Lol, this is the thread that keeps on giving... Y'all just can't help yourselves
....It's like watching a slow motion train wreck.
You guys really have no idea what is going on do you? Big o'l world outside of bitcoin talk....
I wonder if any of you understand what e.g this article means?
https://www.trustnodes.com/2020/02/14/lightning-network-increasingly-centralized-removing-hubs-leads-to-collapse-says-blockstream-studyCritically the use of the word (de)centralised in tho context of the network graph. Do you still not understand what decentralised means? it is about connectedness, and not about node count/distribution. Nobody read "On red balloons and bitcoin"? Nobody know what a near complete graph is...? why bitcoin was designed as a type of mandala network...? all this information, and more, is available for free!
All you have to do is be able to overcome your deep seated emotional biases and whip out Occam's razor... OR, keep slapping each other on the back... you guys have it all figured out, nothing to see here. Aussie man bad. Move along now....
Just for the record and let's keep all the drama to the side and focus on the facts: Are you stating BSV network is MORE decentralised than Bitcoin's LN?
The Lightning Network is not decentralised. It's in the article I linked. I and countless other have been saying this since LN was first conceived. Now you have a study from Blockstream telling you the very same... what's the problem here? what's not to understand?
The Bitcoin network is decentralised, because economic incentives compel miners to connect directly with each other resulting in a network topography that resembles a complete graph.
This continue to be the case in BSV because those incentives have not been perverted by the introduction of schemes such as Liquid which are designed to move tx (and therefor miner rewards aka incentives) off chain.
Gazeta, linking that propaganda thread just tells me you've outsourced thinking about this stuff. GL with that.
It's funny how many guys talk about de/centralisation as if it were a binary thing. LN is centralised and decentralised. Bitcoin is decentralised and centralised. What matters is the degree of each.
So you answered saying that LN is centralised. I reply to you saying it is decentralised. Both answers are correct.
But
I asked you if you consider BSV to be more decentralised than LN. You did not directly answer that.
That being said. I do expect most high traffic payments sidechain to be more centralised than decentralised. Otherwise it would not scale enough for massive adoption to compete with paypal, visa, etc. Unless you do know some genius way to *SCALE* several orders of magnitude more using blockchain. If you do, maybe you should create your own new coin. It would be a blast.
I don't know why you talk about Liquid which is an EXTREMELY (not 100%, but almost) centralised sidechain. As intended.