Topic: Lightning Network - page 2. (Read 408 times)

No. instead Lightning Network will increase the revenue of miners even more!

basically for two simple reasons. first is as others said above, the on-chain transactions will still happen. in fact LN requires on-chain transactions and on-chain scaling to work best.
and second is because there is nothing stopping miners who already process transactions to run a LN node on top of their setup and gather small LN fees on top of what they are earning from mining! (the increased revenue part).

p.s. it is NOT PoS so stop comparing LN with it.

more details, the lightnign network ready settled over the blockchain network. so it will happen automatically when a transaction occurs, but i not know for the miners.

And you are clueless to how LN works.

Those 1000txs Offchain will not pay you a penny unless someone cashes out at the end onchain.
But up that number to millions/billions of transactions offchain that you never see a penny for.

The Fact is LN Goal is to Eventually Lock ALL bitcoins in place and only use the LN network, the same way our crappy fiat system works.

If you are really a miner , then you are a fool to support LN as it's primary objective is to put you out of work.

Just letting you know you are going to need a new job if LN succeeds, so better start looking now.  

Oh, and if you actually think you are going to run a giant LN Hub,  you better have the resources to buy a banking license and submit to all KYC regulations , because the US Gov. is going to be so far up your butt, you will be a hand puppet.  So much for the freedom satoshi hoped for.  

Start thinking now, if all transactions occur offchain for even 6 months at a time, how long can you afford to keep buying new asics and keep the electricity running.
Not Long,  I wager.

The Lightning Network is just a way to have the Bitcoin system working - if you still had transaction that cost 30$ like it happened in December Bitcoin would be already dead.

While this is a way to 'take the fees' from the miners, you must also look at it as a wakeup call to try to shake miners to change with the supporters of the LN. If the LN supporters show that they could easily leave them, and most people support them in this endeavor, then they're going to change quickly to keep the people happy so they're able to keep a portion of the fees they're getting now. Cause some fees are a LOT better then nothing. As the LN is pretty cheap as the only payment is going to the nodes.

So yes it is, but it is also a way to make the miners change for the better of bitcoin.

If that lightning network will run smoothly, then it isn't a problem for those who can afford to invest with that on chain transactions. The miners will still be getting those fees, but not like with those previous time that miners fee was having huge amount of transaction fees. Hopefully this can be implemented and could really help the blockchain network transactions to be running successfully in the future, with minimal delays compared of what everybody was experiencing  in the recent years.

On-chain transactions are still going to be necessary, so it's not like miners won't be getting fees anymore. If we were to assume that Bitcoin will reach mainstream adoption with the Lightning Network, while there would be less on-chain transactions, there shouldn't be any shortage.

As far as monetizing the Lightning Network fees go though, I've heard it would be difficult because everyone can run their own. It would be a race to the bottom, basically, though I haven't really gone in-depth as to how it would work in practice.

Either way, considering the fact that miners will still be receiving rewards for the next century or so, it may be too soon to worry about this problem lol. It may be wiser to see how things are going to turn out with the Lightning Network first.

I do not think, Lightning Network is an option to pay

In fact, you are not forced to use channels to make payments, especially if the amounts are large and the transmission periods are sporadic or away. In that case, using the Bitcoin addresses is more comfortable than creating a channel.

Note that the lightning network is useful only in the case of small and frequent payments so it will not affect the fees of miners.

One of the reason why the lightning network is being implemented is because it wanted bitcoin to realize its main purpose which is a medium of exchange. But because of slow confirmation speed and high transaction fees it is possible somehow to mainstream bitcoin and use it in our daily lives. Thus lightning network is the answer to mainstream bitcoin into all walks of life wherein we can buy coffee in the streets and many more. Also the POS algorithm will attract more users since this time the fees from transactions will go back to the users.

I think, it is right idea.

Additionally achievement is that all full lightning nodes need full bitcoin node. If nothing changes, it will be very good for increasing decentralisation of main bitcoin network. I hope so.

The main present time problem of LN is that very few amount of transactions are pass now (statistics of my own node "LENINGRAD"). The second problem is that more then half channels lower than 2$ and can't be used for real payment transactions.

I hope, situation will change after LN release.

I'm not sure what you mean, "automatic way to POS."

From a miner's perspective - I like LN. There will be always be some level of channel churn, and if LN means 1,000 tx's fit into the space of 30tx's previous - then that really increases the potential tx fees I collect per block.

As a miner it is my dream for the coinbase incentive / tx payouts to flip. I.e. 12.5btc coinbase + 20btc tx (for illustrative purposes.)

Does anyone else see the Lightning Network as a way for large BTC holders to become like banks and get the fees that were designed to go to the miners?  The layers sure sound like the intermediaries that Satoshi invented Bitcoin to thwart.  Long term, miners are needed to continue to secure the system and if there is no incentive or fees then it will be very easy for someone to 51%.

Edit: After doing some soul searching, the Lightning Network may not be an overt attempt to take fees from miners, but it does raise serious concerns.  Keep in mind that fees are paid by $/kB not by transaction amount.

There are many layers or intermediary already in place, but this seems to be implemented by the core team itself.  This is what concerns me.

The more I think about it, this may be one of the reasons why large institutions and family offices are making very very large purchases of BTC.  I have had requests for 100k - 500k BTC from credible sources.

Edit: I do think that it favors the large BTC holders over the miners.  Miners have to pay operating costs of mining and have to churn the BTC to keep the system going.  If you build a layer on top that receives fees for holding BTC, is this fair to the miners?

I do realize this competition of interests was built into the Bitcoin design.  Early adopters would have the advantage and miner reward diminishes.  This is when fees of the system are supposed to support mining.  If the core implements an automatic way for large BTC owners to essentially POS then it will be self defeating.  They may lower security for the entire system even though they may have good intentions.

There is also a regulatory issue. Why do you think ETH is dragging their feet on POS?  If the core team implements a system that provides a reward for payment channels they have now, most likely, pushed BTC into security terroritory.  And that is right where the Institutions would want it.  It would limit access. Thoughts?

Edit: this isn’t a plug for BCH.  I am just thinking long term about the viability of mining which is the backbone of Bitcoin.