once the aggregated transactions reach a certain amount the channel needs to close!
part of the whole point of closing the channel is to settle the transactions.
if there are lets say 20,000 aggregated transactions(200k LN swaps) in a hub(channel intermediaries mempool).. it cant settle because bitcoin ONCHAIN only support ~2500tx/block now or 7500tx/block next year.. so the channel has to close when the aggregated transactions reach that limit equivalent to 2500tx now or 7500tx next year
its also worth noting:
while each hub can only settle equivalent of a 7500 aggregated transaction.. and while people will need to relock in their funds again.. there can only be 3 hubs settling every hour.. 3 for settling, 3 for locking in.
yes there may be some hubs that only handle 10,000tx a day(1,000 aggregate.. maybe) so those hubs only settle once a week when they reach the block limit quota for aggregated transactions... but the more popular hubs will be settling and relaunching much sooner.. BUT limited to about 3 times an hour.
afterall lauda is assuming "billions of transactions a day" meaning popular hubs.. rather than hubs that only settle once a week due to lack of use.
and its because of the ONCHAIN limitations.. that also limit LNs capacity
in short LN its not infinite.. please get out of your unicorn dream..
i would much prefer people to say the logical truth of 2.5x-10x capacity increase based on real usage(which is still a great improvement alone)... rather then stupidly say LN allows billions-infinite transactions.
i would much prefer people to say the logical truth of LN being great for services that are like SatoshiDice.. but not great for people paying their landlord once a month.. rather then saying its the infinite transaction network for everyone to buy unicorns on without delay..
its really becoming ridiculous how lauda has not even read a single line of code, yet wants to over promise something that he doesnt even know first hand.