Damus
Momud · 2w
Yes, but none of them have the security of Bitcoin L1. Therefore, we have two options: creating a new networks or developing L2. Both options require creating a centralized networks. But if we choose ...
Sovereign Being profile picture
There's a third option - adopt existing networks like the ones I mentioned.

"We should build L2's" - I've been hearing this for the past decade. How's that going? The problem is the L1 keeps getting attacked from inside and L2s seem to need an infinite timeline - Soon™.

Better security and stronger decentralisation comes from using networks. While it's not as secure as bitcoin, I don't believe bch has had any security issues, it maintains a lot of the original Bitcoin properties since it was a fork. It's like a really far out knots.

There are aspects to Bitcoin that will never change - like pseudoanonymity - that means networks like Monero will always have a unique position in those regards. Discarding them because they don't fix money like Bitcoin does is short-sighted IMO, especially as kyc and surveillance expands. What are people really going to do if the state shows up at their doors to confiscate their stack for X or y reason?

Vying for one option isn't ideal. Having multiple solutions is better IMO.

Either way, the L1 needs to be protected from bad actors.

1❤️1🤙1
Momud · 1w
Regarding L2, let's consider Lightning. I think the Lightning network is currently the fastest and cheapest payment network for everyday use. Moreover, as long as you don't leave the Lightning network, it offers Tor-like anonymity. Furthermore, everyone has the chance to run their own node, ensuring...