So far, all I could understand from the write up was that most of the perceived problems of LN are moved into the purview of āLSPāsā?
Iām sure Iām missing something and more details will come but Iām not sure how shifting the problems from users to LSPās is a better solution. Wonāt LSPās suffer from the same problems?
Nah, if what he claims is true, itās an incredible solution, the question is; does it stand up to the claims in an adversarial environment? And what really happens when ASP and past owners collude?
If those situations still have an avenue for the rightful owner to unilaterally exit, then this could be a game changer. Moving the problem of liquidity to the LSP is actually a fantastic move, because thatās what LSPs already do. What it means is that LSPs can operate noncustodially (like they do now), we can gain privacy FROM the LSP, and we can onboard without having to have any liquidity beforehand and entirely within the Ark pool. Meaning onboarding can happen entirely off chain and doesnāt require any āsetupā or pushed channels or the like that all require an on-chain footprint. On chain transactions are delegated 100% to those with enough money for long term savings that they want to have their own UTXO. Spending, fast onboarding, and day to day activities can happen entirely within a private pool, shared UTXO that interoperates with all of the current lightning network.
Again, this is by the claims of Burak and I donāt understand all of the loving pieces yet. But if itās what is claimed, this could obsolete payment pools, channel factories, ecash, and even Fedimint since it does all of those jobs without the custodial trade offs that many of those options require.
Yea I agree it is big if it works as advertised. I get how under Burakās idea that fees will be low because liquidity providers will be in competition with each other. I just donāt get yet how they wonāt collude since it seems like users are reliant on them to get their payments through the network. A unilateral exit is great but at what cost and do I need hurry?
It read as if LSPās would be handed complete control of liquidity in an environment where it is designed to be controlled by them, and Iām not sure if we should rush to be happy about it. I wonder how that wouldnāt sprout different forms of problems we see on LN?
Like you said, we donāt really any info yet, but I am looking forward to learning more about it. I think more options is good, and bonus points for interoperability.
Ark is interesting to be sure, but it kinda sounds like a lot of idunno Ithinkso couldbe intheory yeah maybe pretty early testnet stuff. Hope to be reading about prototype implementations by Christmas ... perhaps.
Or maybe we'll listen to a Bitcoin Audible episode sooner?
Sounds like a bad design choice.
