0 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 4 Oct 2023 \ on: Scaling Lightning With Simple Covenants bitcoin
Anyway, I think that's an interesting way of capturing a big concern with this sort of approach (namely, "what happens if the nice, scalable path doesn't work, and we have to dump LOTS of stuff onchain") in a measurable way.
This seems to be a consistent problem with L2s that take activity off-chain via some kind of cooperative utxo yet design uncooperative exits such that they're only unilateral. They reduce N participants to 1 utxo but 1 utxo can turn to N utxos at any time.
Has anyone proposed a design with cooperative subsets exiting in a batch?
I don't know anything about anything, but it'd be cool if these pools were designed such that participants could fork out of them together.
write
preview
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 4 Oct 2023
Looks like Johan Halseth had the same idea (at the same time?) so maybe it's not super dumb.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 4 Oct 2023
I think if this is possible and the incentives can be made strong enough you have a winning coin pool even if there's a theoretical thundering herd worst case. Bitcoin suffers from the theoretical risk of no one mining it yet that seems to be going pretty well.
reply