š
Original date posted:2015-06-14
š Original message:Pieter,
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,
Martin
Martin Schwarz [ARCHIVE] /
npub1c6ā¦fz7ln
2023-06-07 15:37:45
in reply to nevent1qā¦2vlz
Author Public Key
npub1c6ytpr5fshkjp2hptfqrvfxy6qkkcgre9fv9va8qyq7h4fs03ehs4fz7lnPublished at
2023-06-07 15:37:45Event JSON
{
"id": "b4c901afed78681ca94f3dd9c26fd8e15460ed5172f1f5d5475b7082df4654ae",
"pubkey": "c688b08e8985ed20aae15a403624c4d02d6c20792a585674e0203d7aa60f8e6f",
"created_at": 1686152265,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"1eef2249ef2ccb9b29d0cfb214899c0200af52104249c9e48060be1ef0ababcc",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"06d9fd15f4818e118850a5fd4f0d1c96267b0d0db144b361f2bb61b800896f9d",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f9ca566c8a15d0510cba9326659e9d235ad5681c8eb6f5594af50b92b640fb66"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2015-06-14\nš Original message:Pieter,\n\nAm 13.06.2015 um 16:39 schrieb Pieter Wuille:\n\u003e 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).\n\nI think we should set the right incentives to invalidate these assumptions. If the fees as well as the security guarantees\non the main chain are highest and fees are dropping with the distance from the main chain on each level of side chains,\nwouldn't communities with many internal transactions create their own side chain with low fees? I'd expect geographic\nas well as virtual communities to be forming enjoying cheap fees on their 'local' chains and expensive but comparabily rare\n'long distance' fees. One would expect geographic chains (e.g. continents) as well as virtual ones (e.g. the Open Bazaar\nusers' chain) to form. To save fees, a typical user would maintain a wallet in each of her communities which are loaded\nand drained with rare expensive transacations, whereas daily business with many transactions is done cheaply within\neach community chain. So, indeed, I would argue that side chains equipped with the right cost incentives for cross-chain\ntransactions would lead to a scalable and efficiently self-organizing network of side chains.\n\nbest regards,\nMartin",
"sig": "87fe1aae2a31aacfe29cd949ef9e03b1000c758d20189f13342f0773c42362938c913aef9184092920c3741027d383b162681cd0f05a6fd499e8494eab76052a"
}