17 sats \ 8 replies \ @DarthCoin 18 Jul \ parent \ on: bitnodes.io tor node count continues to fall bitcoin
- If you live in a authoritarian regime, the question is not about tor, but about wtf are you doing about that regime...
- Tor maybe is good to browse with more privacy some websites, but NOT for running LN nodes. By saying that you use Tor for your LN node privacy it means you do not know well how to run properly a LN node and multiple ways to run it on clearnet.
People nowadays have a wrong idea about what really is privacy but still they use the word like a panacea.
https://m.stacker.news/40294
If you live in a authoritarian regime, the question is not about tor, but about wtf are you doing about that regime...
Using Tor is one of the things one can do about the regime.
Tor maybe is good to browse with more privacy some websites, but NOT for running LN nodes.
The post was about Bitcoin Core, not LN nodes?
reply
Even for core nodes is a nightmare and introduce a lot of latency.
reply
Even for core nodes is a nightmare and introduce a lot of latency.
Not really, few seconds more latency doesn't matter much for block downloads and transaction broadcast.
reply
It's not a nightmare and if you don't want to leak your home IP address you'll want to use Tor or I2P. Latency is irrelevant for new blocks and transaction publishing
reply
Exactly. I don't spend on-chain often and when I do, I don't mind adding a few seconds to what takes 10 minutes or more anyway.
For downloading and broadcasting new blocks it shouldn't affect the network either as they're mined every 10 minutes.
reply
reply
It's not crucial for the bitcoin network since blocks are ~10 mins apart. Also, home nodes are probably low on incoming nodes (the other nodes to which you will relay new blocks/transactions). The nodes that do most of the work are public nodes in cloud environments with good connections and hardware.
reply
Slow private networks are still valuable for many people, because the decentralized other parts of lightning can be fast and surveilable.
reply