Mr. Word Name and picture from twetch — not on-chain. The signature is; the profile is not.

ETH L1 will never “scale” in the sense that whatever sequential throughout it has, it will still have fees growing proportionally to MEV. L1 on ETH2 can be 20x faster and it doesn’t matter, there’s still only one “first transaction” each block.

So you can use the defi “app” as a protocol and compose them. L2s fracture liquidity, fundamentally for the same reason. Gas fees are a multiple higher than they “should” be because of transactions racing for MEV.

Things like uni and atomic aggregators like 1inch are most useful in the most general shared L1 state space, no admin backdoors or market hours. There are ways to parallelize this stuff beyond sharding while keeping L1 properties but BSV is locked down.

You’ll see how certain features of bitcoin L1 limit native composability across independent apps, but this leaves room for EVM like overlays. The general case of your dex would be to run an EVM shard. Good to think about when people would choose to use it.

You’ll have to tell me your definition of “centralized” if you want a more specific answer. Aren’t currently many eth defi apps “centralized, non custodial” by your definition? USDC?

Composability in a way youcan’t get from web2 APIs or with the current approaches to dapps on BSV. Non custodial is critical to silo admin risk. “Permissionless” means I can use it any semantically valid way, including with self imposed legal constraints

I’ve lost crypto keys before, but I still use crypto. At some point the risk of a locked down contract malfunction is worth it. I’ve been impacted by EVM “contract” malfunctions before, but I still use them. FIs mad that market still judges it less risky.

Crucially these companies can deploy whatever else they want to manipulate their shares without some financial services company and legal team having to build it for them. “Compliant by construction” requires open composability

You can put whitelisted/revokable tokens into uni like pools. So if you mean “centralized” in that e.g. each company has to control its shareholders, I agree. Point is the new primitives like uni LP use and compose these without introducing a new entity.

We can split hairs about “decentralized” but Uniswap is fully decentralized by any meaningful use of the word assuming you use the ipfs gui

Likewise Uniswap is good for users AND actual regulators. It’s only bad for “regulators” that want to gatekeep to extract rent.

The trend will be for defi projects to continue to permanently lock themselves out of admin rights and the regulators will come to like this

A lot of things are “legally impossible”, they said USDC was legally impossible and now it’s prime contender for the US CBDC template

“On” but like “over” as in “over”lay network. Smart contracts on TCP/IP, betcha didn’t think we could do that

Smart contracts “in” my computer

Composability? In L1? Sounds illegal

Can’t wait for custodial BSV “defi” and confusion about why nobody is using it

There’s always a way it can be more weird

https://twetch.app/t/6b7e15d4199d83df19fd6f79ba8a4105f8c94855f4f206b09a06b14522573504

His suggestion would kill this site and I think he kind of knows it

BCC, bitcoin classic, much better name tbqh

We can just have all tickers mean BSV

No wait the point is you can’t profit from it because it’s provable costly signal. In other words I could have gotten the coin

https://twetch.app/t/e5f47d650db93f71e05e705cd07933b06a6c60f1abd5f16b55582730cd9a8cfe

I’m not, even if it seems that way. It’s a bit of a jab at team BSV’s doublespeak

Typically you would use trademarks for this kind of truth setting. Words and names, rules and games !

If there are two versions and each claim the other is a deviation from the set in stone “concept” then truth is defined by aforementioned litigation. If what you said were true we would not have any forks ever.