Am 13.06.2015 um 16:39 schrieb Pieter Wuille:
> We can reasonably assume that different people's wallet will tend to be 
> distributed uniformly over several sidechains to hold their transactions (if 
> they're not, there is no scaling benefit anyway...). That means that for an 
> average transaction, you will need a cross-chain transfer in order to get the 
> money to the recipient (as their wallet will usually be associated to a chain 
> that is different from your own).

I think we should set the right incentives to invalidate these assumptions. If 
the fees as well as the security guarantees
on the main chain are highest and fees are dropping with the distance from the 
main chain on each level of side chains,
wouldn't communities with many internal transactions create their own side 
chain with low fees? I'd expect geographic
as well as virtual communities to be forming enjoying cheap fees on their 
'local' chains and expensive but comparabily rare
'long distance' fees. One would expect geographic chains (e.g. continents) as 
well as virtual ones (e.g. the Open Bazaar
users' chain) to form. To save fees, a typical user would maintain a wallet in 
each of her communities which are loaded
and drained with rare expensive transacations, whereas daily business with many 
transactions is done cheaply within
each community chain. So, indeed, I would argue that side chains equipped with 
the right cost incentives for cross-chain
transactions would lead to a scalable and efficiently self-organizing network 
of side chains.

best regards,

Bitcoin-development mailing list

Reply via email to