• blackwraith joined the channel
      • sausage_factory has quit
      • dkings joined the channel
      • fibonacci has quit
      • blackwraith has quit
      • d9b4bef9 joined the channel
      • CheckDavid has quit
      • cdecker joined the channel
      • c-cex-yuriy has quit
      • fibonacci joined the channel
      • bildramer1 has quit
      • bildramer joined the channel
      • frib joined the channel
      • frib
        how scalable is mimble wimble in terms of transactions / day?
      • bsm1175321
        Mimblewimble doesn't really add scalability enhancements. It's a fungibility enhancement.
      • frib
        i thought it "hit two birds with one stone" ?
      • pero0 joined the channel
      • pero0 has quit
      • pero has quit
      • pero0 joined the channel
      • pero0 is now known as pero
      • gmaxwell
        bsm1175321: that isn't correct.
      • MW eliminates the need for any node to store most historical data, and eliminates the need to transfer it in syncing.
      • bsm1175321
        Good point.
      • sipa
        bsm1175321: its fungibility/privacy is similar (and perhaps a bit better due to simpler coinjojn) than CT
      • and conpared to CT, it is a massive scaling improvement
      • compared to bitcoin as it exists today, it's also a scalability improvement in asymptotics, but with a terrible constant factor
      • Emcy_ joined the channel
      • Emcy_ has quit
      • Emcy_ joined the channel
      • bsm1175321
        Yes...I've explained Monero/RingCT to a few people this week...(they use CT). The scalability implications are scary. 10x worse AFAICT. MW is better.
      • gmaxwell