/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>9315149
It was never a question if lightning could be somehow made to work. It was a question of what that would look like when it does, and what would the decentralization properties of it look like.
The data is in and the answer is it's just another shitty PayPal clone. Effectively no more decentralised and enormously less efficient.
Effectively the idiots in the core dev team traded the vision of peer to peer electronic cash for a shitty ICO on an ineffective PayPal clone.
Anyone stupid enough to not realise how hard they got fucked absolutely deserves to be left holding frozen core bags forever

>>9262554
Yeah whoever could get that impression

>>9133961
> everything is going to be fine
You've already failed shit for brains.

>>9135241
> more centralised
neck yourself cunt brain.

>>9131601
Not delusion, a routed network is inherently centralised, orders of magnitude more so for a staked routed network. From the original Bitcoin white paper "the network is robust in its unstructured simplicity" the design was not a bug or an accident lightning is centralised as fuck.
And why would we believe the truth if it were different? Because of we didn't then we'd be as dumb as you coretard fucks that ignore material reality when empirical proof stares you right in the face. I would definitely rather know and accept I'm wrong than embrace ignorance because I fell victim to a propaganda campaign, so would everyone else on this side. Not coretards though because otherwise you stupid fucks wouldn't be where you are.

>>9097417
> Its a balancing act, where the bigger you make blocks, the more centralized the protocol becomes.
Repeating yourself doesn't make it more true.
> lightning solves everything
Lightning is extremely centralised and centralising.
> so why not just use it and never scale on chain.
Because nobody outside blockstream cares about blockstream's business plan, and you don't get peer to peer electronic cash without on chain scaling, period.
Just because at some point there may be genuine demand for off chain nanotransactions understanding the innate centralised nature thereof if the price is right and there's a genuine free market for on chain transaction throughput doesn't mean that genuine free market for on chain transaction throughput should not exist because it's bad for blockstream's business model.
Get it through your head. Blockstream can die tomorrow and nobody will care except blockstream. With all the enemies you've made in fact people would rejoice at it. You don't get to sabotage bitcoin, no matter how much you whine or try to throw fake shitty technical justifications for it out there.
The number of people that see through your bullshit is exponentially increasing. It's all over, come to terms with it.

>>7739103
(((peer to peer decentralised)))

>>7698030
It's centralised here shit for brains

>>7669832
Well, I'd humbly suggest we should care because it actually works, as opposed to this shit, which flatly doesn't, and if it ever did, would be just another banking system, therefore paypal 2.0, and completely valueless, because paypal 1.0 is better than it already.

>>7617539
Well it's not as impressive as this one I'll grant.

>>7588218
https:// medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800
Note that the form which the proof says lightning must take is empirically the form which it does in fact take.

>>7555212
>>7555218
Then again, maybe they really are that fucking stupid.

>>7554459
bcore lol

>>7525545
> so speculators use it less in a bear market. But keep ignoring my arguments my pajeet.
Right, everyone uses it less now, speculators included, because even nigger tier shitwits like yourself have figured out it's technically not able to be used as a currency.
> lmao a literal fucking Roger shill that understands nothing about cryptography.
Awesome comeback, much citation. Totally knocked all the mathematical proofs contained in the attached article on their ass, good thing in empirical reality we can validate that actually lightning topology looks nothing like this fearmongering amirite? oh shit, actually that's exactly what it fucking looks like you shitheeled clownshoe pic related.
> because it being owned by Jihan and Roger
It is "owned" by nobody, that is what decentralised mean. Exactly the same set of people who can mine BTC can also mine BCH, and they do, in fact, do exactly that, which is what happened on November 12th 2017 and will happen again when the inevitable price appreciation from actual use and adoption in commerce takes effect while BTC is still spinning provably false fantasy shit and trying to drag down the rest of the market with the historical artefact of its peg to all the other coins.
> and the redditors that elected trump:
Oh hai shareblue, shit explains a lot. neck yourself cuntface.

>>7516883
Anyone stupid enough to claim that peer to peer nodes working on the global internet, which constantly streams 4k video to endpoints at 10mbps+, is technically impossible of a distributed 14kbps stream, is not just an idiot, but should actually kill themselves outright.
The truth is that if you are a software developer, you're an absolutely fucking terrible one, but in all likelihood since you have that smarmy core propaganda victim "you just don't know any better you poor little pleb" thing going on, you're just an idiot with delusions of adequacy you're attempting to shore up in a public forum with completely unsubstantiated credentialism.
Nothing I have said is at all disputable or incorrect at all,
1) 14kbps is a completely idiotic total on chain throughput limited for a global distributed ledger of all the world's transactions, unjustified by any technological limits whatsoever, and this is easily verifiable by observing that many other blockchains do not have this limit and do not suffer from it.
2) The actual routing topology of the lightning network must necessarily be "decentralised with massive hubs". Observing a map of the lightning network this is exactly what we actually see.
3) If a supermajority of the SHA256 hashing power abandons BTC, there will be no new blocks, no new blocks, no new transactions, no new transactions, no product, and at this stage even complete fucking brainlets like yourself will have to give up on their delusions of adequacy and accept that they were wrong.
These things are all indisputable concrete actual facts which it is easy to verify, and your response is effectively "is not cause I said so".
You deserve to go broke. Enjoy.

>>7491021
my nigga, this is how we stave off centralisation.