Live data from Hacker News

The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

papers.ssrn.com

271–280 of 448 posts

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#271
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems unlikely to me, since income tax has to be paid by recipients whether payment is in coin or in kind. BTC is a kind. If I pay you in silver rounds, you are responsible for paying income tax for the convertible value of the silver at the time of payment, but not capital gains at any point.

sales tax, not income tax. someone has to calculate, report, and remit it for all these micro transactions somehow. I thought that is what GP was referring to , may be mistaken. In that context cap gains vs other sorts of income is irrelevant.

In this case it's definitely income, see https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/207477063-US-C..., the scenario is directly analogous to Patreon or tipping a Twitch streamer.

They may also owe sales tax! https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043054911-P...

Which, yikes, no wonder running your own business is such a drag, that feels like double-dipping to me. I didn't owe sales tax when I was freelancing, but it is what it is.

Either way though, it's not any sort of headache, because the dollar is still used as unit of account, and what's owed is the value at the time of transaction: what you owe on $500 delivered in BTC is what you owe on $500, presuming you turn it into cash within a year (IANAL, I recall that goods paid in kind become investments after a year, such that gains are owed if sold at a profit).

The problematic tax situation is when someone buys some Bitcoin, and then wants to spend it, since you have to figure out gains on each transaction and report it correctly, that's a huge hassle. I suspect most people who sincerely try to pay capital gains on Bitcoin purchases get it wrong: if you buy 0.1 BTC at 7K and 0.1 BTC at 45K, then spend $1000 worth at 20K, what capital gains do you owe? Does it depend on which wallet you reached into?

I have no idea and, really, feel like I shouldn't have to have any idea. It's the main thing that keeps me from paying in BTC when a vendor likes that form of payment. I could maybe pay a month's rent with the coin in my cushions, I have it because it tickles my fancy to pay for things with magic internet money, but it's just not worth the paperwork to actually do it.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm of the opinion that the rules are behind the law when it comes to BTC. I am deeply uninterested in being anywhere near the legal case that challenges this! But currency exchange for 'ordinary purposes' is not taxed, if my company bought some Euros to pay for foreign goods and the Euro rallied against the dollar before the purchase, no tax is owed. Well, BTC is legal tender in El Salvador, and there's no rule that…

Bitcoin is generally considered a security, not a currency.

Yes, and I'm saying that while the rulings of the SEC on this subject consider it a security, I don't believe the law is on their side any longer, since El Salvador declared it legal tender. That straightforwardly makes it a currency, and I don't believe there is any treaty framework for a country to say "lol no, your currency is fake, it's actually a security to us".

Can you imagine the hassle if a country adopted Apple stock as a legal tender? That's basically what happened last year.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#273

Why use LN when other simple L1 solutions already work great as money. Litecoin (LTC) has cheap fees and lots of room. Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is constantly improving and has a ton of transaction room to grow, with increases if/when demand grows. Dogecoin (DOGE) not my favorite, but does work fine for the money use-case, but development, from what I can see is a bit stale. With these existing simple solutions, I don't see…

All those have problems. A huge amount of transactions in a distributed ledger means there’s a big requirement for storage space and processing power, there’s no way around it.

Lightning reduces the amount of transactions that must be in the ledger, and in consequence the storage requirements can be kept down. The BCH model of just increasing the block size indefinitely is not sustainable.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm consistently surprised by HN's lack of vision in this area. The idea of a Network State / Internet-native economy is a cyberpunk dream, and crypto enables that. The constant doubt, rejection, and preference for SV-startup solutions is the opposite of what I would expect from a "Hacker Community" but I suppose HN is literally full of VCs (particularly FinTech) that don't want the competition from open crypto solut…

> I'm consistently surprised by HN's lack of vision in this area. The idea of a Network State / Internet-native economy is a cyberpunk dream, and crypto enables that. How so? Isn't the "cyberpunk dream" a dystopia?

Not for me. This issue in particular seems to polarize our community.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#275
post #264

I've stopped following bitcoin at a deep level for some time. Could someone summarize for me what changes/problems led current bitcoin to need lightning?

Lightning Network has been going on for years, I at least recall reading about it in 2017 when I started looking into bitcoin

The idea of the Lightning Network is to allow transactions to exist on a separate layer where in theory transaction fees don't have to exist. & transactions don't have to wait for the next block. This allows for microtransactions etc. There are some blockchain transaction fees involved in creating channels & resolving disputes

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#276
post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The 1.5-3.5% credit card processing fee for starters. Compared to... 1 dollar, no, 15 dollars, no, 5 dollars, no, 65 dollars, no, ... transaction fees for Bitcoin.

How much are Lightning transaction fees?

Between 1 to 100 satoshi usually - so fractions of a cent. (1 BTC = 100 000 000 sats)

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm consistently surprised by HN's lack of vision in this area. The idea of a Network State / Internet-native economy is a cyberpunk dream, and crypto enables that. How so? Isn't the "cyberpunk dream" a dystopia?

Not for me. This issue in particular seems to polarize our community.

> Not for me. This issue in particular seems to polarize our community.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberpunk:

> Cyberpunk is a subgenre of science fiction in a dystopian futuristic setting that tends to focus on a "combination of lowlife and high tech",[1] featuring futuristic technological and scientific achievements, such as artificial intelligence and cybernetics, juxtaposed with societal collapse or decay.

It's the kind of world that's better to look at than actually inhabit.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not still early days. Bitcoin was created 13 years ago, it was useless for payments back then and it's still useless for payments now. Every direction that anyone takes it will be in the direction of some kind of pure money-making thing, usually in the form of a ponzi or pyramid scheme. This has happened over and over again for 13 years. There's simply no one else interested in building on this because everyone…

tired and copypasta-like impulsive response written in hysterics is why you're getting downvoted

It's only tired and copypasta-like because it can't be refuted. He's right. Cryptocurrency had it's shot, here's what we got out of it:

1. People trying to make a currency or interoperable token that they can directly or indirectly profit from

2. People trying to replace traditional object-relational databases or P2P networking with the Blockchain

Neither of those are particularly meaningful to the average person. They buy their Cherry Pepsi with a Mastercard and then listen to Podcasts on Spotify or the preinstalled iPhone app. People won't care about this stuff until it's meaningfully integrated into our lives, which is something all of these cryptocurrencies have failed to do. There is no killer app, there is no data revolution. People have been beating this decentralization drum for decades, and nothing happened. If you think that Cryptocurrency is going to deliver us from surveillance capitalism into another digital golden age, then you're failing to see the entire picture. Luckily, proving this thesis right is simple: we just have to wait and watch as cryptocurrency values continue to plummet, and as VC interest in Blockchain-backed technology dries up. It's looking increasingly correct with every passing day.

It's fun being starry-eyed about cool tech, but the Blockchain is a failed experiment. Our suspected fears are true: running an anonymous, distributed and append-only ledger where anyone can be an operator is a bad idea.

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Money is already digital. We know, which being in a centralized MySQL database at the Fed made bailing out all the US elites in 2008 very easy.

The Fed didn't bail out anyone in 2008. Treasury did. Also, the bail-outs weren't grants, they were loans, and they have been re-paid yielding $110B in profit so far with plenty more to come. [1] I was opposed to bail-outs in 2008 personally, but in retrospect it's very difficult to look back and say that it was anything other than an unequivocal success. Hundreds of thousands of jobs were saved and it was super prof…

Yes they did, Maiden Lane [1], which was distinct from TARP you are referring to. I had a somewhat upfront seat at that time and the unequivocal success narrative is, in my opinion, extremely dishonest and manipulative.

We haven’t even started to talk about QE which is actually why the Fed and TARP bailouts (aka investments) ended up being profitable. There are a huge number of losers from 2008 which can’t be seen from a superficial surface view, instead it requires playing out an alternate reality where liquidations were forced, and that is a complex and difficult discussion. Paulson was a brilliant spin doctor and so successful that his fake stories of hundreds of thousands of jobs saved and ATMs that didn’t run out of money is being taken as real history, instead of the evil deceptive game it was to insure all his people continued to dominate global finance. It would take a long discussion to try and explain to you how profoundly unethical and manipulative were the actions they took and the effects those actions still have today in terms of extreme inequality, caused not by capitalism itself, but this crony capitalism.

Bitcoin was born from this reality and highly motivated by it. For a certain generation of finance technologists who had a close view of the inner workings of the system it was obviously rotten and corrupt to the core. The core being fiat.

If you are trying to pretend that by explaining M1 and M3 and the creation of money supply you claim somehow USD is “federated” and not centralized then in my opinion you don’t actually understand what you think you do.

Maybe read up on the Fed window and QE mechanisms and their balance sheet. USD is centralized with Fedwire, OCC, Treasury, Swift, BIS and all their regulatory operations, so they have very good information on most digital dollars in existence and certainly have incredible control over their creation and destruction.

Bitcoin is likely here to stay and in my personal experience most people who hate on it were once believers who bought high then sold low after one of its crashes. they now how a very bitter taste and have decided there is some fundamental flaw with it as an idea, mostly motivated by their own emotions and not logic. the other haters tend to have some deranged love of governments and see it correctly as a challenge to government power so attempt to discredit it, I feel mostly out of anxiety the government isn’t what they think it is and it scares them.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maiden_Lane_Transactions

Re: The Lightning Network: Turning Bitcoin into Money

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It keeps many of the properties of bitcoin: - decentralised - trustless - censure resistance Edit: - pseudonymous

I'm confused by your comment, L2 transactions are by definition run by centralized entities.

With LN you can have a private channel with your friend and do unlimited number of transactions with (literally!) 0 fees. Thanks to recent developments it's also much easier (and cheaper) to then swap those BTC to onchain - sometimes even cheaper than a comparable single onchain BTC transactions.
Post reply on HN