Why You Need To Use Your Node For It To Matter

What is the economic node? To understand this, you first need to understand how the user interacts with Bitcoin in the first place.

Bitcoin is a database, a network to facilitate update and synthesis of updates to this database, used for the basic purpose of people who deal with bitcoin (entries in the database).

The main concern of the user that Bitcoin uses for this purpose is the validity of the transactions sent to them, that is, the money they received is valid in the sense that when they progress in the future to spend it elsewhere, others will also accept it on a large scale. If not, this is not glorified as money.

This is the purpose of the knot, to check these transactions. In order to do this, your node must have a full set of all current metal currencies (unsupp for the transaction outputs, or UTXOS) in order to check each proposed transaction against. When a transaction is broadcast, your knot is verified that the coins you spend are present in the “UTXO group”, which means that they have not yet spent. When this transaction is confirmed in a block, this individual UTXOS is removed from the UTXO group, and the new transaction created by that transaction is added.

In order to calculate this UTXO that was appointed in the first place, the knot must analyze the entire historical registry for all previous transactions mentioned in Blockchain, as it goes through the process of adding all the newly bombed UTXO to the group, removing/adding all the newly created UTXOS and processing processed in each individual block.

Without doing this, there is no way to ensure that the current UTXO group stored in your knot is accurate and valid (in the future, guides of zero knowledge can avoid this by replacing the historic Blockchain with a brief encoder that any certain UTXO group is suitable for a specific station).

Your node is just an agent for you as an economic actor, meaning that the AI ​​agents that many LLM advocates talk about. It is an independent program that behaves on your behalf in a specific context, in this case that guarantees the validity of bitcoin transactions to ensure that when you are one recipient, the series of transactions that created the currency spent on you is valid.

The economic node is simply a knot that is already used by a person who participates in economic activity to ensure the health of the coins they receive.

Why is this very important? Why only this contract is important?

Think about what makes Bitcoin in the first place: people who run the same rules of consensus. The only reason for the solid bitcoin network is that everyone runs the same rules of consensus, when miners produce blocks, each individual knot reaches the same conclusion whether or not. Each individual knot will follow everything that is Blockchain consisting of valid blocks containing the most important work attached to it.

There is only a unique cohesive bitcoin network because every individual actor chooses to apply the same set of consensus rules against the blocs produced by miners. It is a purely voluntary association, as a voluntary subjugation of itself to a certain set of consensus rules.

So to clarify this point, let’s imagine three different scenarios of the contract deviated from the current bases set.

In the first scenario, imagine some major exchanges such as KAKEN, Coinbase, etc. All of them change the rules of consensus from the rest of the network (SoftFork vs. Hardfork is distraction from this point, so we will ignore discrimination here). This contract represents the economic platforms in which Bitcoin is trading, and their price specified in FIAT terms. The contract that manages conflicting rules, or conducting transactions that will not be recognized as valid by the contract to be more specific, cannot now participate in this market.

This stock exchange contract will not recognize the user’s deposits as valid, and therefore you will not be able to deposit coins and participate in those markets. Other nodes can gather together, but they cannot capture the economic power of these stock exchanges. Ultimately, there is no other option of the value of the currency created by the set of rules that it implements to anything, and the other contract on the network will only be adopting their bases for interaction with them. Otherwise, the exchanges will simply ignore and honor the deposits of the contract that it considers invalid.

In the second scenario, let’s imagine a group of companies and many smaller users who receive transactions regularly. Perhaps they all reach economic activity for one exchange like Coinbase. These users who choose to change their consensus rules cannot be inevitable like a number of large stock exchanges at the concert, but it is still important.

Here, other users can still reach the markets like stock exchanges to ensure bitcoin price by the market. The majority of the network will continue to accept the currencies of anyone else in receiving goods, or as deposits for trading on the markets. But they still represent a large part of the economic activity that is withdrawn from the rest of the network. This is the influence they can use.

Even as a minority of the network, the possibility is very high because there are great levels of crossing economic activity between this minority of the contract and the rest of the network. This is not a clear condition to leave the rest of the network. There is no choice but to adopt the new rules, but it definitely creates pressure on large parts of the network that interacts through the “gap”.

From there, the more users who choose to cross the gap because of those who interact with them economically, this pressure increases for the rest of the network.

In the last scenario, let’s imagine a group of nodes that represent a small group of users who generate a very small or ever economic activity. These users choose to change their bases. They receive almost any payments, as they are almost an error in terms of economic value on the network.

It is not related to the rest of the network. Big companies, exchanges, and other economic actors, will not care if a handful of people stop to care or send them Bitcoin for various reasons. This group of contract that changes its own consensus does not matter. It does not create any pressure or cost of an alternative opportunity that concerns the rest of the network.

The impact of the economic node on the general consensus of the Bitcoin network is proportional to the amount of economic activity that involves that node/owner.

The node that is not used for this purpose is not completely related to the consensus rules of the Bitcoin network as a whole. It does not create any economic pressure and does not impose any cost of an alternative opportunity, on the rest of the network when it changes the rules of consensus. It cannot be distinguished from a participant in the Sibel attack.

There may be other reasons for running a knot in addition to checking your transactions, such as direct access to Blockchain data for search or analysis purposes, but ultimately that knot is unanimously related.

This dynamic is the reason that bitcoin cannot be attacked by Cibel. This is why some malicious actors can revolve around a million contracts on Amazon web services that manage different consensus rules, and will have a zero effect on the actual Bitcoin network.

Your knot does not matter, Unless you use it. So use it.