Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

lightning.network

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 115 posts

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#61

Post by nullc »

stale2002 wrote: post #17
paavokoya wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>instead of just fixing the inherent flaws with the protocol What are the "inherent flaws"? Seems like the bitcoin blockchain has done its job better than any other blockchain for longer. Also, it's open source.. You can submit a proposal yourself if you want to fix it..

"You can submit a proposal yourself if you want to fix it" Not really. The vast majority of the bitcoin community has been trying to do just that. But a few devs have unilaterally been able to block the changes. The Devs have a lot of "soft power" to do stuff like that.

> The vast majority of the bitcoin community has been trying to do just that.

Thats a common claim made on easily sockpuppeted forums, but when put to cryptographic votes, we find pretty much the opposite response: http://bitcoinocracy.com/arguments/if-non-core-hard-fork-win...

Similarly, I've found in person meetings to also yield similar results.

> But a few devs

Really, almost the _entire_ technical community; with the exception of a few high profile companies and their consultants.

> have unilaterally been able to block the changes

That isn't how Bitcoin works.

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#62

Post by nullc »

sanswork wrote: post #39
stale2002 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>They can refuse to update core. 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 se…

If it's a simple majority then that isn't true, a 50/50 split of the economy or hashrate would be pretty devastating. But if it were overwhelming, what you argue would hold.

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#63

Post by nullc »

josephpoon wrote: post #58
nullc wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the heck Joseph, when you first started talking about lightning I spent considerable effort trying to convince you that "hub" was a bad model for thinking about or describing these things. Blockstream has no intention of ever monetizing lightning on Bitcoin in any way (nor do I have any idea how we could do so); our interests for it in the case of Bitcoin are only to promote and expand the use of Bitcoin. (We al…

Sorry Greg! I didn't mean it in the sense that Blockstream is planning for a hub at all! I was being sarcastic, but perhaps that wasn't conveyed properly in text. I thought the "if they ever make one" was sufficient, but it didn't properly convey the cultural apprehension towards those types of systems and could be seen as deeply disrespectful. We were definitely in agreement from the start that decentralization in t…

No problem! Understood. It's a bit tough with so much crap being flung to stay clear of it. :)

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#64

Post by sanswork »

nullc wrote: post #62
sanswork wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They can refuse to update core. 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 se…

If it's a simple majority then that isn't true, a 50/50 split of the economy or hashrate would be pretty devastating. But if it were overwhelming, what you argue would hold.

Given his estimate is 90/10 in favour I'd say my argument holds. :)

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#65

Post by wellthissukz »

The lightning network is a pathetic scheme to suppress the liberties the original vision of Bitcoin provides.

Blockstream is a corrupt company which does not refrain from spreading lies and propaganda to further their agenda.

Everyone is free to look up what entities own them.

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#66

Post by out_of_protocol »

nullc wrote: post #61
stale2002 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You can submit a proposal yourself if you want to fix it" Not really. The vast majority of the bitcoin community has been trying to do just that. But a few devs have unilaterally been able to block the changes. The Devs have a lot of "soft power" to do stuff like that.

> The vast majority of the bitcoin community has been trying to do just that. Thats a common claim made on easily sockpuppeted forums, but when put to cryptographic votes, we find pretty much the opposite response: http://bitcoinocracy.com/arguments/if-non-core-hard-fork-win... Similarly, I've found in person meetings to also yield similar results. > But a few devs Really, almost the _entire_ technical community; wit…

I'm looking at this mess for quote a while and still don't understand - why not bigger blocks? Is there good reason for that? (Combibed with thin blocks it doesn't increase propagation and stuff even for chinese miners). I'd like to hear that developers think

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#67

Post by CookieMon »

um_ya wrote: post #37
jswny wrote: post #11

I'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.

Lightning network is the fix. It essentially makes bitcoin transactions lightning channels rather than recording every transaction that ever existed. Raising the block size won't solve anything, it will only make miners store more data and transfer more data. Lighting network solves all of this, and the concept is actually pretty simple and very secure once you understand it.

It's an awesome feature, but it's not a fix - Lightning requires a 24/7 online connection, which will also combine with several other pressures to strongly favor central hubs, putting easily regulated payment processors back in change of who can spend money (a bad thing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11944011).

Plus it won't work (in the sense of saving blockchain space) for people who have few peers and tend to move money in one direction, e.g. a consumer connected to a "paypal"-like lightning service who makes purchases but doesn't sell online, this could be a significant portion of users.

It's a great extension to Bitcoin, but it shouldn't be confused with what Bitcoin does.

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#68

Post by wellthissukz »

um_ya wrote: post #37
jswny wrote: post #11

I'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.

Lightning network is the fix. It essentially makes bitcoin transactions lightning channels rather than recording every transaction that ever existed. Raising the block size won't solve anything, it will only make miners store more data and transfer more data. Lighting network solves all of this, and the concept is actually pretty simple and very secure once you understand it.

No. the lighting network is a scheme to prevent on-chain scaling.

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#69

Post by wellthissukz »

stale2002 wrote: post #17
paavokoya wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>instead of just fixing the inherent flaws with the protocol What are the "inherent flaws"? Seems like the bitcoin blockchain has done its job better than any other blockchain for longer. Also, it's open source.. You can submit a proposal yourself if you want to fix it..

"You can submit a proposal yourself if you want to fix it" Not really. The vast majority of the bitcoin community has been trying to do just that. But a few devs have unilaterally been able to block the changes. The Devs have a lot of "soft power" to do stuff like that.

This is the truth.

Bitcoin development has been hijacked by Blockstream since 2014.

Re: Lightning Network: Scalable, Instant Bitcoin/Blockchain Transactions

#70

Post by wellthissukz »

nullc wrote: post #60
ptokb3 wrote: post #12

-Blockstream Playbook- Step 1: Buy off all of the top developers of open-source project. Check. Step 2: Refuse to support/fix basic network operations so that transactions stop confirming just as the network needs to grow. Check. Step 3: Create a 2nd-layer solution for growth that allows the company to siphon Billions of dollars over many years. Check. Step 4: Censor any forum where people alert others about secret g…

> Step 1: Buy off We founded the company. > all of the top developers A couple people out of a community of around 50-200 depending on the phase of the moon. > Step 2: Refuse to support/fix basic network operations Uh. You know that Bitcoin is a decenteralized system that no one controls; right? We do a lot of fixes, but we're not your personal code monkies. There is a LOT going on in Bitcoin, and it's working pretty…

Again, these are lies from Gregory Maxwell (Blockstream CTO).

Please provide details on funding. Specifically, how much AXA paid?

"A couple people out of a community of around 50-200 depending on the phase of the moon."

Again a lie. The top Core devs are Blockstream employees.

Blockstream has created a toxic environment and a huge ivory tower.

"Uh. You know that Bitcoin is a decenteralized system that no one controls; right? We do a lot of fixes, but we're not your personal code monkies. There is a LOT going on in Bitcoin, and it's working pretty darn well at the moment."

Meanwhile 80%+ of the hasrate is concentrated in a single country and in the hands of a handful of entities.

Ironically, Blockstream goes graet lengths to exploit this (HK roundtable farce).

"Via our magical mind control rays, I suppose? Blockstream doesn't control or influence any forums."

People associated with BlockstreamCore support censored and manipulated forums, interestingly owned by a single individual (theymos)

Gregory, you are the most pathetic individual in the Bitcoin space.

Post reply on HN