Replying to Avatar Cyph3rp9nk

And this is the point, with high fees even LN is not viable for many technical reasons, at least for micro payments.

In fact the ideal way in a high fees environment would be to use LN over Liquid.

Right now many people are paying over $200 for forced channel closure on LN.

I'm not using Liquid because I like it, I'm using Liquid out of necessity.
Avatar
Maxim 2y ago

This would indeed useful, although I see how many people react allergically to federated stuff like liquid, which I partially understand.

But if so, why has nobody created a decentralized bitcoin side-chain yet?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Cyph3rp9nk 2y ago

Simply because it is not possible right now, we do not know the way.

Bitcoin is not scalable and for it to be scalable it would have to lose its decentralized essence, hence the layer 2 solutions that lose Bitcoin properties in favor of being more scalable and private.

You simply have to understand the layered protocol and operate as such, your savings in Bitcoin, your daily balance in LN, Liquid would be an intermediate layer between Bitcoin and LN that you can use in situations like the current one or to lose track of your btc.