Nostr Web Client

Special class for people with special needs. 🤭

I've studied Ver, Wright and Ayre. They are wrong. The timechain' size is very important at this stage of bitcoin evolution. People claiming bitcoin needs to support smart contracts in order to succeed don't understand what's at stake here. Adding extra risks is really stupid.

mike 10mo ago

For me the main argument is, storing every transaction on the main chain requires servers in a data centre.

This means it's going to be run by a company and therefore subject to local government whims and can be shut down.

Ironically, even VISA face this, they only keep transactions for around 6 - 12 months. Keeping them longer would require enormous storage and data costs.

They lost a battle with, I believe the EU, who wanted them to keep records for longer as part of AML, which is why VISA fees are rising.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Thursday 5∞ 10mo ago

The block space is limited, therefore the number of txs is also limited. The relevant players worldwide will pay the fee (premium, if that's what it takes) to be on the timechain. The rest can respectfully go fuck themselves, bitcoin is not for the poor. Other layers will address the vox populi, with certain risks. On chain is not to be fucked with.

mike 10mo ago

I see on chain Bitcoin as the equivalent of RTGS the Real Time Gross Settlement process for bank to bank payments which runs at maximum 9 transactions per second, but typically 4-5.

Side chains are like SWIFT and Lightning is VISA / MASTERCARD