Proof of work. It is the work for which you receive the fees when finding/mining a block. You did the work, you deserve the money.
If on the other hand you choose to keep a copy of the blockchain on ...
That’s a long response to say “suck it up node runner, miners gotta get paid”. If most nodes are pruned, that’s centralization because new nodes need full nodes to bootstrap, and long term that centralization is bad for security because the more centralized the network becomes, the easier it is to capture.
I think the high time preference of large commercial miners is a problem for the network because they are strapped for cash and quite rationally care more about short term profits to keep them alive than the long term success of Bitcoin. Slipstream is a perfect example of this focus on short term revenue despite the long term impact.
How much do you actually get in fees from spam? I read an estimate that fees were something like 7% of revenue with block rewards still dominating (and it’s not all spam, plus some spam pays very low fees because they are happy to wait days to get mined), so spam is probably only a couple of percent of revenue. I’d be interested if you can point me to more factual data on that.
Many node runners do it altruistically for the benefit of the network, and the ~18% now running BIP-110/RDTS are clearly unhappy about the impact of spam on their nodes. Some complain about resource needs, some about moral/ethical/legal risks. All are valid complaints to them, and if we don’t address the problem of spam, many node runners will stop running nodes causing centralization, which is bad for security in the long term.
I think the high time preference of large commercial miners is a problem for the network because they are strapped for cash and quite rationally care more about short term profits to keep them alive than the long term success of Bitcoin. Slipstream is a perfect example of this focus on short term revenue despite the long term impact.
How much do you actually get in fees from spam? I read an estimate that fees were something like 7% of revenue with block rewards still dominating (and it’s not all spam, plus some spam pays very low fees because they are happy to wait days to get mined), so spam is probably only a couple of percent of revenue. I’d be interested if you can point me to more factual data on that.
Many node runners do it altruistically for the benefit of the network, and the ~18% now running BIP-110/RDTS are clearly unhappy about the impact of spam on their nodes. Some complain about resource needs, some about moral/ethical/legal risks. All are valid complaints to them, and if we don’t address the problem of spam, many node runners will stop running nodes causing centralization, which is bad for security in the long term.