Damus
fiatjaf · 1w
Correct, but Zcash, Monero and BCH are all unscalable to billions too (like Bitcoin, although Bitcoin has made all the influencers believe it could do the scaling "in layers" for the last nine years).
fiatjaf profile picture
I used to think there were two ways of scaling Bitcoin: one would be with trusted entities, i.e. banks, but deployed in a decentralized way that limited liability and government capture, and the other way was with Drivechain.

Given what we're seeing with all the Lightning custodial wallets being targeted, implementing full KYC and migrating to Spark (which is becoming almost the one world central bank) that first option is looking worse.

(To be fair my plan was never to have these companies be the custodians in the first place, but it was a bad plan anyway.)
9❤️4
OzzyHB · 1w
Open more LN channels..
epsql · 1w
Do you think drivechains are the way forward at this point and do you see any meaningful possibility that BIP300/BIP301 get soft forked in?
samuel · 1w
What about Ark?
Jordi Llonch Esteve · 1w
Why is everyone so excited about this centralized service? Especially when the people behind it claim it's self-custodial, yet it clearly isn't. Spark, why are you lying so openly about this?
Dependable Independent · 1w
I believe that nothing short of 100% sovereignty is acceptable. With the new home miners think about it ... Everyone has to get a home miner and a node. It's the cost of a light bolt. Imagine 0.01% of the world population mine with 2 TH. The network will be secured everyone who owns will pay the pri...
Nuh · 1w
It depends on the definition of scaling, computational scaling is limited and favours sharding of contexts then maybe use zk proofs to settle between contexts. But data availability isn't doomed, it is actually possible to scale it with users, as long as the number of users is actually objective, wh...