From Ark Labs’ innovation to El Salvador’s prospects, through quantum computing and advice for those wanting to enter the sector: the president of Plan ₿ Network speaks.On the sidelines of the Plan ₿ Forum in Lugano, Giacomo Zucco, president of Plan ₿ Network, gave an interview to Atlas21’s microphones, addressing topics such as the evolution of the Lightning Network, adoption prospects as a means of payment, quantum FUD and El Salvador’s role in the ecosystem.The title of your speech at Spazio 21 was quite provocative: “Will Bitcoin Core kill Bitcoin?”. Can you give us a preview?
pull down to refresh
related posts
38 sats \ 5 replies \ @DarthCoin 31 Oct
Literally Ark DEPEND on LN. Any so called "unilateral exit" will depend on using LN because the user will consider too expensive to exit directly onchain. The poor ones that can't afford a UTXO to open a damn LN channel, will continue to be poor to exit (scam) from Ark.
The whole interaction with the rest of the world is through LN.
Ark's wrong assumption is that people will just drop the whole LN and use Ark.
That will never happen.
That means Ark will be just a niche feature used by such poor users that cannot open a damn LN channel.
And let's mention also that any ASP could be converted into a KYC service anytime... it's a trap!
Meanwhile I could open anytime, freely a LN channel with any node I want.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 31 Oct
I’m afraid you might be right. But we also have to be realistic, LN’s kinda tricky for regular folks, and this solution might actually help fix that. Time will tell though, once we’ve got some numbers on adoption through Ark, we can talk again.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 31 Oct
Daily reminder:
I am really sick and tired of lazy people crying that is hard to use LN... but they never read a damn 1 page of documentation.
reply
111 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 31 Oct
Bitcoin’s for anyone that wants it!
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @d01abcb3eb 31 Oct
Unilateral exits cannot depend on LN, at least not with the current theory and implementation. Unilateral means without the help of the ASP, in which case you can only interact with the blockchain. Unilaterally exiting with small amounts doesn't make sense, analogous to how claiming too small on-chain HTLCs (where the fee exceeds the HTLC value) after channel closures doesn't make sense.
I think it's not only about affordability, but also about convenience. I'm looking forward to see how stuff develop, but will wait to play with it until it works a bit better. Atm it looks like arkade.money does not work in Tor browser, for instance.
I'm also curious to see what growing pains will appear, numbers on fees for users and on operating costs, and how different ASPs can interoperate.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 31 Oct
Agreed. But tell that to the poor Ark users that can't afford a LN channel.
Remember? They got into Ark because of wrong marketing that they do not need LN liquidity management....
Let's be clear: IF YOU CAN AFFORD A LN CHANNEL, ARK IS TOTALLY USELESS.
That means, why not just accumulate enough sats in whatever (even) custodial or friend's LN bank, until you can afford to open a damn LN channel and be happy ?
Ark will fail exactly for the same liquidity is accused today LN...
reply