Topic: Bitcoin Lightning Network Growth 1212% in the last 2 years - page 2. (Read 331 times)

LN is dying all by itself. its already in zombie mode. just held up by centralists hoping to penny pinch each other for tx fee's
and those against LN are not against cheap fee's they are against a flawed and buggy network being promotd as a solution to bitcoin

bitcoin will live on LN is already dying. im sorry you cant see passed the truth and just want the truth to go away to keep your dreams alive. but your dreams have passed the alarm clock. its time to wake up

other subnetworks have overtook bitcoin liquidity and participation and have fewer bugs/flaws
i personally am sticking to the bitcoin network. but the failures of LN need to be poked out before some people fall foul to the broken promises and fluffy promoted lies of ln's status

look how the chief LN devs(lightning labs aka blockstream) admit that LN is more complex to use so then wants to offer a centralised service.. funny part is LN was meant to be the solution to decentralisation and help allow users to be independent nodes.. yet now they are admitting to their failing by offering a centralised service as their solution..

there are many other subnetwork bridges to bitcoin and if you add up all the users. you will see that its LN that ar the obvious minority of userbase because there is a majority of bitcoin subnetwork bridge users avoiding LN and preferring other subnetworks
its time to wake up and wipe the drool off the side of your mouth

Franky1, I'm asking you this time honestly, aren't you tired of attacking LN?
Why do you even bother, it's a done thing, nobody is giving crap about what some users which are obviously a minority say, especially when their arguments are that cheap transactions are bad, so what are you doing and why?
LN is here to stay and it will die only with Bitcoin, a thing I'm pretty sure you don't want to happen, so why? Seriously, why?


Phil is a miner, and although he is overreacting sometimes his math and reasoning are spot on most of the time.
You can't have security without a mining reward, and you can't have that reward without fees, in a decentralized network it's the users who pay, if you don't find a way to make them pay voluntarily it will suffer the same fate as an NGO that runs out of funds.

I assume you remember our discussions you can't say BTC will become centralized because we need to spend 200$ on some SSD while at the same time thinking gear running on 8GW will do so out of goodwill.
LN and the main chain need equilibrium, and ....money!

much like how governments that maintain roads suddenly tell  people to stop using cars by increasing the fuels and toll charges trying to get everyone to ride a train
only problem is the train stations and rails inbetween have more bottlenecks and are just waiting for popularity to go in their favour to then raise ticket prices per journey..
its not an experiment. its standard bait and switch economics that is as old as religion

when devs stop developing bitcoin and become economists(without qualification) and devs for other network preference, wanting to offer another network as the only route.. it does not help bitcoin it just popularises the centralised other network they promote for profit
(those who sponsor core devs didnt do it out of altruism they done it to push a way of getting middle men into the payments game for ROI)

funny thing is the 6mill LN payments of lets say 1 sat per hop is only 0.06btc($1600 in 2 years)
i made that amount just this month by only using the bitcoin network and true bitcoin services.. LN is a failure. its been 6 years and there are still issues and companies are not making the money they were promised years ago they would earn when they sponsored devs to implement code to make LN possible.
the 6mill payments in 2 years is equivalent to 12days of bitcoin transactions

I don't know, it seems like Sam Wouter is just speculating on what he sees without considering anything else and the actual adoption by Bitcoin users.
He only focuses on the raw data presented without looking at the actual usage and adoption data done or not.

The Lightning Network is layer2 of Bitcoin that provides the best solution to overcome the cost and speed issues.
But everything is still in the development stage and there are still some shortcomings that the lightning network has such as theft and fraud activities that can be carried out by means of other users closing payment channels unilaterally or offline and charging more and more additional fees.
But this is still in the development process.

---

The truth is that we can't ignore these flaws and I am even aware of some of the flaws that the Lightning Network has.
Everything is still under development and it's not perfect.
Remember that the Lightning Network was originally just an experimental project on Layer2 of Bitcoin to address the cost and speed issues. 

The report is this: https://river.com/learn/files/river-lightning-report-2023.pdf

In short, they have got data from various lightning-accepting companies, companies that produce lightning software, and from their own lightning node. As they say, 1,212% increase is based on data from 52% of the public capacity, which gives a somewhat confident level of accuracy.

Don't you find it a little ignorant to compare the entire mining sector with just one lightning operator? Also, since when does the largest in capacity node have only 17 BTC?

And it will not bode well in 20-30 years.
It will simply cause miners to abandon BTC blockchain and move to Scrypt.

When the largest node in the world with 17 btc  capacity only generates 87 a month in income  (when pushed hard) and 30 a month in income do the math.

170 btc is 300-870 a month

1700 btc is 3000-8700 a month

17000 btc is 30000-87000 a month

170000 btc is 300000-870000 a month

1700000 btc is 3,000,000- 8,700,000 a month this would be 100,000 x bigger than now

3 million x 12 = 36 million a year

8,700,000 x 12 = 104.4 million a year



today mining does 23,587,200 a day


looks like a fucking mess is coming right at BTC  due to scaling.

usage has not grown. the liquidity has not moved much
bitcoins intrinsic value is at the low $20k range while prices are over $26k

all this shows is that river financial is shuffling more funds back and forth(payments AND rebalancing) more often
as for the 6,599,553 payments in 2 years (1,051,200 minutes) is only 6.278113584payments a minute
bitcoin still does ~300transactions a minute

LN has existed for more then 6 years but is no where near the amount of payments bitcoin done per minute in 2015(its 6th anniversary)

infact there are other subnetwork bridges that do far more then LN

its also funny how they say there are 1.1million lightning network users but only 64k channels. meaning 1.04m users are centralised exchange balance holders. not lightning balance holders. (nor bitcoin holders)

yes i know out of the 84m utxos of bitcoin there are hundreds of millions of bitcoin centralised exchange balance holders. but based on percentages it seems lightning users are more centralised than bitcoiners.. and bitcoiners use bitcoin more than lightning

now if we took away all those upto 6million population of el salvadorians "free $30" of crypto that routed(and failed) via lightning within these 2 years i wonder how much left would be for genuine LN usage in the last 2 years

showing that river represents 10% of nodes(6.4k) and 29% of liquidity(1.5k btc locked) just shows how lightning (the so called solution to bitcoin) is not meeting its promises even after 6 years.

but hey people will just want to shout and scream how LN is great and perfect, ignore all the flaws, bugs, real stats and just want to pump the fluffy media pieces which state things which do not actually compliment a network once you put them into context

Thanks, very nicely compiled and presented info. And of course I'm happy LN is growing strong and it seems like it's going parabolic. It will take some pressure off the mempool, particularly taking care of those Ordinals, BRC20 tokens and what not...

I think it's incorrect to label transaction count growth as network growth. Network growth is something like a node count growth, open channels growth, user growth. Transaction count is important, but it's not network growth.

Also, 6.5 million tx per month is an incredibly low number. Visa has 660 million per day. So the 1212% growth is not impressive, when you go from a tiny number to a still tiny number in the grand scheme of things.

For cheaper and faster transactions.

Lightening network is not a payment processor which is limited to businesses accepting Bitcoin. It is an off chain alternative to high fees for smaller transactions. On average Bitcoin has hundreds of thousands of transactions daily, many of which can be routed through LN.

Bitcoin holders use LN too.

I was posting with the largest LN node owner.

And with 17 btc staked off which 8 was his He earns 80 bucks a month.  What this means is exchanges may be doing it to save money but it is not a real solution for fees being too small for miners in 2056.

Here is my conversation with him and frankly his earnings are disappointing to say the least.

They clearly show that we are heading for a mining collapse in or about 2056

But the question is why people now adopt lightning network? remember lightning network is cheaper than on chain network in terms of transaction numbers, since open a new channel need fees. So it should be a businessman are adopting lightning network.

I doubt Bitcoin holders are adopting lightning network when they still treat Bitcoin is an investment which they're not regularly spend their coins.

i agree that speculation on bitcoin is not only based on bitcoin ATH, online searches, etc. direct adoption by people, number of transactions, applications on online platforms, etc., are the most important factors to look at.

the increasing growth of the bitcoin lightning network in the last 2 years could indicate that the growth of bitcoin adoption is increasing. even though there are some who say that this growth is only transactions between channels on the network, i think it's not only that, there are definitely transactions from ordinary users that are increasing and this should be welcomed positively.

Number of open channels drops but sum of channel values increases a lot after a deep fall since July.

https://txstats.com/d/000000012/lightning-network?orgId=1&from=now-6y&to=now

txstats.com (the announcement) is a product with cooperation between BitMEX and Coinmetrics.com. You can customize time range to see some stats for Lightning Network.

Their guide for time range control.

Well, it can be one of several things...

Lightning Network transactions are very cheap, compared to normal transactions on the Blockchain.... so people see this as a viable alternative to traditional payment options and they are actually using it as a currency... OR

The transactions are cheap and someone are "cooking" the statistics by making MANY transactions to distort the real picture.

I hope this is "real" world use and not some hidden agenda that are being pushed, by the people who wants to boost the LN technology.  

There is a good lesson in this statement that one can not speculate on bitcoin price and adoption based on the drop from the ATH and the number of searches in search engines. The real adoption takes place in terms of usage of bitcoin, number of transactions both on-chain and on second layer, number of merchants that start accepting bitcoin, etc.

This significant growth in usage of Lightning Network is a clear indication of how bitcoin adoption has been increasing non-stop.
It also indicates how bitcoin current price is below its intrinsic value which makes the market state a manipulated one.

Due to some debate about the decimal point ".", I chose to remove it.
So that it would be clearer that it is thousands according to the graphical increment in the image that I have included.

---

Lightning network transaction fees are cheaper and transactions are also faster.
There are many adoptions made with Bitcoin's Lightning network for several payments for credit purchases, vouchers, and other payments.

If regulation becomes an obstacle it is already a rule that cannot be changed.
My country also does not allow Bitcoin as a payment transaction, but I can buy Bitcoin in Rupiah currency with a ATM Bitcoin Mainan made by local people in my country.
You can visit it at this link. https://btcln.app/

and I also discussed about this ATM Bitcoin Mainan
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/share-lightning-atm-mainan-beli-bitcoin-eceran-mulai-dari-rp1500-5404778



Yes, that's one of them, many exchanges have added Lightning Network Bitcoin, especially Binance, which makes transactions increase due to cheaper and more efficient fees.
List of Exchanges that Support Lightning Network.
https://github.com/theDavidCoen/LightningExchanges

Lightning Network is developed in various sectors, one of which is like a game that allows users to get Sats in every game.
Thanks to the Lightning network it can be done with fairly minimal transactions and this will be the future of Bitcoin layer 2 adoption.
There needs to be a lot more development for the Lightning Network.

It is uneven, indeed after several large exchanges such as Binance began to support the Lightning network, there was a significant increase in transactions.
and Coinbase also plans to integrate the Lightning Network, after Brian Armstrong CEO of Coinbase said "Lightning is great and something we'll integrate"
https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1644794656570617856

I don't have an opinion on it, but Bitcoin Ordinal is indeed the cause of the surge in transactions that are getting denser, and because of that people are starting to use the Lightning Network so as not to get stuck on Bitcoin transactions with fees that are also quite expensive.
It also makes the big exchanges want to support the lightning network.

Is there supposed to be a correlation between LN's growth and the Bitcoin price growth? I don't know why Sam Wouters is searching for such correlation. LN is supposed to be growing in times of high transaction fees, when the BTC blockchain is congested. There was such time frame(due to the Bitcoin Ordinals, I guess). The Bitcoin price and the online searches about BTC has little to do with this.
5000 BTC being locked in the Lighting Network proves that there's no actual growth of LN. It's just a bunch of channels inside LN, that are transacting more often between each other.

In general it looks like there's a huge adoption toward lightning network because the total transaction increase really high.

But if we look at the total channels, it's not really increase as high as the total transactions. So it seems only small a group are use lightning network, which I think it's a centralized exchange and centralized wallet that integrated with lightning network, where the user only need to use it without need to open a new channel.

Pretty much like people who use and hold Bitcoin in CEX.

This growth in transactions could have to do with there being more things to do on Lightning. I don't know if the growth in users is as impressive as the transaction count increase. Nostr is an interesting protocol that has attracted many developers to create Lightning focused apps. There are also several play to earn games and apps that let you earn some sats and withdraw through Lightning. There is still many improvements needed for users to have a better experience but it is certainly promising to see a huge growth in activity.