329 sats \ 0 replies \ @davidw 3 May \ on: All the World's Txns bitcoin
Some great research but some strange conclusions. I wish the same effort had gone into explaining why bip300 is superior, besides fees and it’s opt-in nature.
In other words, every L2 will be “run by the miners”. ARK, BitVM, etc – they will be “run by miners”, and all of their special security guarantees will cease. The cryptography they employ will be useless. Bip300 is the only security model that is unchanged if a miner-coalition runs the L2.
Binary flippant conclusions like this damage some of the discussion and progress. Wish more people today were open-minded to being wrong or to alternative futures or viewpoints. Sidechains for sure have a place in the mix, especially as we want to incentivise more people to mine for security. But the thinking that LN is a “dead carcass” already because it is not paying miners is pretty laughable.
LN is the only L2 with any sort of traction today, in spite of all its flaws & issues. The first LN transaction was in 2018, so we’re still in 2015 (in Bitcoin terms) as far as Lightning is concerned. Just because it doesn’t process 6.45 trillion transactions a year doesn’t mean in the future when necessity arises it cannot. Humans are compelled into action when the pain of not building something is greatest.
I predict the world will have 13 L2 payment-sidechains, distributed geographically: East NA, West NA, Central America (+Caribbean), South America, West &North Europe, East Europe + Central Asia, Middle East, China, India, Japan, Oceania, Africa, Rest of World / Internet Native.
Then the idea that the world will organise itself around using 13 geographic sidechains is also an interesting take. Who would organise that? Isn’t the whole point of bitcoin to make geography irrelevant?
So yeah, some great research but some very premature conclusions, for me.
write
preview