Topic: Is the Lightning Network centralized? - page 14. (Read 1959 times)
I have been reading and studying a lot about this thing. Lightning network implementation sounds a good idea to everyone as it can save high transaction fees. But since the two parties directly transact with each other then i can say that it is a centralized in that way. There are still questions that are popping up in my mind like there are still expected shortcomings that may experience, then how can we resolve that issue?
It's not centralized in any meaningful sense. If a hub in the hub-and-spoke network of LN channels ever becomes known as a problem then everyone can start routing around it. So long as blockchain fees for a single TX are not too high there's not much "locking" anyone into using a problem hub. And a bad actor operating a hub is very limited in what kinds of hijinks they can perpetrate anyway.
Some say that the Lightning Network is centralized, but from my point of view, it's still a decentralized solution to scale Bitcoin as anyone would be able to run a Lightning node at will. The huge advantages that it provides for Bitcoin such as dirt-cheap fees, and instant transactions would be too hard to ignore to implement in the future.
However, if the Lightning Network turns out to become a centralized solution for Bitcoin (like many claims it will), then it would be doomed as only those with a lot of wealth and power would be able to participate in this ecosystem.
What are your thoughts about this? Is Lightning really centralized? Or Decentralized?
However, if the Lightning Network turns out to become a centralized solution for Bitcoin (like many claims it will), then it would be doomed as only those with a lot of wealth and power would be able to participate in this ecosystem.
What are your thoughts about this? Is Lightning really centralized? Or Decentralized?
Jump to: