201–210 of 216 posts
Did the Lightning Network solve the routing problem now or are they still emulating banks by requiring permanent online super nodes?
You know what? All the hops where your TCP/IP connection has gone to allow you to write that message, were provided by devices that had to be online in order to provide you the services. EOM
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess that's true based on your definition of "trustless". But I wouldn't consider a network where as a practical matter I have to rely on a small number of centralized servers for validation "trustless".
lol, with lightning you have to rely on a small number of centralized payment hubs who will likely be strongarmed by the government into keeping tabs on transactions through KYC/AML laws. It completely breaks the fundamental and original usecase of bitcoin: peer to peer electronic cash. Now it's "first world speculator to first world speculator through intermediary financial institution electronic store-of-value". Do…
There is no requirement for this. This is FUD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LN Dev: "We're 6 months away." Dec 14th, 2015 https://mobile.twitter.com/starkness/status/6765995708984197... Something seems off with what LN claims is a p2p network, as the claim is they've created something better than BGP yet there's going to be many many race conditions if the network is ever actually used at scale and the only solution to those race conditions will be broadcasting updates to inform other nodes…
LN will have all the problems of BGP, fused with all the problems of KYC/AML/legacy financial institutions. It's truly a beautiful monstrosity. It'd be hard to come up with a more objectively inferior solution if you really tried. No longer can a new user just send a transaction and have that magical user experience, instead they have to be given permission to transact by monolithic liquidity hubs, who of course must…
> instead they have to be given permission to transact by monolithic liquidity hubs
Completely false
> who of course must take their own fee
May, and routes aren't prescribed so they may take a fee on a payment that may be routed through them.
> I would want a rate of return similar to stocks but times some multiple to account for the very high risk of my hot wallet getting hacked and losing all my money.
What. This is completely disconnected from Lightning's functionality.
Please stop spreading FUD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know what? All the hops where your TCP/IP connection has gone to allow you to write that message, were provided by devices that had to be online in order to provide you the services. EOM
And we pay large amounts of money to middlemen to access these connections. And these middlemen can often block your traffic at will. Why not just use banks at this point?
In lightning, you need only virtually connect them.
There's a literal world of difference between the two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>But what happens if a watchdog has an outage? Locktimes are currently on the order of days (roughly 3 days IIRC), which means you have days to react to a fraudulent transaction. A dedicated watchdog service being out for days at a time is pretty shitty uptime. Not to mention that this isn't the ONLY way you can watch out for this. Your laptop, phone, or any other internet connected device can also watch for these tr…
3 days? In contrast, your liability is capped at $500 if you inform your bank of debit card fraud within 60 days.
Unless your bank considers the fraud to have been caused by a lack of care on your behalf, in which case you will not be refunded and have virtually no means of appeal
(note: Obviously depends on your country and local laws)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LN will have all the problems of BGP, fused with all the problems of KYC/AML/legacy financial institutions. It's truly a beautiful monstrosity. It'd be hard to come up with a more objectively inferior solution if you really tried. No longer can a new user just send a transaction and have that magical user experience, instead they have to be given permission to transact by monolithic liquidity hubs, who of course must…
I noticed you've posted the same thing in many different posts with increasing inaccuracy. > instead they have to be given permission to transact by monolithic liquidity hubs Completely false > who of course must take their own fee May, and routes aren't prescribed so they may take a fee on a payment that may be routed through them. > I would want a rate of return similar to stocks but times some multiple to account…
https://steemit.com/ethereum/@dhumphrey/f2pool-manipulates-u...
The latter comment is in regards to the risk of providing liquidity in the more concerning design caveat of exposing keys in memory on an internet connected computer. The attack surface for theft of a LN node is now significantly higher than a normal bitcoin wallet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I noticed you've posted the same thing in many different posts with increasing inaccuracy. > instead they have to be given permission to transact by monolithic liquidity hubs Completely false > who of course must take their own fee May, and routes aren't prescribed so they may take a fee on a payment that may be routed through them. > I would want a rate of return similar to stocks but times some multiple to account…
blockcipher is refering to a new type of attack LN enables, which would be a (large) node/hub having the ability to ignore/drop transactions. It's roughly similar to how pool operators can create custom tools to suppress activity passing though their part of the network. https://steemit.com/ethereum/@dhumphrey/f2pool-manipulates-u... The latter comment is in regards to the risk of providing liquidity in the more conc…
a) Does not work b) Seems to be specific to Ethereum c) According to a mirror, has its information sourced from an unverified Reddit post.
Is there anything but FUD here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would transactions increase but not space per dollar? Has disk technology stopped progressing? The time it takes to increase by 3 is probably the amount of time disk space will increase by 3 at the same cost.
Exactly. Costs for computing/disk storage go down exponentially. Cryptocurrency tx/sec goes up exponentially. As long as the two rates roughly cancel out, we're okay. If they're massively different rates, then you're still dealing with an exponential which is difficult. Either way though, lightning is a linear benefit, not an exponential one. And it comes at the cost of breaking everything that made bitcoin great in…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
blockcipher is refering to a new type of attack LN enables, which would be a (large) node/hub having the ability to ignore/drop transactions. It's roughly similar to how pool operators can create custom tools to suppress activity passing though their part of the network. https://steemit.com/ethereum/@dhumphrey/f2pool-manipulates-u... The latter comment is in regards to the risk of providing liquidity in the more conc…
The link you've posted a) Does not work b) Seems to be specific to Ethereum c) According to a mirror, has its information sourced from an unverified Reddit post. Is there anything but FUD here?
Feel free to ignore the prior mentioned methods denial of service within blockchain networks as It appears your comment has rendered all reality moot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And we pay large amounts of money to middlemen to access these connections. And these middlemen can often block your traffic at will. Why not just use banks at this point?
You need to physically connect your premesis to the middlemen. In lightning, you need only virtually connect them. There's a literal world of difference between the two.
Theres still a middleman with plain BTC, its just that there are a ton of them, and little barrier to entry to becoming a middleman yourself. Lightning requires things which realistically only banks will be able to provide, large payment channels. The whole point is that when you can store your balance on a decentralize ledger, there's no need for a bank.