Topic: Is Lightning going to ensure Bitcoin dominance? - page 2. (Read 386 times)
I think LN has to go through a lot of tests first before they proceed to further adoption. There would be conflicts of people would have bitcoin yet don't know how to transact it with Ln. I wonder why they have to choose only between Litecoin and dash where there are really best coins on top of the list.
In due time yes. Simple answer for a simple question
https://cryptostar.money/blog/will-dash-and-litecoin-be-struck-by-lighting/
Suggests that if users can pay with Bitcoin using Lighting enabled wallets than Dash and Litecoin are pointless. Is this right?
As other users have mentioned, the lightning network isn't ready for large-scale implementation, despite the fact that it has been in development for a number of years by now. Once it does get completed and can work effectively, then we can argue about whether Litecoin and Dash have any place in the crypto marketplace. Until they, they still serve their own purpose. I personally don't think that either Litecoin or Dash would become "obsolete" since many other cryptos would be tossed out due to their obsolescence first.Suggests that if users can pay with Bitcoin using Lighting enabled wallets than Dash and Litecoin are pointless. Is this right?
I'm trying to remember when they started to work on the Lightning network, it was probably at least conceptualized 5 years ago if they weren't actively working on it.
LN is a separate independant network, the units of account of LN (msats) are not even recognised on the bitcoin network
LN is not even fixed/tethered to bitcoin. you can change the chainhash to be litecoin or other alts
thus LN can actually promote litecoin far more than bitcoin because the onramp (cost/time) to lock collateral to LN is faster and cheaper using litecoin
people keep assuming that LN is a sole unique feature that is only bitcoin enabled due to the silly buzz words like "layer" but the reality is that LN is not a layer at all. its just fluffy buzzword used for PR to do the fame game of garnering sponsorship/funding by trying to mention the word bitcoin/crypto/blockchain being related to LN
LN is not even fixed/tethered to bitcoin. you can change the chainhash to be litecoin or other alts
thus LN can actually promote litecoin far more than bitcoin because the onramp (cost/time) to lock collateral to LN is faster and cheaper using litecoin
people keep assuming that LN is a sole unique feature that is only bitcoin enabled due to the silly buzz words like "layer" but the reality is that LN is not a layer at all. its just fluffy buzzword used for PR to do the fame game of garnering sponsorship/funding by trying to mention the word bitcoin/crypto/blockchain being related to LN
It is a second layer protocol that serves to help scale bitcoin. The main opponents of LN tend to be those who hold a grudge against bitcoin and don't want it to achieve even greater levels of success. No one is conflating it with being bitcoin. So far the whole milisats issue has proven to be a non-problem.
LN is a separate independant network, the units of account of LN (msats) are not even recognised on the bitcoin network
LN is not even fixed/tethered to bitcoin. you can change the chainhash to be litecoin or other alts
infact you can run a litewallet that api's to a factory/server and not even worry about blockchains
thus LN can actually promote litecoin far more than bitcoin because the onramp (cost/time) to lock collateral to LN is faster and cheaper using litecoin
people keep assuming that LN is a sole unique feature that is only bitcoin enabled due to the silly buzz words like "layer" but the reality is that LN is not a layer at all. its just fluffy buzzword used for PR to do the fame game of garnering sponsorship/funding by trying to mention the word bitcoin/crypto/blockchain being related to LN
LN is not even fixed/tethered to bitcoin. you can change the chainhash to be litecoin or other alts
infact you can run a litewallet that api's to a factory/server and not even worry about blockchains
thus LN can actually promote litecoin far more than bitcoin because the onramp (cost/time) to lock collateral to LN is faster and cheaper using litecoin
people keep assuming that LN is a sole unique feature that is only bitcoin enabled due to the silly buzz words like "layer" but the reality is that LN is not a layer at all. its just fluffy buzzword used for PR to do the fame game of garnering sponsorship/funding by trying to mention the word bitcoin/crypto/blockchain being related to LN
If eCommerce were to get in to cryptomarkets then yes, the lightning network would help ensure bitcoin dominance. If not, I don't think it will even be that significant to begin with. Well, LN is already helping the network in its own ways, but for people to really see its worth, there has to be some large volume of transactions coming in, else it's just another option for people who want to just try it out or avoid the expensive fees on the main chain.
Of course it'll but for as long as it's not yet implemented and the transactions are not yet secured enough with it then we can't tell what will happen next. If the time comes that it's fully implemented with no underlying problems afterwards then I'm confident that it'll surely affect the dominance of Bitcoin over some other altcoins as paying smaller would become faster and cheaper.
Faster and cheaper fees is the real deal with Cryptocurrencies right now and even though Bitcoin doesn't have it yet but still it's the most used Crypto.
Faster and cheaper fees is the real deal with Cryptocurrencies right now and even though Bitcoin doesn't have it yet but still it's the most used Crypto.
Suggests that if users can pay with Bitcoin using Lighting enabled wallets than Dash and Litecoin are pointless. Is this right?
I will not make comparisons between altcoins Vs bitcoins because this discussion never ends but what we have ask is:
- Why do people need Litecoin?
- Why Do People Need Dash?
we will eventually see the crypto world being legalized, probably anonymous coins will be targeted by governments. the technology will be much better in a few years and will allow bitcoin to be faster and with much less fees and a good investment, this will cause many altcoins to disappear or not have a large popularity that currently have
Re: Is Lightning going to ensure Bitcoin dominance?
I mean, bitcoin is still the dominant coin even if LN is still in it's alpha/beta stage. 🤷 But yea, I think it's going to affect the percentage of BTC's dominance by a bit(but probably not that much). When LN becomes successful, those people who say "how can I buy coffee with my BTC? with these fees" can finally shut up.Suggests that if users can pay with Bitcoin using Lighting enabled wallets than Dash and Litecoin are pointless. Is this right?
They'll probably lose a bit of recognition in the speed category, but LTC still has it's own uses; taking into consideration that as far as I know they're testing mimblewimble on LTC. 
I'm a fan of the lightning network, but it's meant for smaller payments, and is less safe than an on-chain transaction... So there'll always be a place for altcoins like litecoin or dash... Altough they might lose some of their marketshare due to the LN.
I guess you would still be able to send on chain transactions if it is needed. But I agree that all those shitcoins will keep existing. There are a lot of coins with faster transactions and lower fees and they are competing with each other and none of them yet got a serious market dominance.Basically, like the article said: if i was selling a second hand DVD, i'd prefer being payed with a LN invoice, if i was selling my car and i wanted fast confirmations, i'd accept LTC
Emm, that's what LN is created for. It doesn't seem like someone wants to buy an expensive car and he can't wait some minutes and pay an extra dollar as a fee. 
I'm a fan of the lightning network, but it's meant for smaller payments, and is less safe than an on-chain transaction... So there'll always be a place for altcoins like litecoin or dash... Altough they might lose some of their marketshare due to the LN.
Just my opinion based on running a lightning-enabled website for a "long" time (at least, a long time in the lightning network existance timeframe).
Basically, like the article said: if i was selling a second hand DVD, i'd prefer being payed with a LN invoice, if i was selling my car and i wanted fast confirmations, i'd accept LTC
Just my opinion based on running a lightning-enabled website for a "long" time (at least, a long time in the lightning network existance timeframe).
Basically, like the article said: if i was selling a second hand DVD, i'd prefer being payed with a LN invoice, if i was selling my car and i wanted fast confirmations, i'd accept LTC
Lightning network is still in its experimental phase and its too early to proclaim something like that op. Dash and Litecoin are still way ahead in terms of TX speeds and time at present.
We will know what the LN is truly capable of when its fully developed and ready to go.
We will know what the LN is truly capable of when its fully developed and ready to go.
https://cryptostar.money/blog/will-dash-and-litecoin-be-struck-by-lighting/
Suggests that if users can pay with Bitcoin using Lighting enabled wallets than Dash and Litecoin are pointless. Is this right?
Suggests that if users can pay with Bitcoin using Lighting enabled wallets than Dash and Litecoin are pointless. Is this right?
Jump to: