[zhoujianfu]

VISA says they do 150M transactions per day. I’m not sure how many are US, but let’s say half. Avg BTC transaction is 250 bytes, so you’d need about 10GB a day (about 70MB) blocks to do what you propose.

A 3TB drive is $39 on Amazon right now. So maybe 13c a day in storage costs to run half of visa’s US transactions.

Not raising Bitcoin’s block size has got to be THE most insane technical decision in modern history.

[gruez]

>VISA says they do 150M transactions per day. I’m not sure how many are US, but let’s say half. Avg BTC transaction is 250 bytes, so you’d need about 10GB a day (about 70MB) blocks to do what you propose.

Your calculations are off. It's closer to 20GB per day: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=150%2C000%2C000+*+0.5+...

>A 3TB drive is $39 on Amazon right now. So maybe 13c a day in storage costs to run half of visa’s US transactions.

Redoing the calculations with the correct figures comes to 24.4 cents per day. That might not seem a lot, but that's also $89/year, which makes it a non-negligible expense for anyone wanting to run a full node. Not to mention, the data would have to be stored for eternity, so someone wanting to start a full node 5 years from now will need to invest almost $500 just to get started. That would put someone wanting to run a full bitcoin node into /r/datahoarder territory.

[etrabroline]

>$89/year, which makes it a non-negligible expense for anyone wanting to run a full node.

Why on earth would a non-miner run a full node just to observe other people's transactions? Satoshi addressed this all the way back in 2009 in the whitepaper itself. Consumers (non-miners) would just download transactions they care about and run truncated observer nodes, and $89/yr isn't even that much money for a "full" observer (non-miner) node if you care about being a datahoarder. Killing bitcoin as a functioning currency because some people think Satoshi was wrong is mind-numbing. Of course, when your paycheck depends on not understanding something...