/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>7622173
Even Richard Heart the Bitcoin maximalist renounced his faith in Core and dumped his btc because of it.

I'm an early Bitcoin investor(2011), and I fully support BCH as the "real" Bitcoin. These arguments have been repeated over and over, with no actual rebuttal, but here we go again.
LN is a laughable scaling solution that centralizes payment routes and naturally evolves towards a hub-and-spoke model. The argument that routing is NP-hard is laughable, at the scale of LN, that shit doesn't matter. However, that doesn't detract from the fact that LN has many blaring problems.
If we're talking about concrete issues that are apparent right now, having hubs that are central points of failure is horrible for censorship resistance. Regarding future issues, it's likely that according to US regulations at least that LN hubs will be classified as 3rd party settlement organizations, and it will be illegal for businesses to use noncompliant hubs. These regulations require hubs to collect KYC information and adhere to AML laws.
Meanwhile, on-chain scaling solutions don't require an additional network that is open to centralization or attacks the same way LN is. The most obvious on-chain solution is to simply increase the block size. While Blockstream shills argue that increasing the block size will lead to fewer full nodes, the reality is that

1. storage costs are continuously going down
2. "full" nodes without hashpower are meaningless(more on this later), and
3. it was in Satoshi's vision to increase the block size as time went on.

cont. (1/2)