pull down to refresh
17 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 30 May \ parent \ on: Bitcoin Deposits: A Zero UTXO Trust-Minimized Lightning Wallet lightning
Like you, I can't tell what the motivation is. I don't think it's malice, although it is a kind of DOS attack. I think they understand enough to prompt an LLM but not enough to evaluate the output, so they share it.
Vanity projects are everywhere in all things, so I attribute that to the lowest effort ones. It's the high effort ones like Ark siphoning funding and attention that are really malicious.
There is a real (unsolvable) problem that enables them all to grab attention, supply limits Bitcoins user scale, and trust is therefore unavoidable for the overwhelming majority.
That's the real signal, because when people want the impossible they'll entertain anything or anyone and virtue signal it out even further.
reply
It's the high effort ones like Ark siphoning funding and attention that are really malicious.
comparing this link with ark seems a bit excessive... at least to me. Maybe I still have no enoughs grasp of the technicalities behind ark to evaluate accordingly. How and why do you see it as malicious? is just the way they do it, or is the idea and technology itself?
reply
comparing this link with ark
They're the same premise, that Lightning is insufficient
But, Lightning's limitations are inherited properties of Bitcoin, and therefore cannot be "solved" without trust
Ark uses false narratives to position itself as having solved the limitations of lightning when really it's just trust smuggling
They invented terms like pre-confirmed transactions and VTXOs to make it sound like a technical solution. They lie about scaling to poors that can't afford chain security, online-ess etc.
OP here is just retarded, but Ark is malicious as evidenced by their deceptive marketing. That's the only distinction.
reply