yes, of course it is. we have a strict decentralization verification process.
we guarantee decentralization by having every LN transaction’s route be chosen by a single server, kept in a closet at your mom’s house o.O
whats a “stock settlement system”?
Guessing here but closest thing this sounds like that currently exists is Liquid’s asset issuance platform (securities shipped and held as stuff in your Liquid wallet)
one thing i think bitcoiners lose sight of is that we have successfully launched the largest and most decentralized layer-2 payment network (after credit cards)
there is no other ecosystem that has achieved this. most L2s on other ecosystems dont even get close to the *Liquid* federation’s level of decentralization. they just use centralized servers and a manually coordinated multisig
that brings with it a real cost: decentralization is expensive. duplication is basically the bedrock of decentralization but that also kills “efficiency of liquidity”, which is basically what every post-LN improvement is trying to fix
upgrades happen in phases: we try going left, discover problems and course correct to go more right etc
I’d expect the next iteration of “shared utxo” protocols to be more centralized in terms of liquidity, with the tradeoff of far more consensus design work (who all needs to agree on the current state of the world for us to move forward?)
they’re gonna get it! im very excited about ecash tbh 🙈
regular reminder that lightning *is* a “shared utxo” protocol that uses covenants (and multisig) to scale bitcoin payment tx thruput
most of the commentary against it points out that it does not scale number of holders in relation to # of utxos. in my mind this is a good sign of the protocol’s success (it shipped and people use it and they found drawbacks with the MVP). It’s also a sign of bad messaging around the applicability of 2-party accounts to certain payment situations (venmo for example)
sometimes it is useful to have multiparty channels; i’d argue that liquid is one such example of this.
federated mints are another one; note that both of these multiparty systems require consensus algorithms to function. fedimints were using BFS, (iiuc they just changed to a new one). liquid uses “nakamoto consensus” aka a blockchain to keep track and agree on shared balance states
Lightning was shipped as the minimum viable product to scale tx thru-put and it succeeded at that. it did this with minimalist, 2-party design as consensus from 2-parties is the simplest case. this meant it could avoid tricky consensus questions and focus on privacy + throughput instead
shipping multi-party utxos at scale will require a solutions for managing consensus amongst stakeholders in the “shared utxo”; see Ark and already existing federations for examples of contending with this problem 🫡
I pointed out your behavior mimics the very thing that i did that disgusted you
ngl the uno reverso attempt is pretty funny 😄
the danger of being specific is you offend someone without intention, but rather than understanding that you … got offended 🤣
you said i was being too general, now u mad im too specific 🤣
maybe we could try, oh i dont know, leaving mom out of it??
if you’re so tired of it, why you doing it??
no this is much much dumber than that
im sorry your mom is bad at tech. mine isnt 🤷
#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=1080x381&blurhash=Q8D9YXsk00D*9FRh%252kY5R00tR-ps9s%2BtRR%2BD%25t701_4%2508_t7R.WCxZ%252&x=aafbe0d222c2b79755b4962e2f189eec0871eae2fbe1f59bf47b551630c5cf4fis this from liking people’s responses??
I don’t understand what you’re saying, can you explain how you arrived at this description?
did you look at the PR? This uses existing data already stored in core which is currently not exposed(the mempool sequence) and adds a new interface for accessing it (filter out older txs)