...but I thought that the scalability came from centralization, i.e off chain transactions.
Prepare to be shocked, as everyone else will be when I launch the Bitcoin killer.
Re-read my prior post, as I edited it.
isnt that what zerotime did?
No. Zerotime speeds up confirmation of transactions, but it actually can't scale because it requires all the nodes to vote on all the "instant" ("zero" time) transactions.
Note the transactions are not really instant nor zero time, because the voting process requires network propagation over many nodes with multifarious latencies and network hiccups.
Zerotime would also be vulnerable to Sybil attack but we can't prove that on the highly centralized testnet nor accurately test how likely or unlikely such an attack would be, because afaik the testnet is largely controlled by Vlanders supporters (i.e. centralized in that respect). Besides, I don't have time to waste for any silly little bounty on proving John's designs are broken. I am rushed on more important/lucrative work to complete.
John's anonymity technology also is weak.
John appears to be a former Bittorrent programmer who is in over his head in block chain tech. From what I've seen thus far, he is making more hype than actual technical advances that matter. The recent lashing out against Monero was mostly lame and a sign of desperation, although I've also heard from others that Monero is very abusive to the disk storage so he may have a valid point about Monero killing SSDs.
Sorry to criticize but you asked a question and this thread asks a question, so I am giving you frank feedback. You are welcome to try to destroy my credibility (which is the usual reaction of Vlanders to my posts), but it won't help you as I will release far superior technology later this year.