Hi aj,
A few more thoughts on this trust/safety vs. capital efficiency tradeoff:
> Optimising that formula by making LA [the channel's active lifetime] as large
> as possible doesn't
> necessarily work -- if a casual user spends all their funds and
> disappears prior to the active lifetime
Hi all,
I think any valid consensus-change based solution to the pinning and
replacement cycling issues for Bitcoin L2s should respect the following
properties / requirements (ideally):
- non-interactive with contribution of your off-chain counterparty
- minimize level of fee-bumping reserve and
> No, that's not a general underlying issue. You've found two separate
issues.
> Furthermore, revoked states are clearly different than HTLCs: they're
> fraudulent, and thus in punishment-using protocols they are always
associated
> with high risks of loss if they do in fact get detected or
Hi floppy disk guy, thanks for prompting me to look closer at Nostr,
it's very interesting.
I hope that whatever solution is chosen doesn't involve handing power
over to a centralized entity that wants collect as much information on
every living person as possible, and lock everyone and
