2 ms·
I still don't get how you can have any kind of verification of state if you make transfers off of the blockchain. After all, that's the whole freaking point of
by qwertyuiop924 10y ago
I still don't get how you can have any kind of verification of state if you make transfers off of the blockchain. After all, that's the whole freaking point of the blockchain: verifying the integrity of the transferred item, verifying the entire network state, and ensuring that fradulent coin cannot enter the network. But then, I suppose that's why I'm on XT's side.
As for Raiden itself, I think that the forthcoming return of the Snake network will largely bring cheer to those who dislike it, and largely overshadow it. [JOKE]
- edraferi 10y agoBasically, you give the counter party a transaction that they could write to the blockchain and trust that they won't because you're going to give them a better option shortly. It's kind of like giving someone a signed check for $1 and telling them "I'll give you another check for $2 tomorrow if you don't actually cash that one." The party doesn't have to trust you for the $1 you've already given them.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago...That makes forcing verification possible, but that's more like saying "I'll give you a check for one dollar that's definitely real, or you can come back tomorrow for two dollars, which might be fake." Nobody carrying out a serious financial transaction would take the ladder option.
- nemild 10y agoReal world financial transfer systems are often used for net settlements. And writing the entire history of the world's transactions on a single append-only ledger that has low throughput and costly storage may not be ideal, while approaches like Lightning might allow instantaneous transactions. Still many ifs, but if it works, there could be some interesting advantages for speed and scalability.