/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>9925252
it's not a currency though. it's mutually agreed upon to be "digital gold" at best. If people use LN, most people won't set up their own wallets on the base layer and set up their own channel to an LN hub. It's cost and hassle prohibitive. Instead, they will buy / earn with wage LN BTC credits held and sent back and forth between big LN nodes/hubs on their behalf, and we all know how that ends up. The LN hubs that become hubs will be regulated and they will end up having a system of IOUs between each other instead of even sending BTC over LN so that they can effectively have a BTC fractional reserve system on LN.

If any corecucks are reading this, you're welcome for my explanation, former corecucks. You can now be free of bitcoin maximalism. And no I'm not saying to bet on bcash.

>>8387487
Bitcoin Core has unstable fees, this is why Steam abandoned it.
We dont deny second layer solutions, they work better with bigger blocks. FYI, there is bounty for 0-conf exploit, its not feasible to execute with regular amounts (less than 50k$).
>>8387576
They cant develop without banking services in corrupt governments.

>>8387487
Bitcoin Core has unstable fees, this is why Steam abandoned it.
We dont deny second layer solutions, they work better with bigger blocks. FYI, there is bounty for 0-conf exploit, its not feasible to execute with regular amounts (less than 50k$).
>>8387576
They cant develop without banking services and corrupt goverments.

>>4978089
>lol cashies are going to kill themselves once every normie is paying to get credited BTC IOUs that they can use through apps, the site/bank sending the money on their behalf and holding it in their LN contract on their behalf because it is prohibitively expensive to ever actually use the blockchain for anyone but the rich, including just setting up LN channels of your own to some of the few mega hubs, meanwhile those "sites" (banks) will be regulated by bank laws and will probably be allowed to practice fractional reserve policy.

Nice "utopia" you got there. I guess Bitcoin Core truly is "Banking 2.0". Imagine some person among the 4 billion poorest for whom opening a single LN payment channel would be ridiculous to even consider. Think about whether it makes sense for them to use BTC, BTC Custodial LN & wallet service by bank or one of the many other coins that can or will have just as fast and cheap transactions as LN without having to choose between giving away your financial sovereignty or paying exorbitant fees for the main net transaction required to set up your own channels to a few megahubs that can be fucked over by governments or suddenly deny your wallet service so you have to pay to withdraw from your LN contract for that channel and then pay to set up another channel to another hub.

Thank god Africans can still run full nodes with 1mb blocks on 15 year old laptops whereas they might need a 10 year old laptop instead of they upgraded to 2mb blocks, right? The resistance to 2mb blocks is 100% there to force people to use LN and future blockstream side chains as soon as possible due to the impossibility of using the main chain for regular currency use.

Not to mention setting up a payment channel (to a single other entity in the lightning network, not the entirety) is done via transaction on the main net, and is thus very expensive due to 1mb blocks. People are just going to end up setting up a payment channel to one or two major established hub nodes that have massive sums of BTC in their contract and the hardware to process and sign massive amounts of transactions per second. These major hubs will have channels between them. There will not be many such hubs. It is an implication of the economic pain/incentive structure emerging from how LN works.

>>4943615
>people who actually research networks
You want to appeal to authority instead of argue because you're ignorant yourself?
OK, then think about this. Raiden, which is similar to LN in the way it works but will be better, is not considered good enough for ethereum devs. It is considered a shitty bandaid while waiting for Plasma. Request Network and Omisego are just straight up going to launch on Plasma, ignoring Raiden alltogether.

Vitalik barely wants to acknowledge that LN even exists.

>>4943621
>It's a bad precedent to set.
>Also S2x was buggy code that was DOA.
2mb blocks have been discussed for years before s2x. Core devs were not so hostile to the idea before recently.

"It's a bad precedence to set" is a terrible argument against doing something that solves the congestion problem temporarily and has no drawbacks whatsoever. It's paper thin fake ideology to disguise greed based incentives.

>>4898466
Anon watch your words. If blocks are bigger than 1.33 MB she won't be able to run her full node.

>>4848864
Literally the future, nay, THE PRESENT of crypto right there. What a utopia. Thanks blockstream.

I'm going to name my first daughter Blockstream.

>>4823405
>(reminder, everybody can run a node and collect fees)
Not in practice, no.
https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800
Quote:
Imagine Alice wants to send 1 BTC to Carol through Bob like so: Alice->Bob->Carol

In order to route the money, Bob has to have at least 1 BTC in his “balance” in the channel with Carol. Essentially, Alice is borrowing from Bob to pay Carol.

Bob transfers his 1 BTC to Carol in the [Bob->Carol] channel, and Alice transfers 1 BTC to Bob in the [Alice->Bob] channel. That’s how it works—Alice cannot “give” the 1 BTC to Bob to then pass along to Carol.

It really is a loan because the network uses timelocks to eliminate custodial risk: Alice can’t repay Bob safely until she’s sure Bob has paid Carol.

In fact, EVERY hop en route to a destination must have the funds available for each transaction. So, the more hops that are used, the more this lending burden is multiplied.

It's hilarious that BTC shills go "muh african 4 year old smartphones need to run nodes so we need to limit blocks to 1mb" yet are entirely fine with LN being pretty much shoved down everyone's through true forcing the main chain to be useless with the 1mb cap.

>>4751604
Pic related
BCH is about as decentralized as BTC is ever going to be. The 1mb blocks don't really matter.

They're both pretty centralized and subjected to the politics of the few. It is the logical conclusion to proof of work.

Personally, when it comes to steering bitcoin forwards, I'll take the based sketchy self interest ancaps + old guard realists like Ver & Jihan, Gavin & Falkvinge, over The myopic and retarded autists + slimey jews that are core/blockstream any day.

>>4700159
pic related

Reminder: https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800

Imagine Alice wants to send 1 BTC to Carol through Bob like so: Alice->Bob->Carol

In order to route the money, Bob has to have at least 1 BTC in his “balance” in the channel with Carol. Essentially, Alice is borrowing from Bob to pay Carol.

Bob transfers his 1 BTC to Carol in the [Bob->Carol] channel, and Alice transfers 1 BTC to Bob in the [Alice->Bob] channel. That’s how it works—Alice cannot “give” the 1 BTC to Bob to then pass along to Carol.

It really is a loan because the network uses timelocks to eliminate custodial risk: Alice can’t repay Bob safely until she’s sure Bob has paid Carol.

In fact, EVERY hop en route to a destination must have the funds available for each transaction. So, the more hops that are used, the more this lending burden is multiplied.

>Lightning network is just a shittier, more convoluted and ultimately more centralized proof of stake that

Lmao @ corecucks. How do you defend this.

>>4700120
decentralization is just a tool for censorship free currency to exist.
we do not need everyone to run nodes to achieve open protocol for everyone.

Bitcoin Cash is the new world currency

Bitcoin is officially under attack. Unconfirmed transactions are on the rise again and if you decide to transact while the mempool is growing, you are in full opposition of Bitcoin Core and Blockstreams™ vision for digital gold as defined in the much needed revised version of the Bitcoin whitepaper. Your funds will be locked in our AXA controlled Lightning channel until further notice. The $400 fee to open our lightning network channel will be deducted from your balance, effective immediately

>>4628055
Bitcoin was meant to be censorship free currency but it was hijacked by banksters.
(((They))) impose insane fees on the protocol as means to get common people in their second layer services.

>>4622136
Yeah but dude bro new paradigm

>>4621181
Rising block size wont make it centralized but raising fees and forcing people to use second layer banking does.