pull down to refresh
10 sats \ 36 replies \ @justin_shocknet 6 Nov \ parent \ on: Unlocking Liquidity Before Shared Output Expiration | Ark Protocol bitdevs
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
You can unilaterally exit from a VTXO, right? So it can’t be compared to e-cash in that regard?
reply
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.
Not necessarily, that's part of the scam
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
reply
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!
reply
Something like
reply
How does it defeat the purpose?
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.
reply
Good point!
reply
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.
reply
reply
I understand it better than you apparently, aren't you the guy that made a Liquid wallet and called it self-custodial lightning?
reply
If you wanna know more about Ark, for real, you can start with my (a bit old) ark explainer and keep a look at arkdev's blog
reply
reply
You're still scamming
a wallet that has the self-custody of Phoenix
right after this affinity scam:
We believe that Lightning self-custodial should be free and open-source and accessible to everyone.
If you believe that, why don't you work on that instead of fake L2's?
Even if you can afford a real chain UTXO why would you want to pay onchain fees for every transactions you make?
That's inefficient, just batch them with others, Ark allows you to do this.
reply
That's like asking why would you use Bitcoin when fiat has less transaction fees
Ark coins aren't Bitcoin
Lightning already offers infinitely reusable transactions anyway
reply
Ark UTXOs are presigned Bitcoin transactions just like Lightning.
Lightning doesn't scale, and is terrible for unidirectional flow. You can't balance Lightning channels with fiat, with Ark you can.
Ark will make Lightning much better.
reply
presigned Bitcoin transactions just like Lightning
Very disingenuous comparison, what dictates how a chain resolvable tx is constructed relies on a centralized application, Lightning is simply an offchain transaction between equal peers.
Lightning doesn't scale
That's where your wrong kiddo, and I know you know that too... if you really want to commit to that take show us your math so I can point out the absurdity of it, again.
terrible for unidirectional flow
Another hoax, all Ark can hope to do is consolidate inevitable chain TX's, that's exactly what Lightning does.
The difference is Lightning is a truly open network and the larger it grows the less need merchants have to loop out. Arkcoins being a bifurcated centralized coordinator coins lose the efficiency of network effect.
Ark will make Lightning much better
So far the only use-case for it is cannibalizing other fake L2 shitcoins like Liquid, which actually I don't mind because Liquid is the OG fake L2 scam and deserves to eat some of its own cooking
reply
Very disingenuous comparison, what dictates how a chain resolvable tx is constructed relies on a centralized application, Lightning is simply an offchain transaction between equal peers.
No, just like Lightning, you literally craft a 2-of-2 txs with someone and co-sign it.
reply
Prove it, drop the ASP from the design and then update your diagrams (again).
Anyone can provide swapping service against Ark VTXOs, it's totally permissionless
reply
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.
reply
You don't have to trust anyone you are literally holding a signed Bitcoin transaction.
reply
Ideally you receive a signed Bitcoin transaction, but there's trust along the way to that state.
reply
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?
reply
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.
reply
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.reply
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
reply
Ark servers will service different use cases and therefore round intervals.
This is not something to "resolve", it is up to the server operators to decide on the best balance of UX and on-chain costs.
Anyone can run a server.
reply