Yeah, how does that work? If I run arkd on my server and point some clients to it is that going to work? Is there a communication/sync between ASPs? In this setup who do I have to trust (except for open source code devs)?
Each ASP has its own shitcoin, when they say VTXO they really mean VCash between the lines. That's why they affinity scam Lightning, each needs its own swap service just like boltz/sideswap does for the Blockstream shitcoin
An important function of these deep state fake L2's is that they surveil as much Lightning traffic as possible via swap and coordinator services
In practice a lot of VTXOs will be of too small value to actually unilaterally exit... But yes, you are supposed to be able to if you're willing to pay the necessary fees.
Like in mainnet, you can aggregate several VTXOs into a larger VTXO.
The problem would be if you have one single VTXO with small value.
Which isn't exactly a problem, is it?
Unilateral exit requires conditions to be met that would disincentivize you from using a VTXO in the first place, it requires you to afford a real chain UTXO and you'd still have a period of trust with the ASP on swap-in
Every trade-off is negative for the user and positive for the ASP
Yeah, marketing Ark with the “unilateral exit” tag seems a bit disingenuous because to unilaterally exit, you’d need to pay fees for possibly many on-chain transactions, which kinda defeats the whole purpose of using Ark to escape high fees in the first place!
You can do a practically unlimited amount of UTXO swaps on Ark for a fraction of on-chain costs.
That would be like saying Lightning is pointless because force closures can be expensive... sure the worst case scenario is costly but the system is designed to avoid this.
It's a shame too, so many resources get wasted on these scams instead of legitimate projects. ETH didn't die, ETHeads just started pretending to be Bitcoiners.
I probably could have integrated parts of these to better coordinate channel operations in Lightning.Pub, but instead of consulting me they decided to affinity scam Lightning instead, it's war until they repent.
Each Ark having its own shitcoin necessitates a swap for each Ark, yes? Sure anyone could in theory run that swap service, but its still trust centralized against the given ASP for the shitcoin being swapped to/from.
Is there some reasonable way to run my own swap service? Let's say with another friend that has Ark ASP running?
With the original Ark my main issue was that ASP was doing an onchain transaction every 5 seconds, effectively allowing at most 64 ASPs before the full bitcoin block capacity is used (not even considering any other transactions). I'm not sure if this got resolved in any way recently?
Since Ark is just another shitcoin so you would both need a swap service to go from shitcoin to bitcoin and back again.
I wouldn't count on any useful self-hosted tooling being made available for sovereign use, its evergreen vaporware that if it gets any traction will centralize (capture) as much as possible.
It's all trusted anyway so just use an SQL database for your guests, more cost effective and reliable.
Oh apparently arkd is actually that swap service that swaps to bitcoin and back, so you don't need to run anything else afaik, but the question is if there are indeed bindings to not just onchain but also lightning. My question stands about how this works with blockchain capacity and ASP interoperability.
Dunno about the current iterations use of chain space, they change this crap constantly so they can psyop non-technical people with diagrams they don't understand
There's no inter-interoperability, each Ark being its own application with its own utility token requires a swap to Bitcoin to move it to yet another application, it's not its own network
arkdon my server and point some clients to it is that going to work? Is there a communication/sync between ASPs? In this setup who do I have to trust (except for open source code devs)?arkdis actually that swap service that swaps to bitcoin and back, so you don't need to run anything else afaik, but the question is if there are indeed bindings to not just onchain but also lightning. My question stands about how this works with blockchain capacity and ASP interoperability.