Topic: Lightning Network needs companies to pay workers in Bitcoin (Read 168 times)

I went to an old folks home and tried getting them to use cell phones, lap tops, the internet, and a lot of other things and failed. so they all must be bad just like LN...


"hobbyist" is the name you are giving them. but people who are running LN are the same people who have been running bitcoin nodes for ages. and they do it not as a hobby but because they understand what a "decentralized network" means and what their role as a bitcoin node or a bitcoin LN node is in this network.
as for the fees if you want an accurate number go use LN and you will see.

def expanding its project further, right?

The hobbyist won't have the funds or resources to keep up for long.

Your current hubs are full of hobbyists that can't afford many payment channels.

Print out your little pic again, once LN is actually being used by merchants for ~6 months.  

* Also get an accurate # for the fees, too tiny is just a BS line. *


FYI:
Even this early on , you can spot ~12 hubs that have the majority of routing thru them.

You seem to be the fool as the difference between reality and fud escapes you.

If LN is so easy ,   go to an old folk home and video some Senior Citizens using it , odds are it will prove my point instead of yours.  

Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and Ecuador, we can live without them
Besides, is the other way around, we don't need banks as long as the coins remain in circulations and are not cash out for fiat.



Indeed, only a few hubs...

https://lnmainnet.gaben.win/


Same was said for bitcoin itself a few years ago....

I don't know what you think you can achieve by constantly spreading  FUD about lightning network, possibly the same thoughts occur to you now as you had back when you were spreading similar FUD about Segregated Witness before it was activated.

in the end people are using SegWit and are using LN whether you like it or not and the nonsense you keep spreading will only make you look like a fool.

Multiple Countries are now banning banks from accepting money from crypto exchanges, this blocks the hope that people in those countries will take payment in bitcoin.
LN is massively complicated , don't really expect the majority to run to it.
You will have a few LN hubs run by some rich fat cats as they have the resources to keep the techs on staff to run an LN hub safely.
But the hobbyist won't have the funds or resources to keep up for long.

If LN does catch on , people will just give their bitcoin core coins (ie deposit) to a 3rd party (ie bank) and let them manage it and avoid the technical headaches.

LN Design was always to complicated for the average person and it was designed so banks with larger tech resources would control it.
Sorry but Banking 2.0 is here and it will be called Lightning Network.  
They will fee you and confiscate your funds just like a regular Fiat Bank.

So I was thinking about LN's scalability and I'm pretty sure it's usability and scalability for Bitcoin will only be game changing once a lot of people receive their income from their jobs in Bitcoin.

LN is of course highly scalable, but it is held back by needing on-chain openings and closings of payment channels. This is limited by Bitcoin's roughly 6tx/sec throughput with segwit enabled (maximum ~14txs/sec with the smallest tx size but in the real world probably more like 5-6). What this does is limit the number of users that can use the LN, with the variable being how often payment channels are opened and closed. Realistically if the average LN user opens and closes a payment channel monthly, when combined with demand for normal on-chain txs, the on-chain fees are gonna skyrocket with probably even just a million LN users (or possibly far less since on-chain txs on their own will probably be filling up the blocks as Bitcoin's adoption grows).

People are going to need to open and close channels regularly as they run out of funds in their channels. The only way around this is if their primary source of income (their job) pays them in Bitcoin over the LN. This way they'd almost never need to close a channel. However this of course requires Bitcoin to have been adopted already to such a great scale that many companies are now giving the option to their employees to receive their paychecks in Bitcoin (or at least part of their paycheck in Bitcoin), but for this to happen Bitcoin needs to become massively adopted by merchants so that people can readily buy most things with LN.

So it's kind of a chicken and egg problem. LN is what Bitcoin needs to scale to be massively adopted, but LN itself can't scale due to its constraints from the blockchain until Bitcoin is massively adopted to the point where it becomes regular for companies to pay employees in Bitcoin and their is massive merchant adoption of Bitcoin using LN.


Thoughts?