pull down to refresh
88 sats \ 1 reply \ @standardcrypto 8h \ parent \ on: Are we close to consensus for Bitcoin's next upgrade? bitcoin
IIUC, CTV enables ARK (maybe bad, I am agnostic) but also enables much improved channel factories. We probably don't currently need channel factories, but it's nice to have the upgrade path cleared without future softfork drama, if we can get it wrangled now.
"Channel factories by themselves do not require any soft-forks to be possible. However, the simple channel factories described above are probably impractical beyond small numbers of parties due to the coordination required to actually achieve a scaling benefit. Thus, covenant proposals such as OP_Evict or CTV (via txout trees) aim to allow more fine-grained outcomes where individual parties can be forced on-chain, without forcing everyone on-chain at once."
https://petertodd.org/2024/covenant-dependent-layer-2-review#potential-soft-forks
I don't care about Ark (or even understand it tbh) but I am all in on lightning.
Nobody is using channel batching and that has less coordination issues than factories... because channels are not bottlnecked and never will be. All scaling arguments are based on a flawed presupposition that the bottleneck is throughput, this is because retards base numbers of billions of people.
The only scaling limitation Bitcoin has is supply, as in, not enough people will ever be able to own enough sats (5-6 digits worth of sats) to transact, even if the chain is at a perpetual 1 sat/byte due to gigameg blocks or other shitfork like CTV.
There are at most only a billion households/businesses that will ever be able to use real Bitcoin, that may even be a generous estimate given the size of many stockpiles.
reply