Nostr Web Client

See where you're coming from, but anything that allows for more tx throughput either directly or indirectly, helps bitcoin scale.

josie 2y ago

haha i think we are getting into semantics, but i respectfully disagree.

let’s say every tx was taproot and we had CISA - we’d get something like 13k txs per block, maybe 20k if we specially constructed them to be as small as possible. that means 13k txs every 10 mins is all you can do on-chain. anything that has a hard limit that you will likely hit is not a scaling solution.

off-chain stuff doesn’t really have a limit tho on the number of txs that can happen per a single on-chain tx (or that’s true for lightning, not sure about ARK), which is why these are scaling solutions

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

QnA 2y ago

Yeah agreed we probably are.

Both 'scale' but with drastically different results and they all have their on chain limits, even LN.

Trying to remember the stat now about onboarding the globe to LN requiring 100% block space for ~8 years? Obviously not a real scenario but demonstrates its limitations 😅

josie 2y ago

right, but that stat is for “onboarding.” once you have LN channels open, there is no upper bound on how many txs can be processed in the channel, which is what makes it a scaling solution.

taproot and CISA would allow for more efficient and private opening of LN channels, which should help with that onboarding number, but i agree that channel management is a huge drawback for LN.

supposedly ARK uses way less chainspace. it would be really nice to see some code and a PoC implementation 😁

QnA 2y ago

Likewise!

I remain sceptical about who's going to run an ASP. Any entity of size will quickly become a target for regulators. Guess you could say the same for LSPs too.