Any really good "hard" money like Bitcoin is going to be useful for both of money's main two uses: transactions and storing value. Considering the fact that being useful for transactions is the final phase of adoption (because you literally can't transact on a mass scale until there is a large enough mass of people willing to be paid with the currency), it makes perfect sense that in these still early days of Bitcoin its main use is as an investment/store of value. This is very straightforward.

Payments on any sort of a large scale don't come until much later in the adoption of Bitcoin (or any currency growing organically from the ground up). There has been no transition from Bitcoin's original idea to a different idea. Bitcoin is simply following a natural growth cycle where one part of money's use case comes before the second major use case.

The natural growth cycle is:
1. investment store of value
2. payments AND investment store of value

We are simply still fairly early in the first phase. Of course the second phase is happening at the same time but it takes much more mature growth to achieve so it's use case growth naturally lags far beyond the first phase. So if Bitcoin is say 10% into phase 1 it's only maybe 0.1% into phase 2. And it's not until Phase 1 gets to a very mature point that Phase 2 can really start to take off as Bitcoin ownership and acceptance reaches a critical mass allowing people to start readily paying for things with it.

Satoshi's idea of Bitcoin being p2p cash is still very much alive, it just naturally happens to be the use case, or the part of the ecosystem, that takes the longest to develop.

Perhaps my post was a little absolutist and I'm giving the wrong impression.  I was speaking conceptually.  There was certainly an option to run a client without mining.  In practice, there probably would have been a small number of users with outdated CPUs who may not have benefited much from clicking the 'Generate Coins' button.  And the code to do SPV didn't exist at the time the network first launched.  So non-mining nodes have always been a part of Bitcoin, but weren't initially an integral part of the concept.  


From 2010:

I'll amend my prior post to try to clarify things.

Yeah, I agree with this.

Visa for example has a relatively similar amount of "nodes", and it makes sense for them to run them because they get paid through their fees.

In Bitcoin, the fees go completely to the miners.

In the whitepaper the idea was that the miner and the node where the same machine, so probably this issue wasn't really important back then. But now, miners are a completely different industry, and they are the ones making all the money.

Still there are dozens of thousands of Bitcoin nodes that are running securing the network, without getting any financial incentive.

It reminds me of landmark open source projects like SSH for example, which are used by millions of people but maintained by a handful of people for free in their spare time.

Open source is probably one of the best inventions in human kind, and yet it pays almost zero to the people developing it. Instead, useless and bloated software based on open source gets millions of dollars.

That man who bought the two pizzas also helped making the mac port, and open sourced the first GPU miner...

He is of course only remembered for buying pizzas with Bitcoin only.

I was unaware of that, thanks for pointing out. It's unfortunate, but it's also normal. I mean, the story with pizzas seems very intriguing even for someone with zero knowledge in Bitcoin. Unfortunately the open source work he has done is only appreciated by a few people... Thats life...

That AI will give you a false positive that will make the hunt much more difficult because there's more people that's going to get involved that aren't even remotely linked or is even Satoshi plus I don't think that pattern recognition for writing style is difficult to be called accurate, think about this, the story Bourbon Kid doesn't have any author and even if you investigate the writing style, you're probably going to do an impossible because there's going to be a lot of comparison, it's the same with email comparison. If we never perfected the identification of a person through their writing style then how do you think would an AI be able to do that if there's no frame of reference? And that AI can't be scouring all the email out there because that's invasion of privacy to the most glorious fashion.

I think now some one should ask Marti Malmi and Adam Back to provide prove of evidences that Satoshi Nakamoto actually wrote and email to them. As any one can construct and email like that and claims that Satoshi Nakamoto wrote this email to them. They must provide authentic proofs - of - evidences with that claims. I mean electronic evidences with IP addresses.

Other wise I myself or some one else can debunk those claims and establish a false narratives even some of those emails are genuine.  Any body can hacked and hijacked Satoshi's Email Account and send emails to Adam Back and Marti Malmi as Satoshi Nakamoto. Therefore, what is the truth ?  Did Craig Wright send those email to them ?  Craig Wright always can use a double standard to claim saying, Yes he wrote those emails, or he can say no he dib not send those email to them. Its mean either way he can claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.

but as far as the truth is, Craig just a fraud or thief. If he proof that he has sent those emails to them then it is time for the expert to authenticate the Satoshi's Email Account of satoshin@gmx.com and satoshi@vistomail.com and Satoshi@annonymousspeech.com.

Who registered those email addresses ?  it is Craig Wright or Some none else ? There is meta data and Satoshi's IP address of those email accounts as well as those emails.

You cannot just claim to receive special message from God, and cannot tell or bring any proof that God exist. You might received messages from Satan the Devil who us impersonating the  pseudonym of God.  This is what the Christian Priests blames regarding Prophet Muhammad.

Some say Jesus was crucified and some others say some one else was causticized on behalf of Jesus. What is the truth ?
The truth is Jesus was crucified on ground of terrorism by the  by the Roman Governor Pilot but Jesus did not die on the cross but was unconscious and survived and came out of the tomb and are fish and migrated bac to his fathers Kingdom in Paradise Kashmir with 360 0f his followers.

In the case of bitcoin and Satoshi Nakamoto, The governments agents hijacked Bitcoin and Blockchain from Satoshi Nakamoto, and few of those agents impersonating now to scam people because Bitcoin and Blockchain is the proven tract record of Satoshi Nakamoto that Central banks have been debasing our money for centuries. 

So it is time for a financial service reformation. The fiat financial elites d not like it because Bitcoin has challenged their fiat scamming in the financial service industry.  Either you are are one of those fiat financial elite's agent or a genuine Bitcoin adopter,  the truth will be unfolded if whether you are a genuine disciple of Satoshi Nakamoto ?  Satoshi  Nakamoto knows his sheep, and he does not milk his sheep or send to the Baith'Laham which is the House of the butchers.

Just leave Satoshi alone.




   

 

I'm pretty good with writing at times yet not great with coding.

If I could be a coder that would had been a computer scientist's dream. Satoshi Nakamoto (the mastermind) on the other hand succeeded. With cryptography and created the alpha blockchain, which is yet to transition from one state to the final to become the ultimate omega

cUfZz8: "sorry to be a disappointment. Iam not, an AI. IAM HI".


Few of slices to go around. For Satoshi and I. Just the two


A node's tool is a miner

We have dynamic blocks for processing payments at relatively good speeds for a utxo model called Blockchain. And there we also have the GhostDAG. Combination of the two??