- principal --> Major
- I would not call cost a risk. The opening fee IMHO is not a risk, it is simply a cost.
- commas
- in reference to time "immediately" better than "directly"
- added another example, to explain when not to create a channel
- no commas when subject is the same on both parts of sentence
- nothing seems to be gained by introducing concept of "traffic" --> removed it
- instead explained what the scarce resources are
- more explanations
- etc.
- again, avoid extreme terms like "really high" that cannot be quantified.
- you do not gain the entire channel capacity, gain means "benefit", if 9 mBTC out of the 10 mBTC channel capacity were yours anyway, you would GET 10 mBTC but only GAIN 1 mBTC.
- additions
- mention of game theory
- etc
- simplified
- reduced sentence length
- comma after thus
- with respect to time "immediately" is better than "directly"
- avoid extremes, replaced "much higher" with "higher", later we specify the figure 5x anyway
- "additional" better than "more"
- misc clarifications
- some additions
- etc
- closing tx, shutdown tx, etc: to avoid any confusion I took the "shutdown tx" out and simply named it the "on-chain tx"
- replaced "party" with "channel partner" for consistency
- removed "as many people think". If the book does a good job, not many people will think that ! In any case, this phrase does not help. Better to just state the facts.
- etc
- Bitcoin: uppercase as it refers to fees on the Bitcoin protocol
- added more detail on importance of longevity of channel
- the last sentence was way too long and too complicated. restructured it.
- etc
- added distinction between "public" and "private" channel, added the 2 terms
- rename 2-2 to 2-out-of-2 for consistency and to make it clearer
- simplified a few sentences
- added a few additional clarifying words
- etc
- comma after however
- when referring to time "immediately" is better and more meaningful than "directly"
- when referring to time duration "lasts" is better than "is"
- consistency: "channel partner" better than "party"
- etc
- replace "capacity" with "funds to reduce tech jargon
- replaced 2-2 with 2-out-of-2 for consistency and to clarify
- everyone --> singular .. its funds .. not their funds
- "wallet" wrong, "address" better
- avoid "flaw", it might get misinterpreted, rephrased to clearly state that we present the design step-by-step
- "you probably have realized" and "hope you recognize that" puts the reader in a bind. If the reader does not see the problem we will feel "dumb" because the text implies "probably you realized". I suggest to rewrite it so, that the reader does not feel "dumb" just because he does not see the shortcut. --> see changes
- however requires comma
- avoid extremes like "rather high", use facts and measurable units, here simply "high"
- "to lose funds" incorrect, "loose" is correct
- took one long sentence and split it up into several short one making understanding a lot simpler
- etc
- peer-to-peer better than "peer 2 peer" , in acronyms p2p is ok
- English language guidelines recommend numbers up to 12 to be spelled out. 4 --> four
- minor additions/clarifications
The travis linter is too strict and we keep failing builds. This is a bit like taking the batteries out of the smoke alarm, or using aluminum foil to replace a fuse, or both. Everything is fine!
- replace "committing attack" with "performing attack" to avoid that the reader incorrectly concludes that the term "commitment tx" has anything to do with "committing an attack"
- signed by, not signed from
- consistently sticking to "2-out-of-2"
- rephrasing some sentences to make them more palatable. "obviously a lie" is a bit aggressive.
- avoid using exaggerating terms like "very expensive", just state the facts without too many emotions
- as before "2-out-of-2" is more appropriate than "2-2"
- "thus" is not what you wanted to express, "however" is what you wanted to say
- added missing comma
- etc
- "the both of you": incorrect English, better "both of you"
- "cheat on you": spoken English, better "cheat you"
- "had to be", that sounds like you are guessing, better "was"
- if you give full names of some, give full names of all
- added year to make it more precise
- etc.
- comma must follow "additionally" and "however" as they are introductory words or phrases
- same for "last but not least", comma missing
- "nothing else than", not perfect English; better "nothing but"
- "get most use", not perfect English; better "get more benefits"
Olaoluwa Osuntokun
8go
Andrea Cabral
Hugo Doyon
Rene Pickhardt
Andreas M. Antonopoulos
HAOYUatHZ
Kory Newton
Roman