Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know the vast majority has been trying to do it?
As measured by the fact that every major bitcoin company and mining pool has explicitly said that they want these changes to take place? They want these changes to happen, they just want the Core Development team to say that they are going to stay out of the way, and not attempt to burn the whole thing down if they don't get their way.
Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
31–40 of 115 posts
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#32It's not possible to do extremely small micropayments on bitcoin directly as people use it today. Bitcoin's made a lot of promises around micropayments, but doing it in an economical way has tradeoffs, especially if you're talking about millions to billions of transactions per second. In fact it's not possible to extremely small micropayments on ANY platform. Try sending $0.001 to someone once. It's not possible. The closest you're probably going to get is sending someone an item on Steam (and there's no easy way to price the items). The reason for this is underwriting costs, it's too expensive for Visa to process it since they're assuming some liability. Even Paypal, who ostensibly should be doing this, charges $0.30 for payments for goods and services.
Lightning allows for micropayments to actually happen because custody is still pushed to the edges, so you don't have the same kinds of underwriting risk.
This means that something as simple as paying someone $0.001 over the internet one time will become viable this year. The amount of possible business models and use cases could dramatically shift. Users may not know they're using Bitcoin (your application could hide it and abstract it away), but people are getting paid in a way they could not before (even centralized systems did not exist, let alone decentralized ones). Pay-per-click webpages, massive decentralized CDNs, creating API services without a username/password to make onboarding seamless (you paid? you're done!).
We're working on code here: http://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd It's MIT licenced and will soon have some pretty simple APIs to use. Of course, since this stuff will be in testing for a little while, make sure you only use small amounts/micropayments initially when it's released.
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#33For the HN crowd passing by, here's why this stuff could be interesting to you. It's not possible to do extremely small micropayments on bitcoin directly as people use it today. Bitcoin's made a lot of promises around micropayments, but doing it in an economical way has tradeoffs, especially if you're talking about millions to billions of transactions per second. In fact it's not possible to extremely small micropaym…
This has been possible for many years.
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#34For the HN crowd passing by, here's why this stuff could be interesting to you. It's not possible to do extremely small micropayments on bitcoin directly as people use it today. Bitcoin's made a lot of promises around micropayments, but doing it in an economical way has tradeoffs, especially if you're talking about millions to billions of transactions per second. In fact it's not possible to extremely small micropaym…
Say I want to pay Bob $0.001. That's too small for a bitcoin transaction since the fee is higher than that. So from what I understand I would "load" say $10 into the lightning network then create a transaction over the network to Bob for $0.001. Say tons of other people do this and now Bob is sitting on $10. How does he turn that into actual Bitcoin? Like get it out of the lightning network. Doesn't he have to close off all those thousands of channels?
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#35For the HN crowd passing by, here's why this stuff could be interesting to you. It's not possible to do extremely small micropayments on bitcoin directly as people use it today. Bitcoin's made a lot of promises around micropayments, but doing it in an economical way has tradeoffs, especially if you're talking about millions to billions of transactions per second. In fact it's not possible to extremely small micropaym…
You can send someone one Linden in Second Life (the virtual world), i.e. over the Internet. One Linden works out to about 0.004 US dollars. (It depends on the exchange rate, which is determined by an open market.) This has been possible for many years.
I think the big difference here is that obviously decentralization is nice, but the real issue is that Linden could do it because they simply didn't become big enough to be a target. There were some attacks at the edges, but if you wanted to do what Linden did at Visa-scale, they would quickly put a stop to it with chargebacks.
Adversarial problems are far easier at smaller scale, but it is a good point, thanks for the correction! It may be more accurate to say nobody's done it where it could be conceptually feasible at high-scale/volume with dedicated adversaries (many of the Linden exchanges solved this with high exchange rates to buy in, e.g. Virwox).
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
As measured by the fact that every major bitcoin company and mining pool has explicitly said that they want these changes to take place? They want these changes to happen, they just want the Core Development team to say that they are going to stay out of the way, and not attempt to burn the whole thing down if they don't get their way.
If they want them to happen the Core Development team can't do anything to stop it. They can huff and puff but if everyone moves to another fork they lose all power. So if every major company and mining pool really wants it why haven't they gone around the core developers and coordinated a move?
Basically, they can scare people into thinking that there is going to be two separate, competing chains. This would cause prices to crash , and crash hard.
Because of this threat to burn the whole thing to the ground, they prevent the community from acting in the first place, even though it has the support to do so.
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#37I'm still not sure how I feel about implementing a layer over the Bitcoin network like this instead of just fixing the inherent flaws with the protocol. Especially when said network is being pushed by the company Blockstream which is known for shady practices.
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#38For the HN crowd passing by, here's why this stuff could be interesting to you. It's not possible to do extremely small micropayments on bitcoin directly as people use it today. Bitcoin's made a lot of promises around micropayments, but doing it in an economical way has tradeoffs, especially if you're talking about millions to billions of transactions per second. In fact it's not possible to extremely small micropaym…
Question for you. Say I want to pay Bob $0.001. That's too small for a bitcoin transaction since the fee is higher than that. So from what I understand I would "load" say $10 into the lightning network then create a transaction over the network to Bob for $0.001. Say tons of other people do this and now Bob is sitting on $10. How does he turn that into actual Bitcoin? Like get it out of the lightning network. Doesn't…
At any time either party can close out the channel unilaterally by broadcasting the most recent state. The person that broadcasted it gets refunded after a delay (assuming the uncooperative case where the other party in the channel goes off the Antarctica or something -- in a cooperative case, both parties close out immediately with the current balance).
Leaving coins in LN is fully backed on-chain, of course, since these are real bitcoin transactions passed around. The added benefit is you can transact instantly in high volume, so coins in LN will probably have more use than coins off LN when it comes to payments.
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they want them to happen the Core Development team can't do anything to stop it. They can huff and puff but if everyone moves to another fork they lose all power. So if every major company and mining pool really wants it why haven't they gone around the core developers and coordinated a move?
Yes they can do things to stop it. They can refuse to update core. They can say that they have 10% of the mining power and threaten to not move over to the hard fork. Basically, they can scare people into thinking that there is going to be two separate, competing chains. This would cause prices to crash , and crash hard. Because of this threat to burn the whole thing to the ground, they prevent the community from act…
Doesn't matter the majority of users have moved to the new fork. That becomes the new core.
>They can say that they have 10% of the mining power and threaten to not move over to the hard fork.
Why would this matter? That 10% of miners will move over quickly or lose money by mining on a fork with no value.
>Basically, they can scare people into thinking that there is going to be two separate, competing chains.
There would be but since the majority of users and miners and companies want the one you want theirs would be losing right?
>This would cause prices to crash , and crash hard.
Why? If the vast majority want the change then they will just continue on as normal. It's only the people still using the old fork that will have problems.
None of these problems exist if the majority truely wants the change.
Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know the vast majority has been trying to do it?
As measured by the fact that every major bitcoin company and mining pool has explicitly said that they want these changes to take place? They want these changes to happen, they just want the Core Development team to say that they are going to stay out of the way, and not attempt to burn the whole thing down if they don't get their way.