pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 14h \ parent \ on: While we are grumbling over other things, we might just loose Bitcoin!! bitcoin
Many nodes are available to anyone who wants to use them therefore they are quite explicitly providing a service free of charge.
The network would struggle to be functional if there were no node providers providing this free service to friends in some cases, and in many cases, anyone who wants access.
There's a lot more to altruism than just doing something for free. If I clean up someone else's trash at a park, that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm asserting a moral obligation to sacrifice my entire life to keeping the park clean. The node runner voluntarily chooses to contribute work without monetary gain, mostly for the benefit of a network of which he himself is a member. It's not a sacrifice in the way democratic socialism asks us to throw away our whole lives for people we don't know.
reply
I think it is rather similar actually.
Democracy may not be perfect but given that it gives all citizens a voice in governance and that good governance is crucial to the wealth of nations, its probably better than the alternatives.
Nodes operate along similar principles and although as in democracies most people are largely freeloaders, as long as there are enough nodes, the system functions as intended.
reply
But the system that the node is upholding is not altruistic. When you opt-in to the Bitcoin ledger, you're agreeing to play by rules that are based on merit and individual achievement. I could see why the single act of running a node could be considered altruistic in isolation, but it exists in the context of a network that has zero tolerance for freeloading (that is, you can't acquire Bitcoin unless you work, or someone who does work voluntarily gives it to you). The benefits to society are a secondary side effect, whereas democracies explicitly demand that people work for the benefit of others for nothing in return.
reply