nerd2ninja; 🥪 on Nostr: I would like to answer this question. The Bitcoin community stubbornly says "no" even ...
I would like to answer this question.
The Bitcoin community stubbornly says "no" even when faced with painful consequences. Only dire consequences tend to get action, because the downside of leaving behind people who say no approaches an acceptable threshold.
So what if we no longer have a block subsidy, and we got so good at layer 2s that no one is paying for on-chain security?
Well, attackers could undo open channels and prevent the latest channel state and justice transactions from getting mined (hypothetically)
Then, the consequences of leaving behind people who refuse a change mean nothing in comparison to the consequences of doing nothing. It is only when we're in this situation that inconvenient solutions will be able to activate on mainchain Bitcoin.
Bonus take: I think the ideal solution is to have multi-block fees for transactions so that you're paying for your block and the security to keep that block in the most proof of work chain. I think this will be convenient in a multi-party channel system (even more so in a vutxo/lightning hybrid system) because so long as we recognize a difference between operators and users, users pay routing fees, which operators use to pay for the security of the system + profit.
The Bitcoin community stubbornly says "no" even when faced with painful consequences. Only dire consequences tend to get action, because the downside of leaving behind people who say no approaches an acceptable threshold.
So what if we no longer have a block subsidy, and we got so good at layer 2s that no one is paying for on-chain security?
Well, attackers could undo open channels and prevent the latest channel state and justice transactions from getting mined (hypothetically)
Then, the consequences of leaving behind people who refuse a change mean nothing in comparison to the consequences of doing nothing. It is only when we're in this situation that inconvenient solutions will be able to activate on mainchain Bitcoin.
Bonus take: I think the ideal solution is to have multi-block fees for transactions so that you're paying for your block and the security to keep that block in the most proof of work chain. I think this will be convenient in a multi-party channel system (even more so in a vutxo/lightning hybrid system) because so long as we recognize a difference between operators and users, users pay routing fees, which operators use to pay for the security of the system + profit.
quoting nevent1q…5mcxIt's not an either / or issue.
Obviously folks should continue improving layer 2 solutions.
What if they are so successful that demand for block space remains below the threshold necessary for a robust fee market?
We will have screwed ourselves out of sustainable thermodynamic security via our own success.