b0xxer/web
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update docs/liquid/liquid-part3.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
b0xxer 2024-02-06 06:31:18 -06:00
parent d6b64b8c05
commit 682d4b1f0a
1 changed files with 5 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

5
docs/liquid/liquid-part3.md
View File

@ -233,6 +233,11 @@ In theory, you should now have your own federation on your very own sidechain.
* Given the above, proponents of Covenants could build some of their use-cases on Liquid. The big debate happening around Covenant OPCODE inclusion has stalled in a chicken-v-egg style standoff. One side is saying: *Show us use-cases of this solving the problems you claim it can* and the other responding *we first need the OPCODEs to build these things*. A potential solution is for Covenant proponents to go build their use-cases on Liquid. Obviously Blockstream thinks these OPCODEs are safe.
* Could Fedimints / eCash mints find ways to utilize custom sidechains based on Elements as a way to prove to users that they are not debasing eCash tokens via Frac Reserve? (record eCash issuance as asset issuances on federated sidechain?)
* Could the community spin up our own Federated version of Liquid?
* On **Federation Trusting**. The most hotly debated topic around Liquid is can we trust the Federation to not censure us? I think these are reasonable concerns (but largely overblown).
- The group Liquid Members includes some of the most traditionally pro-Bitcoin groups.
- Has there ever been a documented case of censorship in its 6+ year existence?
- Given Confidential Transactions, it seems to be fairly trivial to bypass any censorship attemps. Remember, not even Federation Members can know what is being transacted, nor what is held in any individual address.
* Lastly, let's mention the elephant in the room: *Liquid Derangement Syndrome*. A fair number of complaints against Liquid seem to not based on specific technical or security concerns, but almost seems political in nature. Could this just be hate against Blockstream from other corporate entities? Or is it a fear response, based on the perceived power Blockstream has in the industry? I'm not sure to be honest. There are tradeoffs with any L2, and it seems that Liquid offers a very nice balance of security & features for risk taken on. It is noteworthy that even though Fedimints project is primarily sponsored by Lightning Labs, they are not subject to the same sort of irrational fear-based responses.
[^1]: BlockStream Green, AQUA, Anser (web wallet), Specter, Marina (web wallet)
[^2]: Atomic Swaps allow parties to exchange different tokens directly without the need for a 3rd party, eliminating most of the risk of fraud and counterparty default.In fact, Blockstream has a tool to simplify using it.