/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>23303030
nope

>>23303030
taproot?
https://youtu.be/zjPrxWRP5OM?t=46

Don't tell stinky linkies about this. Delete thread.

>>23303134
it too late fren.
they're right behind me.

>>23303030
No, blockstream broke BTC. We are awake now.

>>23303157
You're not an engineer though why would your input matter?

>>23303185
Because OP asked. Also I am an engineer, but I agree that doesn't matter.

>>23303206
If you think blockstream broke bitcoin you're not a good engineer.

>>23303267
Apologies, let me defer to authorities on the topic! Please tell me what to think

>>23303030
yep well not excited but anticipating

>>23303267
this. bitcoin scales exponentially not linearly as the techno barbarian cashies tried to force it. anyone with iq above 100 understands why this is a good thing.

>>23303386
Bitcoin already scales "exponentially" (log-time validation). Indeed cashies broke it, but a certain other fork remains high scalable...

>>23303134
Stinky linkies are going to get completely fucked by dlc oracles. Who would you rather trust to settle your smart contract, a huge multisig quorum of highly reputable businesses that you can produce a fraud proof against if they lie, or an anonymous group of neets that are probably all the same entity funded by link tokens printed out of thin air by sergey?

>>23303444
nah, curry cashies are the worst order of cashies shoo shoo and you idiotic preconsensus is retarded.
think about it for a bit if 0-conf was actually secure we wouldn't even need a blockchain for consensus.

>>23303528
80/20 rule except 99/1
If you're spending more than a few cents just wait for a confirmation like you have to on brokencoin anyway
>if your spending more than a few cents
this triggers the corecuck
Also great distraction from the key point, both btc and bch broke the log time validation properties of bitcoin

>>23303583
you don't have to wait for confirmation on ln either. it's just better smarter faster and trustless.

>>23303343
Taproot introduces schnorr signatures which unlock discreet log contracts on lightning network.
This is also bullish because the miners don't have the power to dick around this time.

>>23303615
This layering of tech is so bad it makes you wonder if it isn't deliberate sabotage. Almost like someone wants to lose the chain of signatures.

>>23303604
Taproot is bad but in a "not the right approach" bad. Lightning network is simply pure garbage.

>>23303638
It's all tied to multisig addresses on the mainchain of the most secure network in the history of mankind.

>>23303583
>Also great distraction from the key point, both btc and bch broke the log time validation properties of bitcoin
no such thing and never was. also rbf is opt-in you are not forced to use it. anyone is free to accept a non-rbf transaction 0-conf if he doesn't like his money. i have done double spends way before rbf was implemented it required some convincing of the client to let go of the old transaction but it only took a few seconds by hand. with script you could release the doubles spend in china via a proxy at the exact same time you pay in a local shot.

The day scaling was solved.

>>23303638
Imagine thinking that just increasing the block size and ignoring the problem is "tech"
Try and build an internet out of broadcast hubs. Traffic is unmanageable after just a few devices which is why we have switches and routers to segment traffic to the relevant parts of the network.

>>23303652
Lightning network is the most transparent and fluid layer 2 out on any blockchain.
They have several different interoperable implementations.

>>23303652
taproot is a capability multiplier for bitcoin layer 1 and 2. simple as that makes it possible to have actual deterministic complex even semi turing complete smart contracts to execute with minimal on-chain burden. it also allows for contract templates (which can be audited and reused), it also allows for trustless non-custodial liquidity pools basically more capable sidechains than ln.
it obviously is built on top of segwit which is based on p2sh. these were the greatest innovations on bitcoin protocol since the first release. ironically cashies never got them.

>>23303707
Lightning network is about to go completely dark with taproot. Nobody will even know how much corn is on there because channels will look like single sig. This is so fucking bullish it is unbelievable but nobody even cares because they are too busy distracted with shitcoins

>>23303749
that's not exactly how it works or what's the big deal about it but good to see some people are bullish. yes it will blow lightning up but not because you can't audit the perimeter but because less liquidity has to be tied up in a more capable multipath channel and because liquidity pools will not require trust or custody after taproot which eliminates the final foothold of traditional banking.

>>23303749
>Nobody will even know how much corn is on there because channels will look like single sig.
Oh yeh this is a big upgrade.
I meant transparent in that the code is open and reviewable, the BOLT protocol was openly discussed, I've been on the mailing list and they're all very helpful and engaging with the community.
That anon saying it's a blockstream conspiracy is retarded.

Also I have some complicated multisigs that even 1-2 sat/byte still came out to like $7 transaction fees, so this upgrade is huge for distributing risk in a efficient manner.

>>23303725
Cashies are the dumbest fuckers on the planet, they added pieter wuilles original rough draft schnor code and brag that they got it first. Meanwhile they have zero applications because a signature by itself is pointless, you need a framework to actually use them in to get the benefits, plus the code has iterated so many times and they have this old version literally copied from core. Also if they want actual taproot benefits they have to completely redesign but won't because they are so incompetent and they doubtful can figure out how to do it without using segwit

>>23303825
the other big and little talked about thing about merkle tree hash signature schemes which at the heart taproot is is quantum resistance.

>>23303807
Not only that but exchanges like bitmex that use a ton of huge multisig can become extremely efficient on chain now. Its so obvious that if you just bump the blocks up the second there is pressure, then you never encourage anybody to use more efficient habits. Basically you let peoples laziness dictate the protocol instead of an immutable protocol forcing people to adapt to it

>>23303825
also you can do taproot without segwit albeit it's more wasteful but you can't do it without p2sh. and cashies don't even like p2sh for some reason atho it was the single thing that changed bitcoin the most and blew up it's potential to the sky. it did not really change it's basic principles it changed the concern for how to spend an utxo to the receiver from the sender.

>>23303749
Transaction amounts aren’t hidden meaning it’s still very much traceable and multisig is not userfriendly. At best this is a bandaid that nobody will adopt. It also likely won’t solve any of the other lightning security issues.

>>23303801
How does it not go dark? Isn't the locked in lightning number determined just by combing the chain for 2 of 2s and assuming its a lightning channel? That doesn't work anymore for taproot because everything looks single sig

>>23303904
lightnings security issues are indeed not fixable by taproot but they don't really exist for those that pay hubs and the businesses that accept payment have some risk but nothing crazy professional infrastructure can't handle. in the meantime watchtower services will greatly mitigate the risk of business for accepting ln transactions.

>>23303904
I can open a lightning channel and you won't ever know I have one, then I can make thousands of payments. I don't even need to ever close it again, and even if I do it still just looks like single sig self transfer. PTLCs break the ability for malicious lightning nodes to detect your exact payment as well because they don't share the same hash anymore. Bitcoin privacy is not perfect but this is a huge step and will be combined with other techniques in the future to be even better

>>23303896
>and cashies don't even like p2sh for some reason atho it was the single thing that changed bitcoin the most and blew up it's potential to the sky.
What kind of person do you have to be to cripple the native L1 script and then introduce p2sh as a "solution". Christ

>>23303913
no all taproot does at it's heart is it only reveals the branch of the smart contract that actually is executed. this allows for fuckhuge and fuck complex smart contracts. it reveals a path on a decision tree leaving out the other details.

>>23304010
Yeah but a self transfer 1 of 1 script will look the same as a 2 of 2 lightning channel script because of schnor which breaks the heuristic for what is and isn't lightning on chain

>>23303995
dude p2sh was introduced in 2012... and the disable opcodes were shit like sustr() and len() fucking retarded crap nobody needs for anything actual blockchain related.
don't hat is already on the blockchain and what is signed in the tx. nothing else. any other data you put in there is basically worthless unverifiable garbage. and operations on such garbage are just waste.

Core desperation is palpable in this thread.

>>23303995
Satoshi himself disabled a bunch of the op codes retard. The entire thing was poorly thought out and had tons of DoS vectors for nodes where they could get stuck validating ridiculous scripts and lock up

>>23304075
Just look at the price and news of companies buying 10s and 100s of millions of dollars worth, bitcoin is really desperate kek

>>23304083
> beta quality software was beta quality so instead of fixing it us experts made it permanently beta quality

>>23304108
Appeal to authority, appeal to emotion. Neither work here. Tick tock

>>23304041
i would say that's probably not right but i have to look into it more specifically from this angle you would probably have a timelock for any such unilateral spend if you try to use an old commitment you will have to get called on your bullshit. but i will check this out interesting. in theory any immediate settlement should require a multisig tx but it's also true that you need an m that only the other party can reveal to you which is as good as a signature but thee are practical problems with this that is too long to explain here.

>>23304179
I'm talking numbers you're talking emotion crybaby faggot.
Make an actual argument next time.

>>23304108
so desperate... just imagine the desperation you would feel when your shitcoin is worth less than what it was worth before it's fork. so could be worse definitely.

>>23304179
>Appeal to authority, appeal to emotion.
NOOO DONT DO THE HUMAN THING NOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>23304254
What you are referring to is unilateral close case in which 1 person has to prove on chain. In that case the fact you are closing a lightning channel is obvious, but for a joint cooperative close you just agg the 2 signatures and it looks like 1 of 1 transfer. I'm telling you dude its so fucking bullish. Lightning is getting a massive privacy benefit

>>23304514
that's not the thing that excites me about it, rebalancing channels with minimal on-chain burden is more important than any perceived privacy.

>>23304514
yeah i was not considering the composite s i was thinking of the traditional smart contract sigscript use i think i know what you mean... hmm.

>>23303444
creg is going to kill himself.
(and by creg, I meant "you")

>>23303030
This has already been debunked by Reddit, retard

>>23303854
very good point. btc is about to get the quiet quantum resistance upgrade. by the time commercial qbits start to scale up in next 3 or so years. suddenly it will dawn on everyone that the king is already prepped, which will fomo adoption

>>23303972
secondly, ln vulns are mitigated by the fact that they are low-value transactions. high value transactions will always be onchain. the time + effort to steal $2.50 for a coffee wont be worth anyones time. Better return in sending nigerian scam emails than engage in that.

bump for more spaghetti code tales

>>23303030
It's about fucking time they implemented something new.
>inb4 rejected

>>23303157
here comes cashie trashie
pathetic 0tps nigger clogpool coin where everything goes wrong but "muh blockstream" ruined bitcoin lmao

>>23303444
>Bitcoin already scales "exponentially"
lmao
*infinite sync time* oh no we broke the chain, how could this have happened
even bsv is scrambling to reduce bloat lmao

>>23303030
Fuck yes. Bitcoin.

>>23307301
cashies are fucking retards
not a peep from them when ethereum couldnt scale during the DEX craze
wheres the ethereum cash fork, chinks?

>>23307391
they don't scale themselves
BSV has a PR to shove multiple TX inside one that shadders came up with because their sync is starting to clog with the amount of spam inside the chain
their node count is dropping faster than their price

>>23303749
As bullish as LN? kek
You should stick with your SoV meme, BTC is never going to scale because everyry unrealiabke layer of shit you put on it makes it increasingly harder to use and implement.
Exchanges never implemeted LN for a reason.

>>23307417
soon they will all submit to the KING