speed of transactions does not need to be fixed

10 minutes and the latency of the global internet are a perfect match and lightning state channels (two way transactions that can be securely updated to match a flow of sats in either direction) solve the latency problem, they just bring with them the problem of the brittleness of a source routed network system where a transaction path may not work between when the state of the network was acquired and when a vital hop in the path became congested or went offline

solving these issues can be done other ways, and i have pondered a lot the idea of atomic multipath redundant pathfinding, so transactions literally travel light lightning bolts across the paths that are open and the first one that reaches the end settles it, instead of the standard single path or atomic multipath (AMP) patterns where only one failure in all of the hops in the path causes a failure

AMP only makes bigger payments possible, it did not add redundancy

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

also, you get it

slower blocks would be better, actually

Speed of transactions absolutely needs to be fixed. What the technology wants and what the user wants are two very different things. Hour long settling times are absolutely fine for bill payments but not great for getting groceries (unless you open a tab I guess)

The problem will hopefully get worse with space colonization. I have been wracking my brain for a system of payment that is location invariant. I think it can be done but it won't be quite as trustless as Bitcoin.

I'm glad there are others thinking about this.

I think we should try all ideas. This is, so far, the main thing I like about drivechains.

yeah, i can see how this might be a positive feature of these things... a means to mitigate the chain migration problem that makes a minority fork greatly disabled from moving to become a majority, especially in this situation where the majority has adopted some stupid shit that any idiot can see is an attack on the chain