what you need to run a full node for many decades to come.

Yeah, but the spammers are increasing more and more.

When this will stop?

But with block size limit, there's upper limit of blockchain size growth.

Quote from: ranochigo on Today at 12:39:31 AM

Quote from: franky1 on January 23, 2024, 10:16:45 PM

the difference is YOU are foolishly adding in the word FULL to nodes that are not offering full network service
the emphasis is the word FULL means FULL
YOU imply something less then full service is still full

Conventionally, the community has always agreed that full nodes are the opposite of SPV clients and that full nodes are just nodes that validate each block and transactions. Sounds like you’ve blown the issue out of proportion. Just look at the historical usage of the term.

But term "full node" already exist before any full node software offer prune mode. So personally i would keep using term "full node" (store all blocks) and "pruned node" (store recent blocks). And i recall term "archival node" comes from ETH community.