1, about how the team i detest so much self imposed restrictions to then self inflict that it cant scale...(facepalm)
2. discussing eltoo
so quick point about 1
the links in previous post start with the standard mantra of onchain cant scale.. yet blockchains actually have no technical limit. the only limit is that of what devs impose on a blockchain for their personal reasons.
in an day and age where data storage of 256gb is smaller than a postage stamp. and that there are multiple techniques of blockchain validation that dont actually need entire communities to validate one strand of chain(regional chains/sidechains) there are many ways to expand onchain. literally thousands of ways. but to say blockchains cant. and instead resort to non community consensus auditing entirely.. is the foolish notion
as for point 2.
once funds are locked into a factory. a 12decimal 'micropayment' is created. this in short is no longer a standard 'bitcoin' understandable tx as it has 12 decimals. and so becomes its own separate 'token' network. and because its not settled under the terms of bitcoin consensus. its not a bitcoin. its just a promise that A owes B and B owes A. with the factory managing it (as you read please do try reading with an unbiased bitcoin care hat on. and not a core defense league hat on)
you will read that they propose the factory (ill hearby refer to as fortknox and continue using bank analogies to simply the understand) is run by 20 users who collaberate.
Quote
Funds are committed to a group of other users instead of a single partner and can be moved between channels with just a few messages inside this collaborating group, which reduces the risk, as
an unprofitable connection can be quickly dissolved to form a better connection
with another partner. By hiding the channels from the blockchain, a reduction
in blockchain space usage and thus the cost of channels is achieved. For a group
of 20 nodes with 100 channels in between them,
an unprofitable connection can be quickly dissolved to form a better connection
with another partner. By hiding the channels from the blockchain, a reduction
in blockchain space usage and thus the cost of channels is achieved. For a group
of 20 nodes with 100 channels in between them,
the 20 node group (fortknox).. well its written above no need to repeat myself
the 100 channels. think of them as regional banks(hubs) which then like a tree. or as we call it in the UK banking terms then split off to bank branches. before then splitting into individual accounts(channels)..
the link to the burchart pdf calls it "sub channels" instead of regional banks.. but you get the idea.. if not.. ill highlight
Quote
3.5 Higher Order Systems
With larger groups, the coordination work required to sign a new allocation
rises, but it is advantageous to create large groups to save blockchain space and
have more partners for subchannels. It is possible to extend the system to more
layers, each layer having less parties per shared account,
With larger groups, the coordination work required to sign a new allocation
rises, but it is advantageous to create large groups to save blockchain space and
have more partners for subchannels. It is possible to extend the system to more
layers, each layer having less parties per shared account,
notice how they talk about this group from a TOP-down topology rather than a bottom up
EG bank institution group splitting out to local bankers who split out to users level channels.
rather than user channel level creating a fixed route and then forming a hub to reduce channels of a route