5 ms·
Checkpoint blocks are an interesting topic, but there's a mile between checkpoint blocks and "full nodes don't validate transactions so why bother keeping that
by Sir_Substance 8y ago
Checkpoint blocks are an interesting topic, but there's a mile between checkpoint blocks and "full nodes don't validate transactions so why bother keeping that block data around?".
They're also not about trust, they're about protecting against DoS attacks:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Core_0.11_(ch_5):_Initial_Block_Download#Checkpoints https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Core_0.11_(ch_5):_Initial...
Even with checkpoint blocks, a full node can elect to validate it's entire history if it chooses to, which again is a far cry from "block history data is worthless because full nodes don't validate it", a flagrantly untrue statement.
- tomtomtom777 8y agoBitcoin Core, since 0.14 doesn't use checkpoints. It uses "assumevalid" which assumes the signatures of transactions are valid. > "block history data is worthless because full nodes don't validate it" Please don't misquote people.
- tylersmith 8y agoThey could elect to validate all historic blocks before the UXTO set commitment too if they chose to.