Basics of the Lightning Network - page 2.

DooMAD

legendary

Activity: 3948

Merit: 3191

Leave no FUD unchallenged

Quote from: Wind_FURY on March 25, 2019, 12:25:24 AM

GEN4 cryptocurrencies? What are they?

Meaningless marketing buzzword bullshit. Grin

Every time someone talks about their coin somehow being "next generation", it's just a desperate plea for attention. It's invariably a case of "Look at me, I have the shiniest baubles!" and generally not much else. If it didn't shatter the illusion and they thought they could get away with it, they would probably try and call their coin Gen1000. Roll Eyes

wwzsocki

legendary

Activity: 2744

Merit: 1708

First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold

Quote from: Wind_FURY on March 25, 2019, 12:25:24 AM

What? There are more nodes in the Lightning network than both Bitcoin Cash ABC and SV nodes combined. Haha.

Just checked and you are right:

Quote from: Wind_FURY on March 25, 2019, 12:25:24 AM

GEN4 cryptocurrencies? What are they?

Like many others, I call them Gen4 but there is still debate if this is still 3rd blockchain generation or already fourth. Or even if there are generations of the blockchain at all? In the crypto world, everything is constantly evolving, sometimes so fast that we don't add up with how to call or name it. English is not my first language and when I translate crypto related text to Polish I have many times to figure out how to call things properly because such words even don't exist in our language and there are no professional translations available yet. Many times we have just to agree on something and I think this is the case with how or if to call different blockchains as different generations or something else. There are differences between blockchains for sure.

Quote

It’s not entirely clear what 4th generation blockchains are. Possibly, they are 3rd generation blockchains with lots of improvements through A.I. technology. Some of these are Matrix AI, Deep Brain Chain, SingularityNet, Multiversum, Insolar

You can read more about the 4th generation of blockchain and the best projects HERE

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: wwzsocki on March 23, 2019, 07:45:20 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on March 23, 2019, 03:31:03 AM

...users must run full nodes as possible...weak attempt to attack Lightning?...

I don't think this is possible in LN for users to run full nodes and that's one of the concerns he raises.

What? There are more nodes in the Lightning network than both Bitcoin Cash ABC and SV nodes combined. Haha.

Quote

Do you think this is an attempt to attack LN? Maybe yes but a few of his concerns are valid and I thought about it too already.

Third party trust problem, centralization, no control, LN acting like a bank to name only a few first which cross my mind.

He was being disingenuous in his debate. I would like to hear him say that users should stop using blockchain.info wallet, plus other custodial web wallets for on-chain transactions. To take it even further, stop using light clients like electrum, and use Bitcoin only through running full nodes. Cool

Quote

I am not a fan or against Lightning Network. We need a working solution which will make the BTC faster, cheaper, safer, better and additionally don't lose all the core values during the process. To be able to compete with this new GEN4 cryptocurrencies popping up every day with lightning speeds built into them, much safer, cheaper and way more scalable.

GEN4 cryptocurrencies? What are they?

Quote

Has Lightning Network fulfilled this needs?

Maybe it will, maybe it won't. But developers are free to experiment with anything on top of the network because it doesn't alter anything in the consensus layer.

Queenvio

hero member

Activity: 838

Merit: 534

I just read on Reddit and also on there official website that
LNWallet.io is closing.
So if you still have any funds there withdraw it.

wwzsocki

legendary

Activity: 2744

Merit: 1708

First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold

Quote from: Wind_FURY on March 23, 2019, 03:31:03 AM

...users must run full nodes as possible...weak attempt to attack Lightning?...

I don't think this is possible in LN for users to run full nodes and that's one of the concerns he raises.

Do you think this is an attempt to attack LN? Maybe yes but a few of his concerns are valid and I thought about it too already.

Third party trust problem, centralization, no control, LN acting like a bank to name only a few first which cross my mind.

I am not a fan or against Lightning Network. We need a working solution which will make the BTC faster, cheaper, safer, better and additionally don't lose all the core values during the process. To be able to compete with this new GEN4 cryptocurrencies popping up every day with lightning speeds built into them, much safer, cheaper and way more scalable.

Has Lightning Network fulfilled this needs?

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: wwzsocki on March 22, 2019, 10:33:42 PM

I have posted here about a video I have seen on YouTube about Lightning Network because I wanted to hear your opinions and this thread was a good choice, I assume.

This video shows how easy it is to send and receive transactions on LN and to be exactly author buys coffee and pays with LN transaction.

At the end of video, he has some doubts and I wanted to discuss them here but my post was deleted by a moderator and even a quote together with an answer to this post from a member @DooMAD was deleted too.

I don't think my post was spammy so I ask why it was deleted?

I have a copy of this post but don't want to post again until I don't know what is going on.

This is a forum and I thought that all of us here are supporters of freedom of speech and expression.

HERE is a link to this YouTube video, please watch and share your thoughts about the doubts in the end.

I like that debate. As much users must run full nodes as possible. But would he also agree that all users should stop using blockchain.info wallet, and other custodial wallets for on-chain transactions? Or was that video but a weak attempt to attack Lightning?

Ask him.

It was also disingenuous of him to make it look like Lightning is run only by trusted third parties.

wwzsocki

legendary

Activity: 2744

Merit: 1708

First 100% Liquid Stablecoin Backed by Gold

I have posted here about a video I have seen on YouTube about Lightning Network because I wanted to hear your opinions and this thread was a good choice, I assume.

This video shows how easy it is to send and receive transactions on LN and to be exactly author buys coffee and pays with LN transaction.

At the end of video, he has some doubts and I wanted to discuss them here but my post was deleted by a moderator and even a quote together with an answer to this post from a member @DooMAD was deleted too.

I don't think my post was spammy so I ask why it was deleted?

I have a copy of this post but don't want to post again until I don't know what is going on.

This is a forum and I thought that all of us here are supporters of freedom of speech and expression.

HERE is a link to this YouTube video, please watch and share your thoughts about the doubts in the end.

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: Carlton Banks on August 27, 2018, 03:23:00 PM

You could mention that BIP157 & BIP 158 (implemented in Neutrino) will improve privacy for SPV based Lightning wallets.

~snip

And you could mention that Schnorr, MAST & Taproot will make the on-chain transactions opening/closing Lightning channels indistinguishable from regular 1 input/1ouput transactions (another privacy improvement, + extra fungibility)

Thanks for pointing out these things. I have just updated "Planned features" and "Security risks" sections. I would appreciate any further suggestions.

Quote from: Lightblock on October 25, 2018, 05:06:26 AM

Thanks for starting the thread! Could you please add https://lightblock.me to the list "8. Useful sources of information" ?

Sure. I have added 1ML.com as well.

Quote from: Rath_ on August 22, 2018, 02:43:13 PM

offline nodes are considered capable of routing which results in payments not going through in some cases,

This has been fixed in the v0.5 release of LND. When a channel is being closed or a peer node has gone offline, the rest of the network is informed that they are incapable of routing payments. It is also possible to create unadvertised channels which won't route payments.

Lightblock

newbie

Activity: 29

Merit: 40

@BitCryptex

Thanks for starting the thread! Could you please add https://lightblock.me to the list "8. Useful sources of information" ? It's a lightning network explorer for mainnet.

Regards.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Rath_ on August 23, 2018, 02:41:30 PM

Quote from: d5000 on August 22, 2018, 08:16:50 PM

I'm currently installing Neutrino+LND to test the "light client" scenario which would make LN available "for the masses", but I ran into some problems. But I won't spam this thread with them - I'll look if I can solve them myself (I'm a total Go noob, so maybe a bit of RTFM is enough Wink

). Perhaps we can start another thread of this "Lightning series": "Lightning Network Experiences"?

That might be a good idea. Feel free to PM me if you need some help.

You could mention that BIP157 & BIP 158 (implemented in Neutrino) will improve privacy for SPV based Lightning wallets.

Quote from: Rath_ on August 23, 2018, 02:41:30 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

~snip

Thanks for your suggestions. I haven't mentioned Schnorr signatures because they are not strictly connected with the Lightning Network. Updated.

And you could mention that Schnorr, MAST & Taproot will make the on-chain transactions opening/closing Lightning channels indistinguishable from regular 1 input/1ouput transactions (another privacy improvement, + extra fungibility)

btj

member

Activity: 115

Merit: 16

Quote from: Rath_ on August 26, 2018, 03:11:36 PM

That's why eltoo was proposed. It will be an alternative to the current penalty system. A softfork is needed. Also, it's not possible to spend all funds that are locked up in the channel - there is such a thing as reserve which is a minimum balance that channel must maintain. For example, one of my channels has 0.0049 BTC capacity; the reserve is 0.000049 BTC.

Thank you for your time reading the article ! Yes it cover many cases with offering a solutions to remedy the problems.

Eltoo solve the problem by continuously updating payment channel balances off-chain.

Soft fork is required since “SIGHASH_NOINPUT” flag for signature must be introduced to Bitcoin Protocol to make it working.

I suggest you to edit your post and add this basic video explaination about how LN works:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrr_zPmEiME

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: btj on August 25, 2018, 01:31:28 PM

Waiting your feedback about the link of my previous answer.

The article linked by you is well written. It covers a lot of problems and suggests solutions which are quite reasonable. However, one thing drew my attention.

Quote from: https://medium.com/crypto-punks/lightning-network-ux-centralization-b517037b92ec

[...]It will be very dangerous, if a counterparty has an older state, where all or most money on his side, because it becomes very lucrative to cheat (risk almost nothing for a chance to get all channel’s funds)[...]
User should keep untrusted counterparty from exhausting a channel
Solution: a minimum collateral should be set automatically (especially if routing is enabled), but user still should be aware of a problem and not change default settings when dealing with untrusted nodes.[...]

That's why eltoo was proposed. It will be an alternative to the current penalty system. A softfork is needed. Also, it's not possible to spend all funds that are locked up in the channel - there is such a thing as reserve which is a minimum balance that channel must maintain. For example, one of my channels has 0.0049 BTC capacity; the reserve is 0.000049 BTC.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Rath_ on August 25, 2018, 12:36:52 PM

Quote from: btj on August 25, 2018, 07:32:47 AM

Colluding miner attacks - miners have power to decide which transactions they want to include in the block so they can refuse certain transactions selected by an attacker. This attack is very unlikely to happen due to high cost and complexity (all miners would have to cooperate).

You have to trust miners.

If ALL miners decided to cooperate with a single person then you would have to be more concerned about 51% attack. It won't happen since it would scare future investors and users. Miners would lose money long-term.

The same applies to the current Bitcoin network, without Lightning Network. If all miners decide to reject transactions from a certain address, they break the one thing that makes Bitcoin so great, and severely treaten the value of their investment.

btj

member

Activity: 115

Merit: 16

Quote from: Rath_ on August 25, 2018, 12:36:52 PM

Quote from: btj on August 25, 2018, 07:32:47 AM

So let start with MIDDLE MAN:
-SNIP
So Bob here is the middle man, he can affect time of transaction and especially if he go offline.

The time is not a real problem since every transaction has its own timeout. It all happens nearly instantly. I have sent about 100 LN payments and the longest one took 1 minute. Bob can't steal funds because of HTLCs

Quote from: btj on August 25, 2018, 07:32:47 AM

LN is a network of several centralized hubs ... and you have to choose a performent and all time online to prevent delaying transaction etc ... So here a contract of trust ...

You can still open a direct channel to someone who you are going to transact with very often. Here you can see the largest nodes. Only one node has 1/4 of the total Lightning Network capacity. Keep in mind that principal is not the most important factor; the number of connections and channel balancing are much more important. The need of being online is definitely a huge disadvantage for some people, can't argue with that.

Quote from: btj on August 25, 2018, 07:32:47 AM

Colluding miner attacks - miners have power to decide which transactions they want to include in the block so they can refuse certain transactions selected by an attacker. This attack is very unlikely to happen due to high cost and complexity (all miners would have to cooperate).

You have to trust miners.

If ALL miners decided to cooperate with a single person then you would have to be more concerned about 51% attack. It won't happen since it would scare future investors and users. Miners would lose money long-term.

It took me some time to format this text on my phone. I am going to read what you have linked once I get home.

Instructive return, thank you.

Waiting your feedback about the link of my previous answer.

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: btj on August 25, 2018, 07:32:47 AM

So let start with MIDDLE MAN:
-SNIP
So Bob here is the middle man, he can affect time of transaction and especially if he go offline.

The time is not a real problem since every transaction has its own timeout. It all happens nearly instantly. I have sent about 100 LN payments and the longest one took 1 minute. Bob can't steal funds because of HTLCs

Quote from: btj on August 25, 2018, 07:32:47 AM

LN is a network of several centralized hubs ... and you have to choose a performent and all time online to prevent delaying transaction etc ... So here a contract of trust ...

You can still open a direct channel to someone who you are going to transact with very often. Here you can see the largest nodes. Only one node has 1/4 of the total Lightning Network capacity. Keep in mind that principal is not the most important factor; the number of connections and channel balancing are much more important. The need of being online is definitely a huge disadvantage for some people, can't argue with that.

Quote from: btj on August 25, 2018, 07:32:47 AM

Colluding miner attacks - miners have power to decide which transactions they want to include in the block so they can refuse certain transactions selected by an attacker. This attack is very unlikely to happen due to high cost and complexity (all miners would have to cooperate).

You have to trust miners.

If ALL miners decided to cooperate with a single person then you would have to be more concerned about 51% attack. It won't happen since it would scare future investors and users. Miners would lose money long-term.

It took me some time to format this text on my phone. I am going to read what you have linked once I get home.

btj

member

Activity: 115

Merit: 16

Quote from: bob123 on August 25, 2018, 02:40:01 AM

Quote from: btj on August 24, 2018, 08:35:55 PM

I am not the negative guy of the gang, it's great to offer solutions to improve bitcoin or blockchain technology ... but security first (Especially when people's money at stake).

You seem to be the 'uneducated' guy of the gang. At least regarding the LN.
You have a lot of misconceptions regarding the LN.

Before going furthur, stay educated and do not shoot garbage there face to someone you don't know.

So let start with MIDDLE MAN:

Quote

1. Alice opens a payment channel to Bob, and Bob opens a payment channel to Charlie.
2. Alice wants to buy something from Charlie for 1000 satoshis.
3. Charlie generates a random number and generates its SHA256 hash. Charlie gives that hash to Alice.
4. Alice uses her payment channel to Bob to pay him 1,000 satoshis, but she adds the hash Charlie gave her to the payment along with an extra condition: in order for Bob to claim the payment, he has to provide the data which was used to produce that hash.
5. Bob uses his payment channel to Charlie to pay Charlie 1,000 satoshis, and Bob adds a copy of the same condition that Alice put on the payment she gave Bob.
6. Charlie has the original data that was used to produce the hash (called a pre-image), so Charlie can use it to finalize his payment and fully receive the payment from Bob. By doing so, Charlie necessarily makes the pre-image available to Bob.
7. Bob uses the pre-image to finalize his payment from Alice

So Bob here is the middle man, he can affect time of transaction and especially if he go offline.

LN is a network of several centralized hubs ... and you have to choose a performent and all time online to prevent delaying transaction etc ... So here a contract of trust ...

I invite you to read more here for disadvantages of LN in the current state and what make it centralized:
https://medium.com/crypto-punks/lightning-network-ux-centralization-b517037b92ec

Colluding miner attacks - miners have power to decide which transactions they want to include in the block so they can refuse certain transactions selected by an attacker. This attack is very unlikely to happen due to high cost and complexity (all miners would have to cooperate).

You have to trust miners.

And please read more about "what make a technology decentralized" before posting anything else ... and also to prevent spamming this thread since the first goal is to give some knowledge about LN and not to debate it (I given my feedback like you did yourself, there many other threads about this.).

bob123

legendary

Activity: 1624

Merit: 2481

Quote from: btj on August 24, 2018, 08:35:55 PM

Unfortunately this confirm that LN = centralization !

How did you get to THAT conclusion ? Huh

This doesn't make any sense. Please elaborate.

Quote from: btj on August 24, 2018, 08:35:55 PM

It's against Bitcoin's primary objective and personally i can't support this technology (In the current state and especially if nothing will be made to improve the idea more in decentralized way).

Fortunately, you don't have to support anything.
If you believe the LN is centralized, take a look at it again. Read a few articles. And come back with more knowledge. The LN is anything but centralized..

Quote from: btj on August 24, 2018, 08:35:55 PM

2 importants depreciated factors join the game: Middle man and Trust.

Well, good thing is: The LN does NOT need a middle man and does NOT require trust.

You seem to be overwhelmed by looking at the pictures illustrating the LN.
Please, do yourself a favor, and read into the LN.

This takes 5 minutes of your life, but will keep you safe from embarrassing moments/posts (like this one).

Quote from: btj on August 24, 2018, 08:35:55 PM

Of course there adventages using it like enjoying a micro transaction fees, save Blockchain transactions ... but what about security (Keeping things decentralized) ?

What has security to do with centralization ?! You seem to be mixing up a lot words you have heard.

As already mentioned, LN is no way decentralized. And you would know that if you would have read at least 1 proper article about the LN.

If you have any security concerns, feel free to shout them out. I will be glad to answer all of your questions regarding security.

Quote from: btj on August 24, 2018, 08:35:55 PM

I am not the negative guy of the gang, it's great to offer solutions to improve bitcoin or blockchain technology ... but security first (Especially when people's money at stake).

You seem to be the 'uneducated' guy of the gang. At least regarding the LN.
You have a lot of misconceptions regarding the LN.

btj

member

Activity: 115

Merit: 16

Thank you for this nice post !

Unfortunately this confirm that LN = centralization ! It's against Bitcoin's primary objective and personally i can't support this technology (In the current state and especially if nothing will be made to improve the idea more in decentralized way).

2 importants depreciated factors join the game: Middle man and Trust.

Of course there adventages using it like enjoying a micro transaction fees, save Blockchain transactions ... but what about security (Keeping things decentralized) ?

I am not the negative guy of the gang, it's great to offer solutions to improve bitcoin or blockchain technology ... but security first (Especially when people's money at stake).

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: Rath_ on August 23, 2018, 02:41:30 PM

Quote from: buwaytress on August 23, 2018, 03:11:43 AM

I wonder, if during this LN implementation, it would be too difficult to add a second second layer (or 2 parallel layers) to also allow for escrow, or perhaps within LN itself? Or using LN as an escrow method?

There won't be any problems with having more than one second layer, especially if they have different features. It is possible to build more layers on top of the Lightning Network. Some think that ordinary people will use them instead of on-chain transactions.

I am going to write a long guide on the Lightning Network wallets once they stop changing so much. Developers are constantly updating their implementations.

This is actually the scenario I believe will happen as well. I mean, the way people use Bitcoin now, most don't realise which implementation they're using, or even if they're actually signing any transactions at all. If/When these LN implemetations get to the point they look just like any Bitcoin wallet, you can be sure people will be using LN without ever interacting with the chain. In the end, this probably won't matter I suppose. It will take a lot more to convince me to move over, though I'm really keen (if I'm the typical example of a mainstream user).

bob123

legendary

Activity: 1624

Merit: 2481

Quote from: Kprawn on August 23, 2018, 10:43:31 AM

But at some point of time the tx will be mined by someone not in the group of miners that wants to censor these tx's right?

Theoretically, yes.
But practically, most miner (probably each one) has a financial incentive to mine bitcoins.
And with choosing the transactions with the highest fees to be included (either the pool operator or the solo miner decides this) the financial benefit will be the biggest.

Quote from: Kprawn on August 23, 2018, 10:43:31 AM

These tx's might just take a little bit longer, because they have less miners fees, but they will be picked up by some desperate
miner. Roll Eyes

Some people might even target these "scraps" because it is being discarded by the big boys?

This is definitely a possiblity.
But why should a miner be desperate enough to pick a low-fee tx over a high-fee tx (assuming the mempool is by far NOT empty).
He would give up on some btc's.

Topic: Basics of the Lightning Network - page 2. (Read 2333 times)