Bitcoin Forum
May 06, 2024, 06:04:45 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: [10/10/2018] Blockstream Liquid Sidechain Solution for Bitcoin Network Goes Live  (Read 178 times)
Lmaooo (OP)
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 694
Merit: 108


santacoin.io


View Profile
October 10, 2018, 11:14:46 PM
 #1

The Liquid Network sidechain for the Bitcoin (BTC) blockchain went live on Sept. 27, according to an Oct. 10 post from Blockstream.

Blockstream is a blockchain development company founded in 2014, with Samson Mow as its CSO. The Liquid Network project, first announced in 2015, was then launched by Mow and Joseph Weinberg of Paycase in 2017 in order to allow for better liquidity between Bitcoin exchanges and brokers.

According to Blockstream’s blog post, the Liquid blockchain generated its first block on Sept. 27, 2018 at 1:29 UTC with participation from 23 crypto industry members including Bitfinex, OKCoin, BitMEX, and the SIX Digital Exchange.

The blog post explains that Liquid aims to allow for faster transactions with Bitcoin between businesses and individuals with the use of its features. These include a native Liquid Bitcoin (L-BTC) asset backed by a “two-way peg” to Bitcoin, Issued Assets bringing “bitcoin-like features to traditional assets,” and its Confidential Transaction Technology.

Blockstream’s post also notes that more features will be added in the future, including the integration of the GreenAddress wallet and third-party hardware wallet support from Ledger and Trezor.

According to the FAQ page, the Liquid Network differs from the Lightning Network (LN) — a second-layer solution for Bitcoin — in that its transactions are not “limited in amount to channel capacity.” In July, payment service CoinGate launched an LN trial for 100 merchants, including esports betting websites, online stores with crypto merchandise, and adult entertainment websites.

reference: https://cointelegraph.com/news/blockstreams-liquid-sidechain-solution-for-bitcoin-network-goes-live

1714975485
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714975485

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714975485
Reply with quote  #2

1714975485
Report to moderator
1714975485
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714975485

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714975485
Reply with quote  #2

1714975485
Report to moderator
1714975485
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714975485

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714975485
Reply with quote  #2

1714975485
Report to moderator
It is a common myth that Bitcoin is ruled by a majority of miners. This is not true. Bitcoin miners "vote" on the ordering of transactions, but that's all they do. They can't vote to change the network rules.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714975485
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714975485

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714975485
Reply with quote  #2

1714975485
Report to moderator
1714975485
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714975485

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714975485
Reply with quote  #2

1714975485
Report to moderator
vit05
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 526



View Profile
October 11, 2018, 02:42:18 AM
 #2

Can someone put the address of deeper articles on this project? So far the biggest criticisms I've read have been about centralization. But honestly, I do not understand why this would be bad. The idea of the project is simply to provide liquidity to large players and thereby help make the price the right one. This could even decrease the volatility that occurs in some exchanges with lower volume. The most interesting thing is that by charging a Fee, the project will have to prove much better than the current arbitrage solutions.
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 3071



View Profile
October 11, 2018, 01:31:32 PM
 #3

So far the biggest criticisms I've read have been about centralization. But honestly, I do not understand why this would be bad. The idea of the project is simply to provide liquidity to large players

There's a certain legitimacy to that argument, but you could equally argue that Liquid is only making an oligopoly (the exchanges) more centralised, which could in the long term break any illusions that the exchanges are as independent as they would like clients to believe.


and thereby help make the price the right one.

If there's a real marketplace for BTC, there's no such thing as a "correct price". Only controlled (i.e. rigged) marketplaces can claim that prices are "correct".


This could even decrease the volatility that occurs in some exchanges with lower volume. The most interesting thing is that by charging a Fee, the project will have to prove much better than the current arbitrage solutions.

The other interesting idea is that you can issue tokens backed by something other than BTC. Exchanges could use that to manage fiat liquidity, and so create a stablecoin in the process. If all the exchanges depended on such a stablecoin for liquidity, the stablecoin itself would be less exposed to 1 exchange going bust (that would still rock the peg seriously, but it need not definitively kill the coin, as would happen to USDT if Bitfinex did actually go bankrupt).

Even better: if that hypothetical stablecoin could be used without using the exchanges themselves, decentralised platforms could use it too. The ultimate would be if atomic swaps between such a stable coin and BTC could happen, then individuals could trade the stablecoin with BTC freely and quickly, and the exchanges could provide the price stability for the stablecoin. In that scenario, you could actually see an improvement in the decentralisation of cryptocurrency exchange; why hold BTC with a 3rd party if you don't need to? The centralised exchanges would end up trading only the stablecoin as a result (probably why this won't happen, but things are heading in that direction one way or another anyway)

Vires in numeris
bobthegrownup
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 194
Merit: 29


View Profile
November 04, 2018, 09:13:28 AM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1)
 #4

I'm in love with this project. Much needed solution for the Bitcoin ecosystem.

The article seems to incorrectly  describe how Liquid differs from Lightning -- is it really only channel capacity limitations?
adam3us
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 404
Merit: 359


in bitcoin we trust


View Profile WWW
November 04, 2018, 11:50:48 AM
 #5

Can someone put the address of deeper articles on this project? So far the biggest criticisms I've read have been about centralization. But honestly, I do not understand why this would be bad. The idea of the project is simply to provide liquidity to large players and thereby help make the price the right one. This could even decrease the volatility that occurs in some exchanges with lower volume. The most interesting thing is that by charging a Fee, the project will have to prove much better than the current arbitrage solutions.

this podcast has more detail https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/the-bitcoin-game-60-dr-adam-back-part-2-liquid

hashcash, committed transactions, homomorphic values, blind kdf; researching decentralization, scalability and fungibility/anonymity
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!