pull down to refresh
426 sats \ 12 replies \ @supertestnet 25 Dec \ on: LNhance - A soft fork proposal for bitcoin bitcoin
This sentence looks false; segwit already enabled Ark. You can't enable something we already have.
reply
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
reply
reply
reply
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.
reply
It's also wrong for stating APO can help Ark in any way.
reply
You mean taproot?
reply
And no be clear, taproot enabled clArk.
reply
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
reply
You need Schnorr signature aggregation for it to be anything but an academic shitpost.
reply
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.
reply
MAX_PUBKEYS_PER_MULTISIG = 20
reply