You are wrong; if a smart contract is successfully deployed to the Ethereum blockchain, a thing that happens all the time -- it is not as if individual computers have the choice to run that code (or to make the app available). The action is objectively run, Blockchain-style.

In other words, I can unilaterally and without permission deploy code to the Ethereum chain, at the price of "writing the code" and "paying the Ethereum fees to do so." And when I do that, the ENTIRE CHAIN must follow.

That's closer to "a computer" that just "a listing of optional scripts."

▲

dahrkael 5 days ago | parent [-]

but how does ethereum enforce that nodes run the scripts? right now it sounds like is just the protocol definition plus what normal node codebases do, but what if they dont want to?

	▲	SXX 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		All the code and calls to run it is stored on chain. When it's committed to chain every single validator node suppose not just record results of the execution, but run the code. To host validator node you stake ETH which is serve as collateral in case your node misbehave, go offline, etc. If specific validator cheats at any point and end up approving bogus data he'll be punished by loss of staked ETH and penalty grows with each attempt to cheat. If multiple validators commit the same bogus data they'll get even more severe punishment for coordinated attack on chain. It doesn't take a supercomputer to host ETH node so there is absolutely no incentive to cheat unless you actual bad actor who is attempting 51% attack. And to perform said 50% attack you will need like $75-100B+ of ETH stacked since currently there is $150B of ETH stacked for Proof of Stake. So this kind of attack really doesn't make any financial sense.