Taproot Assets is a data standard and a set of cryptography tools for assets and stablecoins, backed by the security of the Bitcoin network, and designed to be transacted over Lightning channels.

Unlike Ordinals or Runes, asset data is NOT stored on the Bitcoin blockchain. No new consensus or standardness rule changes are required to support Taproot Assets.

Taproot Asset creation transactions look like any other taproot UTXOs on the blockchain. They take up very little block space.

Taproot Assets will soon be transmitted over the Lightning Network. (About two weeks™ from now.)

Existing Lightning nodes will be able to forward Taproot asset transfers without upgrading their software.

Trading these assets over the Lightning Network will require the transmission BTC for purchases over the Lightning Network, which will increase the utility and transaction volume of the Network.

I would appreciate if you would review my strategy ( https://docs.megalithic.me/the-gentlemans-guide-to-routing-nodes/gentlemans-networking-stack ) ... and tell me what you think might be wrong or could be improved about it!

It's funny that you flagged this issue because spent many, many hours on this exact problem... the existing Wireguard + VPS solutions were too difficult. I came up with a solution using Docker... which is still pretty complicated... but at least does not require the user to run iptables commands directly on any machine....

Yes, actually, I have a very long and detailed guide on Wireguard + VPS, which is included in these docs! https://docs.megalithic.me/the-gentlemans-guide-to-routing-nodes/gentlemans-networking-stack

Thanks. Please ping me with any problems you see.

Thanks for reading, if you see any errors, please let me know.

I'm not super-enthusiastic about the term "shitcoin", I think it doesn't help N00bs understand the difference between Bitcoin and other coins. I have done a writeup here where I attempt to make the case in a way that I think normies might understand: https://docs.megalithic.me/bitcoin-basics/the-problem-with-altcoins

We've made some docs for the Lightning network.

I think that would be impossible to determine without somehow counting the number of entities or owners of all the "little" nodes -- which itself would likely be impossible.....

We're only trying to identify "entities" or "owners" of nodes who are making some attempt to publicly identify themselves. We're not trying to "out" node operators who are trying to stay anonymous.

thanks!

You can see the "ranking criteria" at the bottom of the page... which sort of explains the thinking... https://megalith.apezdev.com/power_list

There might be a better word than "entities" -- maybe we could say "owners". The point is, who actually owns and runs the node or a group of related nodes.....

We're also trying a very human "editorial" approach where we actually did some research and wrote some commentary on each entity -- again, we are aiming for something that can be grokked by someone new to the Lightning Network. I think that newbies look at something like 1ML or Amboss, and they are just overwhelmed by the complexity....

The concept of entities vs. nodes is (I think) very confusing for newbies when they try to understand the Lightning Network. So we're actually (so far) trying to "abstract away" the idea of "nodes" -- You can see the top of the list is LnBig, and we just note the number of channels.... We don't expose the individual nodes in the interface yet. (Maybe we should do that....).....