Why do you need Lightning Network to open a payment channel when two merchant can simply opening an account in each other's platform and establish a payment channel?
Topic: Blockstream Core #R3KT at delivering Lightning Network (Read 1048 times)
As anticipated, all other off-chain solutions without touching the bitcoin protocol will be much faster to develop. They don't need to wait for 18 months for a major consensus to be formed within core devs, and that might even trigger a hard fork and derail the whole business plan
Why do you need Lightning Network to open a payment channel when two merchant can simply opening an account in each other's platform and establish a payment channel?
Why do you need Lightning Network to open a payment channel when two merchant can simply opening an account in each other's platform and establish a payment channel?
21 just won the game. 
True Micropayments with Bitcoin
https://medium.com/@21/true-micropayments-with-bitcoin-e64fec23ffd8#.opq37cf0a
True Micropayments with Bitcoin
https://medium.com/@21/true-micropayments-with-bitcoin-e64fec23ffd8#.opq37cf0a
that's awesome. Once they release their client to do this on any machine
(not just a 21 computer), then what?
Then anyone can enjoy using machine to machine micropayments for whatever use cases. However and as expected we still need bigger blocks.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
21 just won the game.
True Micropayments with Bitcoin
https://medium.com/@21/true-micropayments-with-bitcoin-e64fec23ffd8#.opq37cf0a
True Micropayments with Bitcoin
https://medium.com/@21/true-micropayments-with-bitcoin-e64fec23ffd8#.opq37cf0a
that's awesome. Once they release their client to do this on any machine
(not just a 21 computer), then what?
Geeez another clueless thread by knight.
The employers will certainly not like this. It seems that we have identified yet another shill that is unwilling to listen to reason.Probably why there is still no lightning network neither other than vaporware.
Quote
Joseph, Tadge and roasbeef's version: https://github.com/LightningNetwork/lnd/
Rusty's version (Blockstream): https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning
"Vaporware". Rusty's version (Blockstream): https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning
You must be enjoying that kool-aid. I think you will find that you are mindless shill around these parts.
LN is still at the prototype stage. What exists currently in roasbeefs repo is in no way a viable implementation of LN as Blockstream have envisaged it to be.
Maybe his former USG employers at Google might give him an idea of how to make it super-private? With Tor maybe?
Geeez another clueless thread by knight. Dude I doubt you have the required IQ to understand this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zVzw912wPo
Also notice that this video is outdated already because thanks to Core devs malleability was fixed with segwit so Lightning Network is looking better than ever. Please stop trying to play the #R3KT game, you aren't qualified to debate highly technical stuff otherwise you would be pro-Core and pro-LN.
What's on your link will never scale to the level LN can scale.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zVzw912wPo
Also notice that this video is outdated already because thanks to Core devs malleability was fixed with segwit so Lightning Network is looking better than ever. Please stop trying to play the #R3KT game, you aren't qualified to debate highly technical stuff otherwise you would be pro-Core and pro-LN.
Quote
LN is about developing a routing system that can make these type payment channels interoperable.
These 21 channels just let you open a channel and transact with one person (apparently unidirectionally). That's been in Bitcoin for a long time, but no one ever develops uses for it.
The LN will allow a person to open a channel like this and then send a payment to someone they haven't opened a channel with. In practice, the node the payor opens a channel with will have several channels open and payments will be routed between numerous payment channels until the destination is reached. This could take 10 hops, but it will be super fast because no confirmations.
By 21 adding this, they are simply incrementally building up to the eventual LN. It's a good step. Also, it's a good way to show the need for the LN; once people use this and like it, they will critique it for being limited to payments with only one person.
These 21 channels just let you open a channel and transact with one person (apparently unidirectionally). That's been in Bitcoin for a long time, but no one ever develops uses for it.
The LN will allow a person to open a channel like this and then send a payment to someone they haven't opened a channel with. In practice, the node the payor opens a channel with will have several channels open and payments will be routed between numerous payment channels until the destination is reached. This could take 10 hops, but it will be super fast because no confirmations.
By 21 adding this, they are simply incrementally building up to the eventual LN. It's a good step. Also, it's a good way to show the need for the LN; once people use this and like it, they will critique it for being limited to payments with only one person.
What's on your link will never scale to the level LN can scale.
Malleability is the least of LN's problems.
how about:
- route/fee dissemination and locating
- route format (no decision re: onion style (SRT bridging or any other)
- initial node finding
How about these points, Mr. IQ?
Geeez another clueless thread by knight.
The employers will certainly not like this. It seems that we have identified yet another shill that is unwilling to listen to reason.Probably why there is still no lightning network neither other than vaporware.
Quote
Joseph, Tadge and roasbeef's version: https://github.com/LightningNetwork/lnd/
Rusty's version (Blockstream): https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning
"Vaporware". Rusty's version (Blockstream): https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning
You must be enjoying that kool-aid.
Geeez another clueless thread by knight. Dude I doubt you have the required IQ to understand this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zVzw912wPo
Also notice that this video is outdated already because thanks to Core devs malleability was fixed with segwit so Lightning Network is looking better than ever. Please stop trying to play the #R3KT game, you aren't qualified to debate highly technical stuff otherwise you would be pro-Core and pro-LN.
What's on your link will never scale to the level LN can scale.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zVzw912wPo
Also notice that this video is outdated already because thanks to Core devs malleability was fixed with segwit so Lightning Network is looking better than ever. Please stop trying to play the #R3KT game, you aren't qualified to debate highly technical stuff otherwise you would be pro-Core and pro-LN.
Quote
LN is about developing a routing system that can make these type payment channels interoperable.
These 21 channels just let you open a channel and transact with one person (apparently unidirectionally). That's been in Bitcoin for a long time, but no one ever develops uses for it.
The LN will allow a person to open a channel like this and then send a payment to someone they haven't opened a channel with. In practice, the node the payor opens a channel with will have several channels open and payments will be routed between numerous payment channels until the destination is reached. This could take 10 hops, but it will be super fast because no confirmations.
By 21 adding this, they are simply incrementally building up to the eventual LN. It's a good step. Also, it's a good way to show the need for the LN; once people use this and like it, they will critique it for being limited to payments with only one person.
These 21 channels just let you open a channel and transact with one person (apparently unidirectionally). That's been in Bitcoin for a long time, but no one ever develops uses for it.
The LN will allow a person to open a channel like this and then send a payment to someone they haven't opened a channel with. In practice, the node the payor opens a channel with will have several channels open and payments will be routed between numerous payment channels until the destination is reached. This could take 10 hops, but it will be super fast because no confirmations.
By 21 adding this, they are simply incrementally building up to the eventual LN. It's a good step. Also, it's a good way to show the need for the LN; once people use this and like it, they will critique it for being limited to payments with only one person.
What's on your link will never scale to the level LN can scale.
Hubs aren't completely trustless.
There's NO HUBS YOU TWAT
Another graduate of the Bram Cohen charm school?
You really are a spastic of gargantuan proportions. LN has a fundamental difficulty with finding routes without hubs. Maybe you didnt get that update.
21 spanked blockstream good and hard. And you are doing a shit job of managing PR.
Hubs aren't completely trustless.
There's NO HUBS YOU TWAT
Probably why there is still no lightning network neither other than vaporware.
Just ask John-connor how to do it.
Hubs aren't completely trustless.
There's NO HUBS YOU TWAT
Hubs aren't completely trustless.
Yep I know, this is better than Lightning Network. Lightning network requires a third party. This thing is P2P.
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
What are you even saying !?!?
Lightning network requires hubs run by third parties, not this approach.
FROM 21.CO ARTICLE YOU LINKED
Quote
or the highly anticipated Lightning Network (for which payment channels are a building block and hubs aren’t needed).
Lightning network is this stuff on steroid.
Which requires a third party.
No it doesn't what are you stupid?
Yep I know, this is better than Lightning Network. Lightning network requires a third party. This thing is P2P.
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
What are you even saying !?!?
Lightning network requires hubs run by third parties, not this approach.
FROM 21.CO ARTICLE YOU LINKED
Quote
or the highly anticipated Lightning Network (for which payment channels are a building block and hubs aren’t needed).
Lightning network is this stuff on steroid.
Which requires a third party.
Yep I know, this is better than Lightning Network. Lightning network requires a third party. This thing is P2P.
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
What are you even saying !?!?
Lightning network requires hubs run by third parties, not this approach.
FROM 21.CO ARTICLE YOU LINKED
Quote
or the highly anticipated Lightning Network (for which payment channels are a building block and hubs aren’t needed).
Lightning network is this stuff on steroid.
Yep I know, this is better than Lightning Network. Lightning network requires a third party. This thing is P2P.
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
What are you even saying !?!?
Lightning network requires hubs run by third parties, not this approach.
Yep I know, this is better than Lightning Network. Lightning network requires a third party. This thing is P2P.
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
What are you even saying !?!?
Quote
At a certain point, complementary scaling solutions may need to be found — such as a hub-and-spoke model that would allow for each device to establish one channel to a hub and then exchange with all other devices connected to that hub or interoperable hubs, or the highly anticipated Lightning Network (for which payment channels are a building block and hubs aren’t needed).
Yep I know, this is better than Lightning Network. Lightning network requires a third party. This thing is P2P.
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
-edit-
This has nothing to do with the fork. What's your point?
This is not the Lightning network.
Can you read?
Jesus you f0rkers are ever desperate.
Gavin is taking a vacation, maybe you should too?
Can you read?
Quote
The same ideas apply to the technology we’ve implemented for Bitcoin micropayments, which is called micropayment channels or payment channels. The tech has a long history in Bitcoin — it was actually originally imagined by Satoshi Nakamoto when he designed two features called nSequence and Locktime, and a variant of it was later implemented by Matt Corallo and several other developers in BitcoinJ.
Quote
At a certain point, complementary scaling solutions may need to be found — such as a hub-and-spoke model that would allow for each device to establish one channel to a hub and then exchange with all other devices connected to that hub or interoperable hubs, or the highly anticipated Lightning Network (for which payment channels are a building block and hubs aren’t needed).
Jesus you f0rkers are ever desperate.
Gavin is taking a vacation, maybe you should too?
Jump to: