>There are heavy systemic risks that get worse and worse as the number of full nodes decrease. It's true but as I pointed out in a sibling comment those risks

>There are heavy systemic risks that get worse and worse as the number of full nodes decrease. It's true but as I pointed out in a sibling comment those risks are pretty slim as long as it's highly unlikely that all node runners could be colluding. It takes only one "uncorrupted" node to raise the alarm publicly, then anybody can spawn a node and check for themselves if they want. >You don't want an ecosystem where only enthusiasts are verifying transactions. That's abusable, and if it forms a significant part of the economy it absolutely will be abused. Okay but that's the way bitcoin works, with or without SegWit, with or without big blocks. There are not enough incentives to run a full node already. I don't think that will change unless you manage to create an incentive somehow.