From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23413C0037 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 09:12:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBA564160F for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 09:12:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org EBA564160F Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sonic.net header.i=@sonic.net header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=net23 header.b=AI+wrSdy X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.799 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6eJOmP-yTVWN for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 09:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c.mail.sonic.net (c.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.80]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F84D41607 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 09:11:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 1F84D41607 Received: from webmail.sonic.net (a.webmail.sonic.net [184.23.169.31]) (authenticated bits=0) by c.mail.sonic.net (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPA id 4039Bwwo025966; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 01:11:58 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sonic.net; s=net23; t=1704273119; bh=d5VT/34n6+kVEGc2fq7H7YXQ8Da9gp8bKGntb9Sdw4Q=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:From:Subject; b=AI+wrSdyGMC9mcy0U0sMEzJlTOGHbmOqNJ4zCeE5WpoDqEAzexvBhwWYLUuSBs9Gb Phlo/fFgUFiLBgrHJAC34rGwcPhmW2zMuxBSwtq0hdp/mJ1/qM2/j4Bp+8maC4ITSv JB6twJDE13zm6EcHMn2zhN8Z8gH6BTZ6ObonY4OyPw859B4FtNJoBphny0xFB3niIc +pY+En0xdq3Hl/rDpQtIU9XwnMJy5ANLwxRXpvNWgHojzYkhzD1VKJc7plGfEIM7QZ uA4aYwO/Mw7Tfy3rzh5IDA9QT6VkwdDLp+QlbvcGaJJABC8Zr7OdcG5D3vpj7caUcM fWBng23gA9uaQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2024 01:11:58 -0800 From: Brad Morrison To: Erik Aronesty In-Reply-To: References: <980df778-cc94-4f98-8eb1-cbb321883369@gmail.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.17 X-Sonic-Auth: F2670XPBhbCZK7i2ZvqvU5ehBZ4RVvZ55liU6OHwY2kU3YA8lawH/XlrnXAFra1swQaEvOKePkTNinwZ64skwGBZgUHuU90Vw0sJxZsi364= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_6794355418408ac65cc63d78c74555ca" X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVYX+X8P0WKUApa7Eipe0siuAUyynuPMDMYShE0CEeB52ldt3c98tAJz/I/MH4H8emd+sipumdnQuR3sF2PdfscDl0P90iGZlP8= X-Sonic-ID: C;pH2XJRiq7hGjcrt3R+6Zsg== M;xCa6JRiq7hGjcrt3R+6Zsg== X-Sonic-Spam-Details: -0.0/5.0 by cerberusd X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 03 Jan 2024 16:20:16 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ordinal Inscription Size Limits X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2024 09:12:01 -0000 --=_6794355418408ac65cc63d78c74555ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Erik/all, Are you saying that node capacity is the primary technical limiting factor to increasing adoption of bitcoin payments? UBER & Lyft payments are actually poor examples because they are not regular/monthly and I should not have used them (unless refilling existing accounts, like gift cards). But utility bills would be a much better example of an opportunity for bitcoin payments to compete with existing credit card payment systems because processing timing has the potential to be less urgent. Sharing UTXOs seems pretty minor compared to lowering transaction costs. Brad On 2024-01-01 08:08, Erik Aronesty wrote: >> . >> >> In the USA, where I am, large businesses like UBER, Lyft, and many major telecom, cable, & electric utilities process huge volumes of regular and irregular credit card payments on a monthly basis. Almost none oft hose transactions are completed in bitcoin. > > Unfortunately block size is not the limiting factor > > Main chain transactions have to be broadcast and stored on every node in the network which, as you know, cannot scale to the level of Uber payments > > Lighting and possibly ark are solutions to this problem > > Both require covenant tech of some kind to scale properly (nonrecursive is fine) > > Covenant tech (any will do, arguing about which is bike shedding at this point) allows people to share utxos and yet still maintain sovereignty over their assets > >> --=_6794355418408ac65cc63d78c74555ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

Erik/all,

Are you saying that node capacity is the primary technical limiting fact= or to increasing adoption of bitcoin payments?

UBER & Lyft payments are actually poor examples because they are not= regular/monthly and I should not have used them (unless refilling existing= accounts, like gift cards). But utility bills would be a much better examp= le of an opportunity for bitcoin payments to compete with existing credit c= ard payment systems because processing timing has the potential to be less = urgent.

Sharing UTXOs seems pretty minor compared to lowering transaction costs.=

Brad

 


On 2024-01-01 08:08, Erik Aronesty wrote:

.

In the USA, where I am, large businesses like UBER, Lyft, and many major= telecom, cable, & electric utilities process huge volumes of regular a= nd irregular credit card payments on a monthly basis. Almost none oft hose = transactions are completed in bitcoin.

 
 
Unfortunately block size is not the limiting factor
 
Main chain transactions have to be broadcast and stored o= n every node in the network which, as you know, cannot scale to the level o= f Uber payments
 
Lighting and possibly ark are solutions to this problem
 
Both require covenant tech of some kind to scale properly= (nonrecursive is fine)
 
Covenant tech (any will do, arguing about which is bike s= hedding at this point) allows people to share utxos and yet still maintain = sovereignty over their assets
 
 
 
 


--=_6794355418408ac65cc63d78c74555ca--