If you want to support LNhance 🔥 for #bitcoin, or contribute to the activation effort:
bc1pt3c80q32m5fz27sh7yztc6l9wcysxahyg5yu40jmwvhc0x3326rquqjk99
or
sp1qq0ma9z3xxzgdgsjuf4rxlsvyq2snyxv7zk2242mw0aps9djjktlysqav8mrnhkqm222vakfqmqhhhuxlj7dthny4mu0tukddj4vlpzej5qf0nt9t
or alternatively you can boost this post!
Funding would help, but we will proceed anyhow.
Things we wish to spend on: github CI/CD, independent hosting for website and a git repo in case a legal takedown is attempted to disrupt activation, hosting signet nodes, bounties for playgrounds, demo apps, contributors, so on...
This sentence looks false; segwit already enabled Ark. You can't enable something we already have.
Could they mean Ark with unilateral exits?
Ark with unilateral exits is already a thing
The various covenant opcodes make it so more people fit in an Ark without a long signature generation session
Ah I didn’t realize. I just assumed they meant the op codes made Ark more practical or better in some significant way - like it’s the difference between Ark being popular or not.
The chart is wrong, it says Ark-without-covenants requires running a server 24/7. It doesn't. Ark-without-covenants only requires being online in two circumstances: (1) when you want to send money (2) about every two weeks (similar to lightning).
The chart is similarly wrong about lightning. Anyone with Phoenix or Zeus wallet on their phone knows you don't need to run a 24/7 server to use lightning.
It's also wrong for stating APO can help Ark in any way.
You mean taproot?
And no be clear, taproot enabled clArk.
no, you can do Ark with just segwit + standard multisig, no need for taproot
it's just more expensive because the ASP has to pay for more signatures (and will surely pass those costs onto his or her users, which would annoy everyone)
imo clArk counts as Ark
You need Schnorr signature aggregation for it to be anything but an academic shitpost.
I disagree. It would still have been worth doing Ark even if we never got taproot, because of the cheaper transactions. But no one thought of Ark til after taproot was a thing, so it's a moot point.
MAX_PUBKEYS_PER_MULTISIG = 20
(1) 20 people sharing a utxo is a 10x improvement over lightning...especially when you pile on "there are no inbound capacity issues" and "every user can still 'send to' lightning invoices"
(2) it is perfectly valid and standard to do an m-of-67 in segwit v0 as explained by Pieter Wuille here
Try Randy McMillan's gNostr option to host the code as well.
gNostr is a decentralized version control on nostr, and you can pull the repo directly from your github.
I'm ignorant and I don't know.
But i'm not a fan of making more 'changes' to Bitcoin without far, far more user education.
Far more people could use Bitcoin now if we had the education and we don't... so I'm not sure how much benefit there would be to adding 'features'/forks when people don't fully use the features we already have.
Just my 2 sats.
How can you buy anything when it's either too costly/tx (on-chain) or too hard to onboard (lightning)?
Bitcoin isn't 'too expensive' and lightning isn't 'too hard' to use. Neither of those things are true in my opinion.
Instead, people are stupid and lazy and/or don't know lightning even exists. Bitcoin is such a bubble... i have heard shop merchants, employees tell me "bitcoin is scary". Their exact words and that's why they don't take it.
If Bitcoin is "scary" to them, how the hell can we expect them to understand Lightning or want to adopt it?
I ask the uber driver over and over... hey do you have lightning? They just look confused they have no idea what I'm talking about. It's not that they have decided 'not to use it'... they just don't even know it exists.
And as far as lightning's current state:
view on youtu.beThis is exactly what I said about Linux when I was 15 years old "It's the fault of the user! No way to fix it!" Now we have people using Android, ChromeOS and SteamOS.
Please don't conflate working around limitations with actually understanding what you are using, a LN wallet might be easy to use for you and me, but we are not representative of the users that we all want to join Bitcoin.
Also, it's widely known that Lightning doesn't scale the ownership of Bitcoin, it simply off-loads transactions of already existing users from the chain.
If a user can interact off-chain (lightning) thousands of times without ever touching on-chain...
That is by-definition scaling. Does it scale 'infinitely'? No.
But remember right now where we're at - Bloomberg the WSJ the Financial Times and most media outlets have no idea Lightning even exists. They have never made a Bitcoin transaction or even held their own keys. Not once.
They have literally never used Bitcoin...
So they don't have really any informed opinion on it. This will take time but it will change eventually and when they do they will come to Lightning in some format.
That scales throughput, but it doesn’t scale ownership, which is what @pakovm mentioned.
bro having end users manage liquidity channels is the dumbest design solution possible. No normie is gonna do that. Let's look inward and try to do better, rather than blame users for suboptimal choices.
No end user should spend weeks learning the technicals of LN.
Society advances when things are abstracted away, not complicating them more than the status quo.
I've used phoenix wallet. It wasn't hard and served its purpose.
For you... You also use stacker news. Not representative.
I believe it is inevitable. When? I don't know noone does. But i believe that Bitcoin usage, as a MoE through Lightning, Liquid or other layers (Ark) is inevitable.
Bitcoin is better money... and 'the market' can only ignore better money for so long.
MoE can never go mainstream until it's below the threshold of what it's doable by users. Lightning is not there, yet, or never will be I am not sure. Ark might one day be normie friendly enough.
LMAO!
Donate, disrupt, dominate! 🚀
Cool website
Ethereum Borsa Yatırım Fonu (ETF) 2,5 milyar dolar barajını geçerek Ethereum fiyatının önemli bir yaşaması bekleniyor. Farside Investors verilerine göre, 24 Aralık’ta ETF’ye toplam 2,5 milyar doların üzerinde para girişi oldu ve o gün net para girişi 53 milyon dolar olarak kaydedildi. Ancak, fon girişi pozitif olmasına rağmen, Ether (ETH) fiyatı geçtiğimiz hafta yüzde 10’a yakın bir düşüş gösterdi ve şu anda işlem fiyatı 3.475 dolar civarında. Analist Satoshi Flipper, 3.500 doların önemli bir psikolojik seviye olduğunu belirtti, eğer bu seviye aşılırsa, daha fazla küçük yatırımcının ilgisini çekebilir ve fiyatı yukarı yönlü hareket ettirebilir. Bybit analistleri, ETH’nin 20 Ocak’ta Başkan Trump’ın göreve başlamasından önce 4.000 doların üzerine çıkmasını bekliyor.