Bitfortip

0.00047 BCH

We often hear running a node is needed for decentralization. But isn't that also problematic?

Surely not every user has the skills and time to ready line by line every new update that is happening on the Bitcoin source code and then agree oh yeah this is Bitcoin. Also how can I be sure that the current or next node version isn't fraudulent? For example a malicious one line code gets activated once we reach block height 700.000? With all this drama we can only trust and run the last version released by Satoshi himself back in 2010 using strictly the command line. Thoughts?

serenity75 3 years ago
Tags:
Bitcoin

Source Code

Version

Tom Lutzenberger 3 years ago

I think this sums up the answer pretty well:

A blockchain is a shared database to which records can only be added. When you run a node, you're saying "I will accept only entries to my copy of the blockchain which followed these rules". That's all. With a node, you define what will be the currency you accept and what those rules mean. By having lots of others following the same rules, an economic ecosystem where participants can freely transact with each other is created. If someone changes the rules in a way that's not compatible with the rest, then he can no longer transact with the same people, but if there are others using the new rules he can transact with them instead - another currency is created. Depending on context, the split can be called a hard fork (when 2 different coins have a shared history). If you don't run a node, but use a light wallet, then you delegate the choice of rules to the node operator. If you don't agree, you should change the service.

The main thing which enabled the first decentralized cryptocurrency was the way it used POW (proof-of-work) to solve the double-spend problem without having to rely on some trusted authority. The POW is what enables your node to tell the order of transactions and ensures that history can't be changed or re-written. I.e., I can't take back my Bitcoins once I sent them to you and I can't spend them again at another place since the whole network sees them as spent.

See the whole discussion here: https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/1525/how-do-full-nodes-vs-miners-secure-the-network-differently

serenity75 3 years ago

These are valid points for sure. I am more cautious and thinking of a sleeping agent situation. Check the recent chaos with the Bitcoin whitepaper that was taken down and reuploaded from various sites.

Artemciy 3 years ago Correct

We need a tool and an ecosystem that would look at every commit and link it to a corresponding security review, managing a network of trust, allowing to incentivize for more reviews when needed. I've envisioned such a set back when I worked in Komodo, and Kadan Stadelmann was going to put it under a name "codeloupe", but we're currently busy with other things.

serenity75 3 years ago

That's a great idea!

Stårflash 3 years ago

Sure thing

Miss Mike 3 years ago

Thanks 'Tom L.' for the lessons. I appreciate your candor as I haven't updated since I first learned of this stuff during the Cuban missile crisis in Lemay's air force in the early '60's as a WAF file clerk. Wow! Has it come a long way in language. Been busy doing other studies and life since. Just catching up. Artemciy, how is your mom doing?

Artemciy 3 years ago

She's going to be all right, thanks!

What's up on your end?

Rucci 3 years ago

Doubtlessly only one out of every odd client has the right stuff and time to prepared line by line each new update that is occurring on the Bitcoin source code and afterward concur goodness definitely this is Bitcoin. Additionally how might I be certain that the current or next hub adaptation isn't fake?