I always wondered how IOHK defines an honest node in Ouroboros. In theory the best play for a node is to build on every fork, except too many nodes to that, because then your own stake is worth less, right? Are you already a dishonest node if you build on all forks? With Ethereum's Casper it is 100% clear that you are then a dishonest node if you do that and you would also get slashed, but since there is no slashing in Ouroboros, and it is an optimal play expect the majority does it, I wonder if this is already considered dishonest behaviour?

What about light clients and SPV, what are the differences there?

Is it not impossible to keep this up to date? I mean imagine the number of messages that need to be sent to everybody everytime somebody makes a tx.

@Much: My question was the result of lack of knowledge. It may sounded a little bit confusing...

Currently miners do always mine both ty-types(segwit and non-segwit) right? Is this intended to continue to be like that forever or will miners at some point stop lets say mining non-segwit txs? Because if they stop at some point, non-segwit funds are in danger.

Currently miners do always mine both ty-types(segwit and non-segwit) right? Is this intended to continue to be like that forever or will miners at some point stop lets say mining non-segwit txs? Because if they stop at some point, non-segwit funds are in danger.

I mean your answer is good, but I guess there is no real answer to this question, because we already have two approaches (UTXO and the account-model) and both seem to work. Maybe you can diviate slightly from UTXO and create another approach etc.. There are pros and cons to each method and Satoshi chose the UTXO design.

The question is about the WHY. So the reason why it is designed that way. I guess to answer such a question somebody would have to point out pros and cons of different approaches.

I did not say that UTXOs work this way. I brought an example with another approach to point of the benefits of the UTXO approach.

The question at your link is totally specific, my qustion is generic. I suppose the answer it totally different or lets say the answer here should be much more comprehensive (spv, light-clients trust, privacy, smart contracts etc etc).

Nop. If this would be the case @David Schwartz would not have suggested to open a new question about this topic in this thread: bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/20611/…

It is not. My question is generic as you can see he asks something specific.

@David Schwartz: Do you know an answer to WHY in the UTXO model you have to spend the entire utxo / WHY it is conceptualized this way? Do you think my answer here is correct?