Currently, the most direct way to allow Ethereum to process more transactions is simply to make blocks larger to allow for more transactions per block, but this would mean that each node would have to do that much more work in the same amount of time and may eventually preclude consumer grade hardware
from running full nodes.
Not exact matches
But if Dashjr continues to insist his block - size - caused -
full -
node - percentage - to - drop argument, maybe he could learn a thing or two
from bitcoin entrepreneur Olivier Janssens, who recently pointed out that increasing SVP «lightweight» clients» fraud proofs will yield «nearly all the benefits of
running a
full node, without the disadvantages.»
This would allow users to keep the
full blockchain separate
from the wallet while still retaining all of the benefits of
running their own
full node.
In Puey's view, the idea that every Bitcoin user is going to
run their own
full node, even at a 1 MB block size limit, creates a flawed user experience and will prevent the technology
from being adopted by the masses.
Without a real incentive mechanism, Bitcoin has remained healthy largely
from the fact that
running these
full nodes is nearly free (cost of a 200 GB hard drive and an internet connection).