Create account

Because it's awesome. Im a bch supporter but things like https://satoshis.place are awesome. Bch can't do that
Tide
replied to post · 68 days ago
A place for dudes to draw dicks on a wall... BCH can certainly do this. But, why would we want to?
Anders
replied to post · 68 days ago
I'm a BCH fan myself, and I think all use is welcome. I think Lightning is great for some things, but I don't like the way it's sold as an alternative to nearly all on-chain....
Channels are good for some things, LN is just a load of bollox, it's not P2P, and is nothing more than fractional reserve 2.0 in the making.
Anders
replied to post · 67 days ago
So if LN is bad, what kind of channels would you prefer? Just simple channels without routing?
Yes, payment channels have many use cases, even centralised routing though a single hub is not so bad for certain use cases. But is LN exclusive to BTC?
Anders
replied to post · 67 days ago
No it isn't, that's why what they are doing is a very stupid approach for their coin's survival. And yes I agree: in some cases centralization doesn't matter much, though we.....
Anders
replied to post · 67 days ago
... shouldn't be forced into it.
For stuff like game play where you deposit funds to use in game, although no real routing as just 2 tx with main hub, but tokeda does this better with token issuer adjusting balances
Anders
replied to post · 66 days ago
I haven't looked much into Tokeda. Doesn't it settle balance on the BCH blockchain?
Exactly, if LN can be used by multiple coins, why is BTC needed? They will just start accepting alt X (fiat tokens) to open channels cheaper than on chain BTC fee & then why use BTC?
That's right, Lightning Network will be equally insecure for all coins.
Anders
replied to post · 66 days ago
Exactly. LN won't save BTC - it will make it irrelevant.
Anders
replied to post · 68 days ago
... but this would indeed be a good use-case for LN. Only problem I see is you have to pay on-chain fees to open a channel.
Nikamoto
replied to post · 68 days ago
BCH can't
Because it might be a better option to sell ads spots (better than AdSense model for instance), and if it is the potential is huuuuge
Btc is an interesting alt just coz of LN
Tide
replied to post · 67 days ago
You say BCH can't, ok then why? Your reasoning doesn't make sense. BCH can, but no one in this community cares enough to create a place to draw dicks on a wall.
now there is a domain. dicksonawall.com
Nikamoto
replied to post · 67 days ago
It's not about drawing dicks on a wall, it's about paying 1 satoshi for each pixel, and being able to rebuy them instantly. It's a different market mechanism than just buying pixels
Anders
replied to post · 67 days ago
And why can't BCH do that on-chain? Fees too high?
Nikamoto
replied to post · 67 days ago
The guys that will fight for this advertising space will buy again and again the same pixels, maybe 500 times per second the same pixel. Bch can't properly order as many transactions
There are plenty of ways to avoid that problem which does not exist. It will be a long while before BCH is doing 500tx/s, let alone a single pixel, please avoid logical fallacies.
Nikamoto
replied to post · 66 days ago
Transactions in bch get confirmed in about a second. That's too much for 500tx/s if each tx needs to be sure the previous one was confirmed (which is the case here but not everywhere)
You were the one that brought up 500tx/s, your point just demonstrates your illogic reasoning on your previous post.
Nikamoto
replied to post · 67 days ago
Moreover blockchains (bch included) can't do those things where one action is done because of another : games, satoshis.place, ect .. (Even with the first seen first safe mechanism)
Anders
replied to post · 67 days ago
500 times per second? That must be far into the future.

What do you mean by one action done because of another?
Nikamoto
replied to post · 66 days ago
If you but a pixel in this "place", you do it because you've lost, you don't want to buy it for free. You need to be 100% sure a specific action happened and this can't be done with
Nikamoto
replied to post · 66 days ago
"you do it because you've lost, you don't want to buy it for free" -> because you've lost it, and don't want to buy it if you already have it. So it depends if someone just bought it
Nikamoto
replied to post · 66 days ago
a blockchain (this is why Hashgraph claim to be "safe")
But I've not read satoshis.place code so I might be wrong and it might be slow enough to be be done on a blockchain
Anders
replied to post · 66 days ago
slow? because you have to wait for a block? don't worry. we have 0-conf.
Nikamoto
replied to post · 66 days ago
You have to wait ~1sec for 0-conf
Anders
replied to post · 66 days ago
Ah yes. If that's too long I understand why a payment channel is preferable in this situation.