Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

chainparrot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 179 posts

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#131

Post by donmezgel »

1024qw wrote: post #67
mjmj wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their software runs a full node and a wallet, so most users are a node by default (if I’m not mistaken) and rewards are double for the first couple years. You can run their software and just about anything, low powered CPU’s, pi’s, NAS, etc. So I don’t doubt their numbers are too far from the truth, esp considering how much China supports them. Nodes have been slowly dropping over time as the crypto boom cycle has di…

In the beginning everyone had to run a full node even if they weren’t farming (in Chia instead of mining it’s 2 stages, first plotting and then farming) but earlier this year Chia released a new light wallet which doesn’t run a full node. Now it should be mostly actual farmers that run full nodes. Chia currently has 22 EiB of netspace which would be more than 1.5 million of 14 TB hard drives.

So is this 120k nodes are validating/producing/verifying the blocks?

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#132

Post by arcticbull »

yarky wrote: post #107
mbesto wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Answer (0 yr crypto dev & veteran): I start a new coin call $FOO. I release 1,000,000 coins. I sell one coin to a friend for $1,0000, and keep the remaining 999,999 coins for myself. The market cap is now $100M. > Number of nodes is a poor metric that is easily gamified (pumped up), presenting an artificial picture. You can game either one.

> The market cap is now $100M. In your dreams only. Good luck finding any serious (aka "smart") money willing to take your valuation seriously. With such due diligence you're likely to be the only one hodling $FOO ;)

Thats exactly why market cap is a bad metric - it does not encode market depth (how much you can actually sell before the price moves) or velocity (how many units are changing hands in the wild in a given period).

Worst of all, currencies do not have market caps - equities do. Market caps are measured in currencies.

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#133

Post by latchkey »

nl wrote: post #129
latchkey wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Move them where? As we've seen more recently with the OFAC list blocking... once one big player starts to block, the rest follow suit pretty quickly. Remember also that a lot of the large staking players are staking on AWS and also have other external factors which dictate where they can host (taxes, corporations, shareholders, etc). Many of the large players are also tied to AWS deployment APIs... moving means rewri…

> Move them where? Google Cloud, Azure, deploy a server yourself, etc. > As we've seen more recently with the OFAC list blocking... once one big player starts to block, the rest follow suit pretty quickly. There's a big difference between something that is made illegal (eg the OFAC sanctions) and a private action by a company. If your service is illegal then you are going to have other problems than just AWS refusing…

> Google Cloud, Azure, deploy a server yourself, etc.

My point is that if AWS decides to follow Hetzner, the rest will too. If it was so easy to just deploy a server yourself, then more people would be doing that already. Right now, AWS is the lowest bar cause that's what half the people running this stuff know already [1].

> If your service is illegal

PoS / staking is a grey zone right now... there is a lot of discussion over the legalities.

> There's a big difference between using AWS as dumb compute and using AWS features.

Correct, but even the dumb compute involves setting up VPC's, networking, disk, monitoring, logging... etc... and each provider does it differently. For one staker, no big deal... but for the larger ones... it gets a lot more complicated.

[1] https://github.com/verida/storage-node#lambda-deployment

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#134

Post by dskloet »

donmezgel wrote: post #50
dskloet wrote: post #27

Where does this get its data? Dash has close to 4,000 nodes but here it's listed with 27.

It's from active connections here: https://explorer.dash.org/insight-api/status

Why would one assume that an explorer has connections to every node in the network?

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#135

Post by arcticbull »

Market capitalization of a currency is not a defined quality. That's a quality of an equity. You measure market cap in a currency, you do not measure the currency in terms of market cap. Currencies only have supply, velocity and exchange rates.

There's no market cap of USD. There's only the supply. It's value is derived from how much you can reasonably anticipate exchanging one USD for in an economy. Fundamentally that requires goods and services to be priced in USD so that you can derive a value for the dollar from a basket of goods and services. But nothing is priced in BTC, it's priced in local currencies and converted in real-time at the point of a transaction since generally speaking you can't exchange BTC for anything directly, cost of inputs is determined local currency and taxes are due in local currency at the spot price at the time of the transaction.

This is an aspect of the holy trinity of crypto where it's all things to all people.

It's not a currency, it's a high-beta speculative play on US dollar liquidity in the market as determined by the Federal Reserve.

Nodes are gameable, market cap is gamed for sure. The only way to more forward quantitatively is to actually treat BTC for what it is. That's why none of these definitions fit.

If you want to treat it as a currency compute its GDP, which is supply times velocity converted at spot to international dollars.

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#136

Post by donmezgel »

aptenodyte wrote: post #114

They didnt include NKN which has a lot of nodes

It says on their website:

"Our economic model consists of two kinds of users: The ones who want to use the benefits of NKN, and the ones who create them."

So how many of 32k nodes are actually the ones that create NKN?

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#137

Post by donmezgel »

dskloet wrote: post #134
donmezgel wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's from active connections here: https://explorer.dash.org/insight-api/status

Why would one assume that an explorer has connections to every node in the network?

So where did you get 4000 number?

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#139

Post by nl »

latchkey wrote: post #133
nl wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Move them where? Google Cloud, Azure, deploy a server yourself, etc. > As we've seen more recently with the OFAC list blocking... once one big player starts to block, the rest follow suit pretty quickly. There's a big difference between something that is made illegal (eg the OFAC sanctions) and a private action by a company. If your service is illegal then you are going to have other problems than just AWS refusing…

> Google Cloud, Azure, deploy a server yourself, etc. My point is that if AWS decides to follow Hetzner, the rest will too. If it was so easy to just deploy a server yourself, then more people would be doing that already. Right now, AWS is the lowest bar cause that's what half the people running this stuff know already [1]. > If your service is illegal PoS / staking is a grey zone right now... there is a lot of discu…

> PoS / staking is a grey zone right now... there is a lot of discussion over the legalities.

There's really not.

Post reply on HN