Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Incentivizing the running of full nodes

From: Justus Ranvier <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 20:55:12 +0000

On 06/16/2014 07:00 PM, Justus Ranvier wrote:
> There can be multiple independent transport networks for Bitcoin.
> 
> There already is: ipv4, ipv6, Tor, and native_i2p (out of tree
> patch).
> 
> As long as multihomed hosts that act as bridges then information
> will propagate across all of them. -- Justus Ranvier 
> ----------------- sent with R2Mail2
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Whitlock
> <[email-masked]>
>> Now another concern: won't this proposal increase the likelihood
>> of a network split? The free-market capitalist nodes will want to
>> charge their peers and will kick and ban peers that don't pay up
>> (and will pay their peers to avoid being kicked and banned
>> themselves), whereas the socialist nodes will want all of their
>> peers to feed them transactions out of the goodness of their
>> hearts and will thus necessarily be relegated to connecting only
>> to other altrustic peers. Thus, the network will comprise two
>> incompatible ideological camps, whose nodes won't interconnect.

Also consider that currently there are many people have already
demonstrated a willingness to donate bandwidth and resources to the
public by running nodes, so those people aren't going to disappear.

They could operate mixed-mode nodes, with a fraction of the allowed
incoming connections reserved for free peer, with free connections
might be limited in terms of time duration. Bitcoin-accepting
brick-and-mortars would probably allow free access to anyone connected
to their internal wifi to facilitate people wanting to pay.

Crowdfunded free bridges, assurance contracts, etc are all other ways
to let people get into the network with no upfront cost.

- -- 
Support online privacy by using email encryption whenever possible.
Learn how here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bakOKJFtB-k