Wut? That first statement made no sense.
I’m asking what about the protocol is broken and needs to be fixed besides the unix timestamp issue? I’m guessing nothing since you didn’t point it out.
The problem it fixes is well understood. I didn’t get here yesterday. Yes, i think the problem is appropriately addressed.
These protocol changes are motivated by ideological reasons not catastrophic flaws in bitcoin’s design. “Everyone needs to own a UTXO” and the like. It’s not as if satoshi didn’t know not everyone was not going to be able to transact on L1.
Login to reply
Replies (2)
The problem is UTXO ownership that doesn't scale. Resulting in capture and then the protocol is what the capturing party says it is. If everyone can always go to main chain consensus, capture becomes deterred.
"A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution."
If I am unable to go to main chain, I am now going through a financial institution.