Call me crazy, but why don't people who argue for a certain upgrade just prove the use on Liquid or fork you own side chain with the feature and if the market is big enough for it people will use your chain and you earn fees
Make a Squidward side-chain move all your BRC-20 and Rune stuff there, have a good time, and everyone is happy
If you build it they will come right? Right?
Because I don't respect liquid. Thought a testnet app was good enough.
I will remind everyone in this thread that CTV being one of the BIPs in LNHance by itself enables timeout trees which John Law wrote a paper on as well when combined with CSFS (as it is in LNHance) it allows for LN symmetry which you may know as Eltoo.
What I would like to see with these two structures, is a multiparty channel of pleb nodes which issues timeout trees to casual users. A pleb LSP if you will.
I do feel as though I'm the only idiot shouting into the void that CTV is useful and good and also fuck shitcoins and fuck the BIP authors whiney fits in the core repo. Can we not just claim it for ourselves? Is there no way to separate them from the code somehow?
reply
I get that liquid has its issues, thats why I said if people don't like it, have your own chain and your own federation you're comfortable with using, I'm not against convenants, I think they will bring a lot of enhancements
But from my experience as someone who works in tech I've been in so many meetings where we are close to the project looking at data and think this feature or this change will work and then when its released customers don't give a scooby doo about it lol, we're all just making educated guesses
Hence having something out in the wild and seeing how it works should have some benefits, especially when trying to convince people of making a chance to bitcoin
reply
Man, no sidechains are ass. I have not seen a single sidechain that doesn't have unacceptable trust assumptions and if you build a whole ecosystem on that just to prove the point that people want it, how are you gonna come out and say "Hey, by the way this solution is ass please go use these features on mainchain Bitcoin now".
On the other hand, if you start out by saying "Hey this solution is ass, but come over and see how you like it" its like, but its ass so why would I use it?
Testnet apps are the way you can demonstrate functionality of something without developing an ecosystem on a harmful solution. I don't think you're trying to present an option for development to prove a soft fork's use case, I think you're just trying to make a cop out for something you think you don't want to deal with.
On the other hand, there isn't a testnet app for CTV + CSFS LNSymmetry multi-party channels. So you would have me there. However, there is one for APO based ones. Just test it out and see how you like it.
reply
Agreed, if something is obviously silly or makes no sense no one will do it, and if someon does, you take on the economic loss of your time, labour and any money you put in.
But if there is something that has promise, try it on the ass option, thats what an MVP is, and if the MVP can work out its kinks fine. Testnet is obviously one way to go, but if some feature matures to a point where people want to try using real money or want open testing the ass-chain does make sense as a testing ground
Builders don't always know where something goes and crowd sourcing ideas only happens when people can F around with something and find out
reply
Because Liquid is just WBTC with its own blockchain. Fuck custodial BTC with a different coat of paint.
reply
Lol no one is forcing you to use it, there are options and people can make their own choices, you're using a custodial LN app right now, fedmint is just liquids model without a blockchain
Liquid isn't perfect by any means, dunk on it, don't use it, but propose a solution, because LN also isn't perfect either, very few are using it non-custodially in any case
reply
Drivechsins, ARK, Mercury, zk-Rollups, CTV's timeout trees, channel factories, Enigma Network, hell even motherfucking bigger blocks with assumeUTXO and SPV enabled nodes.
There are a gazillion proposals but you mfers are too afraid to add any new thing to Bitcoin because somehow you all think Bitcoin needs your protection.
reply
LOL can I use that right now?
.....where's the liquitiy for moving in and out? Where's my unilateral exit? How would people interact with one another if theres no wallets, and no network to send to, then I just have to go back to the basechain or hope someone has a swap to LN and trust them.
You're pulling out things with no active product for me to use or send others to use and presenting it to me as a solution, anyways I think i'm done here, but do let me know when theres something to try out, always happy to give alternatives a go
reply
You asked for proposals, I gave them to you.
I won't ever call Liquid an L2 and would never tell a developer to "prove a use case on Liquid first", rather use Kraken than that joke of a custodian token.
reply
In the case of something like OP_VAULT, where the use case is primarily aimed at making cold storage safer, it would be pretty difficult to attract users to do it on liquid or some side chain, since the point of cold storage is to rely on the maximum security of the btc chain.
Maybe we will see the ordinal and other protocols do what you are talking about, but they are a little bit affinity scams and if they move off bitcoin they lose a big part of their value prop.
reply
Yes I get OP_VAULT wouldn't make sense on Liquid
I guess for ordinals, yes the block space and fee paid is the value prop, you could do your stupid mint/etch transaction on base and then move to the multi-sig where you go and trade, just so it reduces the need to always use block space for it
Retail who tend to get involved in this stuff are always looking for cheaper options, otherwise TRON, MATIC and other offshoots of EVMs wouldn't exist
reply
Laugh's in Altcoins.
reply
That's a good point, the reason they are not doing it is probably because they think they are smarter than everyone else, I doubt that.
reply
Point taken, whenever i read altcoin material its always some massively complex gigabrain solution, that disregards a lot of the trade offs. It can't be simple, that was the altcoin space for ages, now ironically simple meta data like BRC-20 are all the rage, its weird
Thats why i thought okay if having smart contracts and all that other jazz isn't all that important, a BTC side chain where you can slap your OP_CAT or whatever upgrades your community wants would surely have a market?
reply
Yeah really, why don't they port it to a side chain and use it there?
reply
You don't even need a separate side chain. Bitcoin SV has OP_CAT I've heard.
deleted by author
reply