pull down to refresh
Scoresby sent me a very polite (public) request on Twitter, to do this AMA. That is why I am doing it.
It certainly isn't an endorsement of Lightning. Lightning is a dead end. I have demonstrated this to an utterly overwhelming degree -- especially here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhJoJPf76Pw .
In fact, it's much worse: Lightning is a cancer, rapidly metastasizing and killing off BTC. Lightning spreads to unrelated parts of Bitcoin, and destroys those as well.
Your very post (rude, inaccurate, yet overconfident) is further proof of this fact! At this rate LN will kill BTC sooner than I had thought.
Scoresby, bless his heart, has a morbid curiosity about scam fake L2's
Lightning, is literally just reusable chain transactions, nothing more or less.
Quick skim of that video shows a strawman of what you want it to be, and of course, when people want the impossible only scammers will satisfy.
Convenient I wasn't there for the debate at the end.
What would you have said, that Tadge Dryja did not?
To what specifically?
Just saw this gem in your vid, touching on my greatest hits, especially scaling and liquidity for starters
Lightnings scales throughput, that's not the same as scaling users. Nothing scales users, Bitcoin itself is supply constrained and not floating point. Given that the 2.1q sats is not evenly distributed, some even lost, and the assumption of non-zero fees and dust limits, bears out that there's no avenue for more than 100 maybe 200M people to ever settle on actual Bitcoin. Bitcoin self-custody is for the golden billon 200M... yet but everyone still benefits from the measuring stick of infinity/21M.
No fake L2 solves that, if it claims to, it's shitcoin with trust assumptions and not actually settled Bitcoin.
Liquidity is also a retarded nit, no liquidity is required anymore than a chain transactions. If you want to transact, you need money to transact, it's that simple. Lightning is literally just reusing transactions someone has already made.
I'll agree on the culture on LN, it's full of grift, virtue signal and larp... and a general lack of first-principles thinking. You might actually enjoy my post history here, contrarian grenades to counter this including privacy as a practice, onlineness, tooling, and Lightning generating MORE chain transactions not less.
Well, back in 2015 I devised an L2 (called "drivechain") which.
- is merged mined, passing all txn fees down to L1 miners
- can onboard an unlimited number of people to the L2, without consuming more L1 bytes
- does not involve a blocksize increase on L1
So, that's what I compare everything else to.
It is not about "settling" 8 billion people (or, what it now called the "unilateral exit") -- that is impossible (without huge L1 blocksize increase).
But onboarding + use , is necessary.
Sidechains are not security equivalent to Bitcoin, and therefore, shitcoins.
Not even terabyte blocks would solve the scaling limitation, this is a signal you've never studied the actual problem space. It has nothing to to with throughput, but distribution of the base unit. The only solution is a supply increase (non-dillutive), which isn't going to happen.
There are less than 300M companies/institutions on the planet, less than 1BN households... even less with actual money to save.
The theoretical scaling limitations, including mine, have no effect on reality.
The drivechain security model is much better than Lightning's.
Lightning:
- fails if a 51% hashrate coalition interferes with your channel
- the 51% hashrate does not suffer any costs by attacking
In DC, it is more profitable for greedy miners to maintain the deposit/withdrawal. So that they can farm the chain for free merged mining revenues. -- https://drivechain.info/blog/fees/
And that is just a comparison on DCs weakest point. In every other way -- routing, hot wallet, sensitivity to L1 fees -- LN is much much worse.
The LN model is just bad. Altcoins usually copy Bitcoin's ideas... if they are good. Many coins use Bip39 -- many coins use HD wallets -- many coins have block explorers -- many coins use addresses -- many coins use ZK -- many coins use the UTXO model. When ethereum invented the EVM -- many coins copied it. Copying = good.
But no Altcoin copies Bitcoin's LN because they can all tell that it is just garbage.
Lightning is hot-wallet risk generally, that's the trade-off for speed and granularity, which inherently requires interactivity and nothing solves that... fake L2's devs shilling Ark/Spark are learning this the hard way.
51% attacks can break any number of things, the same incentive applies to both DC and LN in a 51%, that a theft of that scale renders what you've stolen worthless.
Altcoins usually copy Bitcoin's ideas
Generally a counter signal.
BIP39 is terrible, not even Core uses it, yet it's responsible for more coin theft than anything.
EVM is straight up moronic
no Altcoin copies Bitcoin's LN
Because no altcoin is worth transacting frequently, granularly, or is valuable enough that transactions need to be re-used.
Your appeal to shitcoiners wisdom speaks volumes.
you keep making broad universal statements as though they are fact
they are not facts
the Bip300/301 blind merged mining is secure
have you studied the technology before making these declarations ?
Security equivalent
Just because it's secure enough for you doesn't make it security equivalent. Plenty of shitcoiners think Litecoin, DOGE, Monero etc are secure enough... they're still shitcoins.
MM Sidechains would not only have inferior hashrate, but additional swap surface, centralization... out of necessity.
It's fucking physics.
Your very post (rude, inaccurate, yet overconfident) is further proof of this fact! At this rate LN will kill BTC sooner than I had thought.
...and you concluded that forking Bitcoin was a fix to that (non-)problem?
If BTC is indeed being killed off by LN, then what should we do instead?
how would it be "killed off"?
I understand not working, not scaling, wrong scaling etc, etc. But that does nothing for the mainchain, which still works impeccable. What's the deal?
LN destroys Bitcoin's layer zero -- its people.
Well obviously Lightning sucks and is unusable but it'll kill Bitcoin because too many people use it.
how...?
Because people use it even though it's unusable, don't you get it?
people don't use it
a few people do
most people use apple pay and tap
Nope. Unless you're being sarcastic, I'm at a loss here
if everyone used LN only and L1 gets much fewer fees
does bitcoin survive ?
Bitcoin is designed to live off fees. period.
fedimints is trying to do just this negative thing, by the way
more TX's can occur in these higher levels in a semi or full custodial way that do not pay their way
these are iatrogenic and negative behavior expectations to be instilling in the user
Zucco and Peter Todd both refuse to see this particular point at all, but its true
LN is getting most of the dev attention and is the current answer to world adoption
its equivalent to a parasitical mimic, siphoning off scarce resources to put a few developers kids through college at the long term expense of bitcoin itself,
risking being replaced by something better and more advanced, and more convenient
ok, so it's killing Bitcoin in an opportunity cost sense? What could have/would have been, yes?
my lightning node works great
The irony of using that cliché, originally used for Trump, which turned out to not be a derangement but a totally valid anxiety....
derangement but a totally valid anxiety
No, you're just deranged
send me 20 thousand dollars on a lightning tx if you are so confident in LN
or even send it to yourself and record it
do it self custodied on your own channel, none of this fake satoshi wallet shit
then repeat that 8 billion times
and then what would you do ?
"send me 20k bro"
Lightning deserves better derangement
"or send yourself and record it"
lightning supporters can't read too good
which explains a lot
Lightning is a hot wallet, who's retarded enough to do that with any hot wallet? Lightning or otherwise. Lightning analogous to the kind of cash you keep in your wallet, not ACH transfers.
well i would be confident sending an instant Thunder tx in excess of 20k because its not a retarded jobs program for bitcoin developers and is secured by a provable peg
so it seems you are the one who is deranged
Thunder
That some shitcoin you're shilling or you referring to the dead LN implementation?
Can't make this shit up
predates you, the wasted sperm that brought you into this debate and Trump DRS
The irony of not declining then
The website seems to work just fine.
Of course -- the logo [with the two lightning bolts] is (presumably) somewhat misleading. Since I don't have any channel open -- I seem to be surviving on Cowboy Credits.
Which proves that Cowboy Credits does , indeed, work better than LN. Which is perfectly true.
on this, I think @DarthCoin might agree with you. I am curious how @k00b might describe the presence of cowboy credits on SN.
Cowboy credits do work better in some cases. However, in the case of sending sats from one user to another, they do not work so well.
I think the real difficulty with a site like this (a place that is trying to use sats as a source of meaningful signal) is that it needs to be sybil resistant.
I do not and will never agree with Paul. FUCK drivechains and all that crap.
And is totally wrong to consider SN CCs as a drivechain-like. It is not.
CCss are simply credit tokens, used only inside SN - this is where many people still do not get it.
IMHO using directly sats for zaps is stupid. Sats must be used for payments IRL not on a place where you pay to post. Also on nostr zaps with sats are quite stupid.
I said many times here: CCs are like World of Warcraft in-game goldcoins. You can buy them with sats or earn them inside SN. But the whole economy is inside SN, not outside.
Simply credits to post / play the game.
Most of people want to use directly sats with external wallets because are mostly assmilkers thinking that will get rich posting crap things on SN.
I understand k00b position that he wants to experiment as much is possible with LN and external wallets, but the whole concept of using sats for zaps is useless and this will NOT drive more adoption, but the opposite, will push more users into fucking custodial wallets.
Is simply throwing the dead cat into custodial accounts yard.
Of course -- the logo [with the two lightning bolts] is (presumably) somewhat misleading. Since I don't have any channel open -- I seem to be surviving on Cowboy Credits.
Which proves that Cowboy Credits does , indeed, work better than LN. Which is perfectly true.
checkmate, Stacker twats :/
ALL RISE FOR THE CC SHITCOIN!ALL RISE FOR THE CC SHITCOIN!
He took the bait
It worked even better before CC's, which are a result of non-technical considerations.
And they may still kill it yet... slowly.
You can see on the graph exactly when they're introduced, and the site may never recover
I'm not sure I understand the colors
I was offgrid when this AMA started, but anyways, I do not have anything to ask about shitcoineries. I simply do not like to debate about ANY shitcoin. Is wasting time.
this is the sort of autism i expected
Lightning derangement syndrome fucked you up good eh?
The irony of doing this here.