Damus
Open in Damus
kukks profile picture
kukks
@kukks

Building in the shadows for a better future.

nprofile1qqsz925p2y8wv0lzk9k2u9hqjg0h36d6nzpw9p5w0e366mgg46d4j4qpw9mhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0dec82c330yergem6x4nhwatrdsmnjan5wc6xxarhwpuhxmpswg6k6drc09a82vnjva6kcmnjxs6xkuenws6k6apexfcngmn6xfskg0mzwfhkzerrv9ehg0t5wf6k2fn8d3hkyctv84skcmqpz4mhxue69uhkkattddejummjvuhkummnw3eqdxvy03npub
[email protected]nip05
[email protected]lnurl
Relays (5)
  • wss://relay.nostr.band/ – read & write
  • wss://relay.damus.io/ – read & write
  • wss://nostr.wine/ – write
  • wss://nostr.bitcoiner.social/ – read & write
  • wss://nostr-pub.wellorder.net/ – read & write

Recent Notes

kukks profile picture
This has always been the way. Hyping up "nostr" because "nostr" can only go so far.

It's the products that elevate any protocol beyond the nerd gaze
kukks profile picture
If it's monetary transactions that are the "problem", maybe the degen were right. How about pepe tokens pegged to 1 sat
kukks profile picture
No, this doesn't refer to the typical tps measurement used by blockchains.
I refer to the pragmatic upper bound for creation of new vtxos within a single onchain tx.

This bound is mostly defined by interactivity rounds between participants to construct the covenant. Since we do not have introspection covenants, we use a a series of n-of-n musig transactions. More vtxos = more interactivity.

We've had a functional ark for bitcoin for almost a year now, and since then we've optimized heavily along with plans to go even further. We have methods to achieve the above in concurrency, so that even with a single onchain transaction, we can create higher vtxo counts, without increasing interactivity for each VTXO owner.

In terms of "tps", I would say it is similar to lightning in that we have offchain instant transactions, but with actual transaction composability -- just craft a bitcoin transaction, sign, and submit.

There is of course no free lunch: one must swap their existing vtxos for new ones that are created with the commitment transaction (covenant session) described above, a trustless swap through connector outputs, for two reasons:

Batch expiries: these covenants have an expiry that allow the ark operator to reclaim its initial liquidity.

Switching from preconfirmation security (previous owner + ark operator collusion risk) to bitcoin finality (fully under your control). This also prunes the unilateral exit to a minimum tx set for broadcasting to.covnert vtxos to utxos.
kukks profile picture
This whole spectacle that Ark is "gimped" without a covenant is way over the top.

Yes, Ark can be better with covenants. In fact, at @npub1hf5sg... we have both variants developed and concluded that a covenantless variant today is not only viable, but can exceed expectations through the right optimizations and engineering. We have a path for multiple hundreds of vtxo creation in a single commitment transaction while keeping the interactivity at an acceptable level.

We also have paths of varying methods to mitigate the approaching expiry dilemma.

Ark does not need covenants. It is FUD to state otherwise. You'll see soon enough though!
kukks profile picture
Unsure what you mean by "remixing".

If you're referring to the need to batch swap vtxos because of the expiration, then yes. Especially because you said you have a server?