Does anyone have any educated opinions about Kaspa? It's the first crypto I've discovered that isn't entirely composed of red flags on first glance.
What's interesting about it is they use zk rollups to support ~1 second block times (with parallel block construction) while keeping economic nodes extremely lightweight (<40GB). Of course a full transaction history would probably be immense, but I'm not sure how important that would be for anything other than chain analysis.
> Of course a full transaction history would probably be immense, but I'm not sure how important that would be for anything other than chain analysis.
Do you want the answer most Bitcoiners want to hear or the actual answer?
The former: “verifying the chain”
The latter: the chain has been verified so many times that more than 1 year of history is only useful for data mining
Kaspa... Ya that got really popular for its minning profitability.
But... XMR gives you red flags?
Ok, XMR is the other one. But the privacy has trade offs. Kaspa seems much more bitcoin-like.
i have a major sad right now
Ditch the cult thinking brother. If kaspa is better, great. If not, the answers will help me understand bitcoin better.
Why do we need a bitcoin-like shitcoin? What am I going to do with Kaspa coin that I can’t do with Bitcoin?
Scale without L2s? Unless you can point out some flaw I'm not seeing.
Why would we want everything on the base layer and not scale with L2s?
History has proven that you need to scale in layers. Ethereum was supposed to be the world computer with everything able to be done on layer 1 but even they had to pivot and leverage L2s to scale
I don’t understand this obsession with doing everything on the main chain
What specifically is wrong with kaspa's approach?
The fact that they launched a blockchain in the first place?
There is absolutely no need for another blockchain with a shitcoin token tied to it.
We have Bitcoin
What do we need the kaspa token for? What use case is it solving?
Bitcoin doesn't scale, thats what kaspa claims to solve. There is a need to scale. L2 sucks, its mostly an over centralised complicated Rube Goldberg device to make bitcoin work.
Such a strawman that the shitcoiners use so people can market their shitcoins. Bitcoin does scale it just needs to scale through layers which is what is happening.
I have no issues using lightning and I wouldn’t consider myself a tech wizard. It’s not that hard and it continues to get easier (e.g., nostr:npub1xnf02f60r9v0e5kty33a404dm79zr7z2eepyrk5gsq3m7pwvsz2sazlpr5 allows you to run a self custodial lightning node on an iPhone).
Plenty of people working on alternative layer 2s that will complement and/or compete with lightning and liquid
Also nothing wrong with scaling through custodial solutions like the ETF or exchanges.
Again the key is we keep options open and available so everyone can self custody if they need or choose to do so
Not needing to trust ETFs is a huge reason Bitcoin exists and continues to grow.
If it's not self-custodial it's a bank account.
Lightning's just not there yet especially with small nodes. If that's layer 2, than most the world will interact with layer 3. Liquid is my new fav but still more centralized than some chains.
I think the world might not be prepared to find out just how expensive/slow Bitcoin will be one day. I'd rather use Bitcoin, but the gov will still fuck us all until merchants can accept it and our grandma's can spend it.
Custodial Bitcoin is a Shitcoin.
I don’t disagree but you are delusional if you think people will not use custodial solutions
then what is the point.? might as well use paypal, works for purchases than WoS . Bitcoin exists for self custody trustless transactions. if that isn't going to be then fiat will surfice
Bitcoin exists to give people an option to opt out out of fiat. Some people will use custodial solutions and there is nothing wrong with that as long as people have the option to use Bitcoin in a sovereign manner and transact with privacy in a p2p setting
self custody maxis are just as delusional as bcashers
The biggest issue is KAS.
I used to buy ether before nostr existed, LTC when merchants accepted it because it was more usable than BTC at the time, and AUDIO before Fountain, thinking they must have a token for governance or there won't be any.
Solutions just keep coming out that replace the need for these others which use their own token.
I still own some of these as I've been slowly getting rid of random shit I got bought getting excited about unique solutions. Not totally against tokens for every reason, but that's probably the biggest thing wrong with it
I'd love to see something more like liquid that is decentralized instead of "federated". If that happens, kaspa may become as obsolete as other solutions.
If the point is to be money though, it seems like you would need a token
Yeah, maybe the world will always be 100s of different currencies. I think there's many digital currencys better than fiat, but wish for something more simple for merchants and people buying or using apps.
I think of it this way. BTC a currency on a chain with the most trustlessness where you don't worry about value dropping because a newer/better currency was just released since the value aspect is good as it gets, but just doesn't scale. I think people just need trustless payment solutions.
Could maybe have a token for a sort of governance purpose/ mining incentive but I think the future is more fun for users when that's abstracted and they don't need to buy such token to use it.
why not if you can? It makes everything easier and user friendly for people. L2s biggest problem (and there are many problems) is its usability. Lightnng is complicated to understand and set up, which means most peopleuse custodial wallets, and thats just not what bitcoin wants. And even then its a faf.
Because history has shown us that you cannot scale a single protocol to 8 billion people on the base layer. Would bet a good amount of satoshis that some shitcoin called kaspa is not going to magically scale to the entire planet
This whole fantasy that people are not going to use custodial solutions is comical.
The key is we have options and keep the options open to allow people to self custody and be sovereign if they want to put in the work
Maybe we don't need "everything" on the base layer, only transfers of peer-to-peer electronic cash. Bitcoin still works without custodial solutions. If the default is anything but self-custody and private something is wrong.
What would be the point in custodial bitcoin? One of the main reasons bitcoin was invented is to have a private, decentralised, non custodial digital currency that doesn't depend on centralised companies like visa/paypal. WHy would anyone buy bitcoin and use coinbase instead of just using paypal, other than for asset speculation purposes?
You ask these questions but then promote a shitcoin like Kaspa…
I don’t promote custodial solutions but you live in a fantasy world if you don’t think that a global money will not have some people using it with trusted custodians. I won’t hold my bitcoin with custodians but I am not going to bash people that choose to do so.
The key is that everyday people can “choose” to opt out and take their bitcoin into self-custody with relative ease.
The point of Bitcoin is to fix the money. That means different things to different people. Bitcoin is winning and will continue to win. Your shitcoin will continue to trend to zero against Bitcoin
Ya I feel you. I can admit it doesn't have any glaring flaws... But I never got into it. I always stay curious and stay eager to learn. Lmk what you find out.
wut. zkp is red flag, rollup is red flag
i kinda assumed you understood that a blockchain is a type of data corruption protection scheme for distributed databases and that as such it is governed by the CAP theorem and making availability that high is extremely high consistency requirement on a network with latency averaging 12 seconds for global propagation of a block this is impossibly fast and thus can only work on a very limited geographical region
and global state is unnecessary for most data, except for one thing, the money
i am feeling disappointment, i thought you understood this stuff
I understand the problem, but not why Kaspa's proposed solution doesn't work. Even bitcoin blocks aren't final, best practice is to wait for 6 confirmations. Why not wait for 3600 blocks on Kapsa before accepting a utxo? Seems like the same problem, parallel block construction notwithstanding.
Fast block confirmation allows the sender and receiver to reach consensus on a transaction faster, but doesn't gurantee it.
Very clever marketing team but just another shitcoin
I don't know much about kaspa but I have my doubts on it's decentralization
Skepticism is the starting point
Well, mining centralization. There are no incentives whatsoever to mine. So only kaspa devs are actually mining... And if there were some small miners are irrelevant for the most part.
and they are simply too late even if zk is a good thing (which is not).
Why are there no incentives to mine? It seems the same as bitcoin, in that it's PoW and you get fees + block subsidy. Why is zk not a good thing? I agree that they are almost certainly too late from an adoption point of view.
Because of it's valuation. You need to sell everything to cover your bills.
I don't want to dive into zk thing because it will endup in a sort of flame war. Take it as my peraonal opinion.
That's a great point, though less a technical criticism than a comment on the path dependence of how bitcoin has already won. Do you have a link to the zk stuff I can read?
Not the gratest one but the only one from my bookmarks which still works:
Thanks, I'll give it a read
Acutally there's probably nothing new to you. As I remember it led me to more research because of the trust requirements for zkp. I know how it sounds 🤪
I'm not intimately familiar with zkps, but I am intimately familiar with the idea that all technology has trade-offs. I can totallly believe there are trust requirements involved 😅
Have you heard of Fartcoin? 💨
I took a dive (a little beyond surface level) to see what it's all about. My barber told me about it and said he was going to quite because he was going to be rich lol. Isn't the point of keeping track of a full transaction history so that you prove there's no double spend?
Would love to hear your conclusions.
Ok that's a red flag 😂
My impression is that it's technically pretty good (with the caveat that I don't understand the trade-offs of ZKPs at all), but can't compete with bitcoin due to network effect.
Running a full node seems to only take about 18GiB unless I'm not really running a full node. The block DAG thing sounds great. The (alleged?) lack of pre-mine is good. The lack of custodial crap seems OK. I don't know the technical details. I just recall seeing a note from nostr:npub163gcvh4dwwqm4yp2y7355tu9s7e6pzmqlcl3p78m7vm52fq7ej9s0g40f6 about it sometime back and noticed it is atypical in that it appears to solve scalability (like, orders of magnitude scalability) without compromising on a bunch of other stuff. I'm curious about the negative feedack you receive here other than "because it's not Bitcoin it's a shitcoin." Just because the vast majority of coins are shit doesn't mean every single one of them is garbage.
The Cult of Bitcoin is a great heuristic, but a poor dogma. So far it seems fine from what I've read, but it's sort of a moot point because I think it is basically true that bitcoin has already won in the category of cryptographic money.
Ron Paul said in like 2009 "the dollar is done" then something like "what will replace it?" and that is the question. I originally thought Bitcoin could replace the dollar after seeing the whitepaper. Now I think if the dollar is abandoned in the next few years I doubt Bitcoin can replace it. Bitcoin is great for intermittent, substantial, long-distance, cross-jurisdiction, low-speed, online payments. As long as it is useful it will be valuable and I'll keep using it. I don't want custodial stuff. The original sin of money today is rooted in custody. If gold was hijacked by custodial solutions, why wouldn't Bitcoin be hijacked by custodial solutions? Anyway, yeah, Bitcoin could still potentially replace the dollar, but I think when the dollar collapses, I doubt Bitcoin is the replacement unless some major breakthrough happens. Some altcoins might rise to meet the challenge, likely altcoins that actually aim at the becoming that replacement. I think the most likely scenario is a handful of market monies competing with whatever the authorities propose.
Difficult questions. I do think bitcoin can replace the dollar today, but not without custody. Unfortunately, it seems like we might be going that direction (at least based on Saylor pushing the "store of value" argument independent of payments). This is good for keeping governments honest, but only marginally better than gold. We need good payment technology ASAP to keep what's good about bitcoin from being captured.
I assume gold, silver, and maybe copper will replace cash at most places that only accept cash in the dollar time. Meanwhile Bitcoin, doggie coin, and monero will replace debit and credit cards.
