--- Log opened Thu Nov 18 00:00:39 2021 00:00 < dr-orlovsky> > No multip-hops are involved here, right? 00:00 < dr-orlovsky> they can be involved, but again, they are operated by lightning 00:01 < dpc[m]> Trying to map it to real-life-like usage. So if we were to trade game items... then people would have to open a channel between each party they might want to trade (if multi-hop is not possible)? 00:01 < dr-orlovsky> you just validate RGB state when you validate a state change on each segment of the route 00:01 < dr-orlovsky> for NFTs, you will need direct channels, yes. And here where channel factories are coming helpful (and other forms of multi-peer channels) 00:02 < dpc[m]> Oh, I see. Well... wouldn't it be hard to find a route like this? Or is it expect that people will cluster their channels around tokens they use. 00:02 < dr-orlovsky> for fungible assets you do not need channels and you can route with HTLCs/PTLCs 00:02 < dr-orlovsky> People will cluster channels around issuers, like game producers 00:02 < dr-orlovsky> so all game players will enter multi-peer channel / channel factory with the game producer 00:02 < dpc[m]> Or online exchanges and such. 00:02 < dr-orlovsky> yes 00:03 < dr-orlovsky> that is why we are doing Bifrost, where you can have multi-peer channels and channel composability (one channels originating from others) 00:03 < dr-orlovsky> Bifrost is a non-backward-compatible update on lightning messaging and tx management 00:03 < dpc[m]> OK. I guess one last question. How does it realistically scale? It's tight enough to theoretically open normal LN payment channels for wider population. Once people start creating contracts lefts and right ... will it fit? :D 00:03 < dr-orlovsky> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTrY74G5-G8&t=2s 00:04 < dpc[m]> I guess factories are a must? 00:04 < dpc[m]> Yes, I've watchted bitfrost video as one of the first ones. All makes sense there. 00:04 < dpc[m]> Though it's a bit unfortunate that LN is barely popular, and a "LNv2" is already needed. :D 00:05 < dr-orlovsky> factories are must for NFTs, and they are also must for bitcoin itself - since without it blockchain would not fit all tx to open channels for all ppl on the earth, not saying about hardware/devices 00:05 < dr-orlovsky> yes, that is very unfortunate and we were trying to escape designing LNv2 in an uncompatible way for three years 00:05 < dr-orlovsky> but finally we gave up 00:06 < dr-orlovsky> when Taproot/Schnorr came it became invietable 00:06 < dpc[m]> Considering that a node can run both LN and Bifrost and provide bridging, I think it's not too bad. 00:10 < dr-orlovsky> yes, the most important point is not to split liquidity between two networks 08:24 -!- dpc[m] [~dpcmatrix@2001:470:69fc:105::1:2020] has quit [K-Lined] 08:24 -!- lederstrumpf[m] [~lederstru@2001:470:69fc:105::bc8] has quit [K-Lined] 08:24 -!- awesome_doge [~awesome-d@2001:470:69fc:105::1:252c] has quit [K-Lined] 08:24 -!- merkle_noob[m] [~merklenoo@2001:470:69fc:105::bad0] has quit [K-Lined] 08:24 -!- robertspigler [~robertspi@2001:470:69fc:105::2d53] has quit [K-Lined] 08:35 -!- merkle_noob[m] [~merklenoo@2001:470:69fc:105::bad0] has joined #lnp-bp 08:45 -!- lederstrumpf[m] [~lederstru@2001:470:69fc:105::bc8] has joined #lnp-bp 08:45 -!- awesome_doge [~awesome-d@2001:470:69fc:105::1:252c] has joined #lnp-bp 08:45 -!- dpc[m] [~dpcmatrix@2001:470:69fc:105::1:2020] has joined #lnp-bp 08:45 -!- robertspigler [~robertspi@2001:470:69fc:105::2d53] has joined #lnp-bp 09:00 -!- lederstrumpf[m] [~lederstru@2001:470:69fc:105::bc8] has quit [Quit: Client limit exceeded: 20000] 09:01 -!- merkle_noob[m] [~merklenoo@2001:470:69fc:105::bad0] has quit [Quit: Client limit exceeded: 20000] 18:51 < dpc[m]> I've been talking about RGB over LN, and looks like there's still something I don't understand. When a LN channel is opened, and includes an RGB token, I understand that both participants in the channel can keep updating (and validating before signing) the ownership and any other state changes. 18:51 < dpc[m]> But does it mean a token like this is locked within a channel and can't leave it without closing it? Seems like fundamentally ownership can't be transmitted to anyone else outside of the channel, because such a 3rd party can't trust that channel owners eventually actually close the channel (and thus the single use seal) respecting the previous ownership transfer. 19:57 < dpc[m]> And just to mention one idea we had when talking about it among Polish Bitcoin members. Seems like passing RGB token in L2 is better (in some ways) than passing sats around LN channels. There's just no problem of receiving capacity. If some form of a trustless or semi-trustless "RGB wrapped BTC" token could be introduced, it could be used as complementary (to help with receiving capacity) or a replacement to LN altogether. 20:07 < dpc[m]> After thinking about it a bit longer, I'm not sure if we haven't confused ourselves here. :D --- Log closed Fri Nov 19 00:00:37 2021