pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @TheCharlatan 10h \ parent \ on: COMMENT BOUNTY CHALLENGE BooksAndArticles
Right, I think your 1of 2 two things is a strawman. The first case has never been suggested, and the second case is the exact point of vaults. You create a staging area for your coins under weaker security, but still with yourself in control.
Your solution to congestion then just seems to be "wait it out". But that seems backwards. If the exchange can offer their customers sooner and cheaper access to their coins, I don't see how that is not of mutual benefit?
Like I said before, not a fan of arkade or similar attempts, but that is just one implementation of ark. 2nd has been more honest imo. I'm also not completely convinced of either vaults, or congestion control, but they do make clear cases for base money and might actually enhance lightning.
The 1 of 2 is the binary outcome, as soon as someone argues against the possibility of it interfering with merchants they automatically undermine the argument against attacks.
Congestion isn't wait it out, its giving the receiver time to accelerate, which they can already do.
2nd has been more honest
The bar isn't really that high though, they're still inherently FUDing Lightning to sell a centralized and trusted non-solution, they face the same reality that makes Lightning imperfect, immutable physics of the chain.
All any fake L2 can do is add centralization and trust and re-brand it.
reply