Lightning Network is just around the corner for about 5 years now
The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
11–20 of 448 posts
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#12Does this imply an admission that Bitcoin itself is not usable as money?
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#13Does this imply an admission that Bitcoin itself is not usable as money?
What do you think is being exchanged on the Lightning Network?
LN transactions are simply 2-of-2 multisig transactions made on-chain, where both parties can change the balance amongst themselves, and where settlement is possible at any moment.
Bitcoin isn't being used as money on-chain. Why is this controversial? Bitcoin is the equivalent of gold, which was the hardest form of money that is accepted worldwide, before bitcoin was invented. Using it as a settlement layer for higher layers is the obvious scaling solution if you wish to remain decentralised.
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#14Lightning Network is just around the corner for about 5 years now
It is being actively used daily by a vast community of users. I don't understand what you are trying to imply with your statement.
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#15Lightning is a solution that does not do what it says on the tin. It requires an on-chain transaction to open a channel, which at current block size limits requires about 75 years for everyone on earth to have one, and somewhere in the trillion dollar range in fees and the entire outstanding block reward. Factor in quadratic routing complexity, and even if you did onboard everyone it wouldn't work anyways. This is as…
Not everyone needs to open a Channel. There are custodial solutions already. You just need some Satoshis and are good to go.
Likewise, not everyone needs to create their own Visa or MasterCard. They may have their MySQL/PostgreSQL implementation where they scale and allow for many TX/s. But they don't settle all these transactions in real time. That's also done on a different, slower layer.
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#16Lightning is a solution that does not do what it says on the tin. It requires an on-chain transaction to open a channel, which at current block size limits requires about 75 years for everyone on earth to have one, and somewhere in the trillion dollar range in fees and the entire outstanding block reward. Factor in quadratic routing complexity, and even if you did onboard everyone it wouldn't work anyways. This is as…
Not everyone needs to open a Channel. There are custodial solutions already. You just need some Satoshis and are good to go. Likewise, not everyone needs to create their own Visa or MasterCard. They may have their MySQL/PostgreSQL implementation where they scale and allow for many TX/s. But they don't settle all these transactions in real time. That's also done on a different, slower layer.
Custodial solutions offer zero benefits over putting your money in a bank - and have a ton of drawbacks associated with Bitcoin people only overlook because of those benefits - and the L1 is so slow that any subset that wants to open a channel brings it to its knees.
It's not a real solution. It's something coiners distract people with whenever someone points out the obvious and glaring flaws of the L1.
[edit] To me it's pretty telling that critics offer specific quantifications (X people requires Y time) and proponents say "only some people need it!" - how many, exactly? How full do you anticipate blocks being with other things? How long is too long to open a channel? Currently it sounds like a Soviet phone line - better put in a request now otherwise you might be in your 80s before it gets installed.
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#17Is lightning just another layer 2 scaling solution? Or am I missing something?
Lighting is indeed one of the many layer 2 solutions.
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#18Does this imply an admission that Bitcoin itself is not usable as money?
If its taxed with capital gains it cant be, that law needs to change at minimum for smaller day to day transactions, say sub $600.
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not everyone needs to open a Channel. There are custodial solutions already. You just need some Satoshis and are good to go. Likewise, not everyone needs to create their own Visa or MasterCard. They may have their MySQL/PostgreSQL implementation where they scale and allow for many TX/s. But they don't settle all these transactions in real time. That's also done on a different, slower layer.
Custodial solutions offer zero benefits over putting your money in a bank - and have a ton of drawbacks associated with Bitcoin people only overlook because of those benefits - and the L1 is so slow that any subset that wants to open a channel brings it to its knees. It's not a real solution. It's something coiners distract people with whenever someone points out the obvious and glaring flaws of the L1. [edit] To me…
I'd like to counter that with the opinion that for most people, controlling their own keys isn't a priority. These are the people that don't even know there isn't any gold backing the dollar, or where money comes from. For these people, Bitcoin offers the option of digitally native money that is well suited for a rapidly digitizing world. They won't feel any problems holding their bitcoin in a walled garden maintained by banks or money transfer companies, and won't consider the counterparty-risk as something they need to be worried about.
Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not everyone needs to open a Channel. There are custodial solutions already. You just need some Satoshis and are good to go. Likewise, not everyone needs to create their own Visa or MasterCard. They may have their MySQL/PostgreSQL implementation where they scale and allow for many TX/s. But they don't settle all these transactions in real time. That's also done on a different, slower layer.
Custodial solutions offer zero benefits over putting your money in a bank - and have a ton of drawbacks associated with Bitcoin people only overlook because of those benefits - and the L1 is so slow that any subset that wants to open a channel brings it to its knees. It's not a real solution. It's something coiners distract people with whenever someone points out the obvious and glaring flaws of the L1. [edit] To me…
Look into Taproot.
Once adoption and implementation spreads, you'll realize you can open multiple channels with one on-chain transaction.
This is an evolving space and scaling happens already.
But sure, you can stick to the traditional monetary system where only a select few control the rules.
You are free to adopt Bitcoin. No one will force you :)