pull down to refresh
20 sats \ 1 reply \ @standardcrypto OP 24 Mar \ on: "Lightning self custody works for 100 million users" "But it needs 10 billion!!" bitcoin
I neglected to include the alex bosworth scaling commentary in the top post sorry, here it is:
#907529
The same thread contains a discussion of why I now distrust the ark push for a covenant softfork:
quoting peter todd
""On-Chain Fee Payment In Unilateral Withdraw
Similar to Lightning, the economics of on-chain fee payment and the actual value of a V-UTXO after fees determine whether Ark usage meets our definition of an L2 via unilateral withdrawal, or fraud failing to benefit the ASP. We’ll discuss the specifics of this further when we discuss the txout tree design pattern.""
justin_shocknet: "I think its fair to say if someone with Peters grasp on the fundamentals has done a review of L2's, and can't conclude whether something is definitively an L2, then it's not an L2."
Hey one interesting thing i learned on the stephan livera podcast. ark developers actually consist of 2 camps, one optimizing for bitcoin payments (currently on bitcoin signet) and one camp optimizing for building application layers (currently on liquid).
I'm raising this because this comment doesn't seem to take into account that there is an Ark implementation very focused on improving bitcoin payment UX.
The episode is here and I think it may be a good listen to understand a little better what is currently going on with the Ark Protocol:
https://stephanlivera.com/episode/645/
reply