nostr:npub17u5dneh8qjp43ecfxr6u5e9sjamsmxyuekrg2nlxrrk6nj9rsyrqywt4tp has warned us!
Discussion
Don't you think though nostr:nprofile1qqs0w2xeumnsfq6cuuynpaw2vjcfwacdnzwvmp59flnp3mdfez3czpspr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0yfjuhy that scaling will have to happen off chain? Obviously trusted third parties are the easiest way to scale. This is what things like blackrock or Strike may evolve into. Banks. Cashu is also a trust based solution. But then there are current and potential systems that make different trade offs and retain sovereignty. Like lightning at the cost of fiction. Or compromises like federated systems. Liquid. Fedimints.
I expect bitcoin banks will emerge that adopt systems that preserve trust minimisation.
Scaling should happen both on and off chain; on-chain scaling ought to result in a multiplier effect for off-chain scaling if done right.
I agree. I am even for a conservative block size increase, because I think as technology evolves, we'll be able to handle that. But I also understand that many people are going to resist that, and I guess there in lies some of our problem, even if increasing the block size is not one of ways we code to scale on chain.
But I also see this as difficult because too much block size increase would certainly centralize the system. So it's a delicate dance we would have to do and the further we go down the road the harder it's going to be to make that kind of change period.
And perhaps most of all, a block size increase might grant us a brief reprieve, but we will never be able to increase the block size of Bitcoin to the point that it would be scalable on the base layer. So it must be another solution in my opinion.
Do you have other ideas for how scaling on chain could happen?
There is an increasing amount of politically correct douche wads spewing ass from their mouth about how self custody is dangerous. I almost puked all over myself listening to the River guy talk about how IBIT was safer than owning Bitcoin. He also said only 15% of River users self custody.
Apparently Bitcoiners aren’t toxic enough.
Honestly Fuck nostr:npub1xkere5pd94672h8w8r77uf4ustcazhfujkqgqzcykrdzakm4zl4qeud0en they sound like some real pussy ass bitches
People’s self custody fears is the perfect weak spot for attack.
NgU = number of compliant market participants goes up.
Hold up. He helps run one of those third parties…
He still works at CASA right? I do love me some Lopp but…
CASA literally helps centralize a portion of normies keys - some folks with the CASA model (which also supports ETH) have a key in their hands and a captured key on individuals phones…. Unless they opt to do all external signers… (not even sure if that’s an option)
This is how their service functioned the last time I took a peek. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
I realize he’s speaking about exchanges and etfs etc.
I honestly wonder how he reconciles the work at CASA with what appears to be to be diametrically opposed personal views.
Bitcoin is for everyone
I had a dream recently that there will be a hard fork in 2029 ish.
Bitcoin (The Asset) captured by US and Big Tech on layers 2 and beyond VS Bitcoin (The Ecosystem)
The world will be in such disarray, that even many Bitcoin maxis will be tempted to choose door number 1.
However, humanity’s future requires choosing door number 2. Decentralised self sovereignty.
Spoiler Alert ‼️
We make it. (Just barely) And go on to build an unfathomable future for civilization on this planet. And eventually beyond.
🧬 🦋 💫
The moment they fork, I will cash out the new fork and put it into Bitcoin