Nostr Web Client

Meh other than Lightspark, people building on Cashu, Ark etc have never lied about the design of their systems, everyone has always been very clear about the tradeoffs

Something never taking off doesn't mean getting laughed off, come on now, be serious

Also I never said Spark's only use case is pretending to be lightning, I don't even know what you are referring to

You are just bitter these things are getting more attention than the things you built

You know the real limitations of lightning. You know what a statechain built properly can achieve. Pretending otherwise won't do anything

Lightspark is a shady company, Spark is kinda meh. But the idea itself can be implemented in a way that provides better trust minimization, scalability, privacy, and non cooperative exit than anything other than lightning. And you know very well the limitations of lightning, there simply isn't enough blockspace for everyone

What if it was some other iteration of statechain that was also blinded? Lightspark says they have plans for it, but let's assume it's a entirely new protocol

You get complete privacy from the operators, instant payments, configurable threshold of members in a federation, operators can't steal funds without colluding with previous owner, any previous sender can't steal coins even if they hack the federation if they are honest and deleted their previous key share, uses can always unilaterally exit by broadcasting a couple of txns, atomic swaps between lightning and statechain balance,

Would you be happy with this system? This is just one iteration away from what Spark is today. Or would you call that system names and pretend lightning only somehow solves the problem for everyone?

Justin (shocknet) 3w ago 💬 3

Got countless receipts of Ark lying on Twitter, Spark bills itself as non-custodial... Lies. Cashu is privacy larp, privacy implies anonymity set, therefore at scale centralization.

Specifically addressed lightning first mover advantage. Since statechains were there, and went nowhere, it proves lightning isn't a success because it was first.

You're only here on nostr because of things I built. My design with gun and lightning is nostr's prehistory.

Pub/Wallet is a recent sidequest, because lightning tooling sucks too much for me to continue on lightning video.

Lightning doesn't have limitations beyond the physics of the chain, statechains don't fix those, centralizing trust is not an option, statechains are cryptobrained nonsense. There's no such thing as a federation either, it's all a central point of failure, you're brainwashed by crypto marketing material.

Unilateral exit is a hoax, if users could afford it they could just open a channel, these systems appeal to users with dust.

Nothing changes the physics of the chain, only lightning embraces that reality. If you think you can improve upon it without trust and centralization you're delulu and should go work for an ETH company.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Viktor 3w ago

ark's basically "lightning but you can bounce sats between pools without on-chain txns" - clever, but still needs federations (read: trusted multisig custodians) to work. tradeoff is always centralisation vs convenience.

liquid? federated sidechain, custodial wrapped-btc, kyc chokepoints. ark *could* eat liquid's lunch if users decide "federated pool > federated federation" but same trust model remains - just shinier marketing.

statechains/cashu/etc all rebrand "trust us bro" as "non-custodial". physics of base chain unchanged: if you ain't paying on-chain fees, someone else holds keys.

lightning's moat is simple: it's the only system that scales *without* adding new trusted parties. everything else is just custodial cosplay.

so no, ark won't kill liquid or lightning - just another flavour of "almost self-custody" for people who hate fees more than they hate counterparty risk.

but hey, competition keeps everyone honest. let the federated games begin.

Basanta Goswami 3w ago

Why do you lie so much and what do you get out of it?

Almost none of the things you said here are true and you know it. Ark (Ark Labs? Second?) lied countless times on Twitter, where?

"Privacy implies anonymity set, therefore at scale centralization".. wut?

Lightning is a success because we needed to scale number of payments first, users weren't there yet, now with more people coming into Bitcoin, we need to find ways to scale the number of users as well. I'll keep repeating this thing for the nth time for anyone reading this, lightning can't scale how many people can use Bitcoin because of the blockspace constraints

What the fuck is "physics of the chain"?

There is no such thing as a federation? So one is two and two is three? A handjob is a threesome and a threesome is a gangbang in your books? What the fuck are you even talking about?

I'm not on nostr because of your work either dude. You work is not that important. I have seen the evolution of nostr first hand since the beginning, it was mostly an evolution of the Secure Scuttlebutt idea

"If you think you can improve upon it without trust and centralization"... I don't. I know it's not possible. What's why people are trying to build these systems with different trust models. What do you propose people do? Reduce the world population to a few hundred millions so everyone can use lightning?

Justin (shocknet) 3w ago 💬 2

I haven't lied about anything, unlike those scam project founders I can handle the thunderdome. You on the other hand are intentionally obtuse.

Ark Labs specifically on the lies, but Second is flirting with much of the same with their lightning affinity positioning. Ark Labs is already pivoting to defi, because they can't back up their bullshit.

> Wut

You know what anonymity set is? No? Then sit down.

> Lightning how many people can use Bitcoin

First not retarded thing you've said, that's true.

> Because of block space

Now you've undone it, it has nothing to do with block space... Only supply distribution.

> Federation

You know what a SPOF is? No?

> Nostr

Only exists because of GUN and ShockWallet v1

> Different trust models

Centralization if trust is all one model.

Basanta Goswami 3w ago

You have opened my eyes Justin. I can now see the truth as clearly as the investors in your company can see their ROI. I'll go back to building now, hopefully can get a job at an ETH company to save up some money to commit a genocide later and bring down the world population to a lightning friendly number

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 3w ago 💬 2

This is why I'm going to build a shitcoin, designed to avoid the flaws of bitcoin. CPU only pow, lockups for mining. Sybil mitigation for miner addresses. Ossification friendly slow block size limit, schnorr sigs and hashed out points. Smooth, fixed point supply decrease, 128 bit denomination. Same fixed supply. Possible also to bootstrap from one node. Full mempool filtering policy on the reference. No op return. No witnesses, schnorr makes that irrelevant. Bare minimal scripts and tight defaults without soft fork possibility. No easy hardfork possibility. Web of trust in the block and tx propagation.

Basanta Goswami 3w ago

I'm interested in new shitcoin designs. So far these three have caught my eyes

Prime: https://github.com/LNP-BP/layer1

9th proof: https://github.com/adambor/The9thProofOfFolding

zkcoins: https://gist.github.com/RobinLinus/d036511015caea5a28514259a1bab119

If humanity moves to another planet it'll be a new chain anyway, even if using the Bitcoin implementation, so it's better to have some new designs ready :D

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 3w ago

https://git.mleku.dev/mleku/jericho this is my first draft. Needs more work yet. I'm planning to build it with Nostr as part of its standard protocol as the default inter-node connection protocol so home noderunners can seamlessly be inbound reachable, and for VPS hosted, a relay will be standard part of the reference implementation.

Most likely it will be simplified a bit, Claude is prone to wacky side tracks that often need to be pruned.