“Every Bitcoin User Needs A Full Node” is a Self-Defeating Argument

Maybe this article is too short and simple, but it seems necessary to point out a flagrant stupidity in the Bitcoin scaling debate.

Starting from the original Bitcoin whitepaper, there’s always been a method for users to safely participate in the network without downloading the entire blockchain.

It’s called Simplified Payment Verification (SPV) and I recently wrote an article on why it works and why it’s so secure.

The skeptics say: “No, I MUST be able to validate everything myself. That’s what makes Bitcoin trustless and secure. So, we’ll need small nodes that anyone can run on a raspberry pi. That’s how we keep things decentralized.”

A Glaring Contradiction

Think about it: You want to keep nodes and blocks small. Fine. But that means you need second-layer solutions if you want Bitcoin to grow.

Right now, Bitcoin’s 1MB blocks support 3 transactions per second. If Bitcoin were to support, say 300 TPS without increasing the blocks, then 99% of the transactions won’t be happening on the main blockchain.

Here’s the punchline:

If 99% is happening OFF the blockchain, then what are the raspberry pi’s actually going to be validating at that point?

Nothing… except a bunch of interbank settlements! Your transaction won’t even be on the blockchain.

Therefore, the idea that small blocks let you ‘validate everything yourself’ is self-defeating. With second layers, you won’t be validating everything. You will be relying on third parties (banks, exchanges, payment processors, and other financial institutions).

There’s no way around this contradiction. You either want to validate every transaction in a high bandwidth system, or you don’t. If you don’t, then you should embrace the SPV solution that’s already available. And if you do, then logically you must accept on-chain scaling.