pull down to refresh
73 sats \ 2 replies \ @justin_shocknet 30 Dec 2024 \ on: Questions For Aqua Wallet Users bitcoin
It's only purpose is to provide custodial UX with some deniability if the regulator comes knocking, there's no advantages to the user.
For the user its actually the worst combination of trade-offs, custodial risk with key holding responsibility and swap fees... they make an absolute killing on lost keys and swaps.
This is a copycat of how it works in the ETH ecosystem. There's a ton of money in fake L2's there, which is why Ark and other fake L2s are getting shilled so hard. The scammers behind the fake L2's are who's astroturfing new op_codes to make them appear legitimate.
This is exactly what's coming to Bitcoin unless Bitcoiners resolutely tell forkers they're scammers and to gfy:
Thanks for the reply. You brought up another question that I had about Ark. Can you explain in more detail why you see it as a fake L2?
reply
All fake L2's including Ark work similarly because they face the same fundamental limitations of reality that make Bitcoin (and Lightning) the emergent systems they are.
Unlike Bitcoin, fake L2's are centrally coordinated and require an easily-gamed quorum of super-users (effectively proof-of-stake) to enforce what amounts to a "peg" amount of real Bitcoin.
Because they're really just apps signing arbitrary data, they downgrade from the security of Bitcoin consensus to app-layer rules which are easily gamed. They also lack the transparency of a singular custodian. (Again they exist only to scam the regulator if he comes knocking and generate fees)
Historically sidechains have been the fake L2 of record, but since sidechains have had over a decade to prove themselves useless, scammers need a narrative shift. VTXO's locked in scripts are the new "sidechain", there's a few of them now using this nomenclature. VTXO is a neologism/affinity scam to resemble UTXO for the purpose of deceiving the retarded.
Fake L2's also can't have a real network effect because they're centrally coordinated, users spending from one sidechain or ark to another need to swap into real Bitcoin and out again, incurring a swap fee with each coordinator.
Contrast all this to a real L2 like Lightning that uses the base chain for security. Since it has no coordinators, it makes the protocol ubiquitous and network-effecty. The trade-off Lightning makes to the chain is online-ness for chain defense, and whether or not you can actually afford to use the real chain. This is the wedge scammers try to drive in Lightning, affordability and online-ness for which there are no solutions, only trade-offs.
This is also why fake L2's push the narrative of Lightning being relegated to the glue between fake L2's, because they aren't Bitcoin, so they need a way to get your Bitcoin and generate swap fees.
reply