Topic: Lightning Network node income? Please share some info (Read 376 times)

Most Signature campaign members are doing this for extra income and a lot of them are not going to have the money to fund a Lightning Network hub. Yes, you might generate a little bit of money, but I doubt if it would be more than the interest you would have received, if you simply deposited that money into a Bank.  

So the question is, would you lock up say $1000 worth of bitcoins in a LN Hub for say a few cents profit a month or get $8 interest on the same amount, when you deposit it into a Bank account at a fixed interest rate. 

this topic is very interesting, yes the income of the signature participants for now is indeed a bit unlike the lightning network node you are talking about, I am a layman in this discussion so I searched and found this link https://lightning.network/
maybe I will learn and try to understand

well you wont be one of them consultants/specialists.
maybe you can earn a bit from the comedy circuit as u had me laughing.

but bringing the topic back from your de-rail
guy asks about income from LN. i inform them that they need to process 100k transactions to earn 4cents..
im not the one saying average joe can earn millions from it

as for your mindset that LN will take the pressure off people wanting to be full nodes. but those wanting to run future fullnodes with LN interaction will end up actually being masternodes of multiple networks to allow atomic swaps.
so get the mindset out of your head that taking utility away from bitcoin under the pretense of making bitcoin lighter. helps bitcoin.
get it out your mindset that those wanting to run fullnodes and happy with LN will get a lower resource required node when they integrate LN.. they wont
get it out your mindset that LN will help covr any costs of running a full node for average joe
and please get it out your head YOUR exaggeration that bitcoins ntwork needs LN due to the "gigabytes by midnight" crap that a certain group uses to promote LN and promote why fee's need to go up before scaling bitcoins network and all that blah

anyway
back to my point on topic before doomad derailed the topic
to make just 4cents requires handing 100,000 transactions.

and guys dont worry about doomad he has been round the forum lately trying to over social dramatise discussions to try to get anyone thats talking less than optimistic about LN to be poked into other discussions in th hope that those mentioning LN's flaws stop mentioning the flaws.

h seems too financially/emotionally invested in LN. while happy with the attempts to stifle/halt/deburden bitcoins network of its bitcoin utility. from how he talks about LN.. his information is just some glossy promo material. he doesnt seem to understand the tech/code/concepts and dosnt seem to have yet even used LN. nor run any LN based scenario's even if run just on paper. but i do hope one day he does try doing some research and some indpendant thought as then his echo's will seem less of a yawn

Someone asked a question about it.  You were the one who introduced the talk about "getting rich", because you can't help but take things to extremes.  No one thinks that.  There's a clear difference between not being sure on the amounts you could potentially earn and "getting rich".  Don't exaggerate if you don't want people to challenge you on it.

LN will generally allow people to pay less money in fees for their transactions, rather than earning them an income from fees.  No one is "getting rich" from fees.  Not even those scary companies you keep FUDing about.  Their business model is more likely to earn income through consultancy and integration work.  There are millions of companies around the world who would be willing to pay specialists to help them set up their systems if LN takes off.  That's where the real money is.

try to do some research. i know your hoping to be employed by some DCG funded company by kissing certain groups asses and promoting thier agenda.. but just put your greed aside especially if it leads you to get so emotional that you have to get insulting.
a lesson for you.
no matter how much i discuss. does not change anything.
its a discussion forum. so chillout
if you dont like discussions, go watch eastenders to get your social drama fix
your emotional replies thinking that some how forum discussions can stop LN function.... is not logical.
CODE changes CODE. so get emotional over devs
like you said devs have no desire to implement a fee priority mechanism. thus its devs letting oncahain fee's go wild and uncontrolled while the devs promote LN to get returns on the investments made to the devs corporate partners


yes the old fee mechanism was not great, but to remove it as part of the plans to push onchain fee's up while not helping the wider community is a DEVS decision. and there are ways to enforce a fee mechanism that even miners cant ignore

are you forgetting the recent bips to reduce blocksize to push fee's up and cause people to want to move to LN
are you forgetting the last 3 years of devs coding has been pretty much predominately to make a txformat thats LN compatible.
are you forgetting that de-burdening bitcoin network is NOT scaling bitcoin but reducing bitcoin utility while also ramping up costs of using bitcoin network. thus making people dislike bitcoin more

oh wait you didnt forget. its just you on a flop narrative not a flip narrative

and again.
if you wanna just de-rail a topic and just rant and insult a discussion. then you are wasting your own time yet again

now go do some research
as its funny you say no one is talking about LN fee income.. in the very topic about LN fee income.. hilarious

Except that's not the point of LN at all and it's just something you like to say repeatedly, even though it isn't true.  The point of LN is that off-chain transactions will ease the burden on full nodes and keep the overall size of the blockchain somewhat manageable.  It's also about giving users choice over how they transact.  The fact that people are already using it voluntarily (and aren't earning any astounding income from fees) would seem to suggest that you're talking crap (as usual).



This lie has been debunked already.  Miners were ignoring the fee priority.  Devs have no desire to override what the miners are doing.  Therefore it's pointless to include that code when miners ignore it anyway.

Stop lying and I won't poke the manipulative shitweasel (you're not a bear).

here he goes again. poking the bear again
did you even read. why do you think nodes will own more than one channel. to maximise exposure to get as many people routing through them to double up income without revealing that the 3-5hops a user makes is actually 3-5 hops through one person. rather than having one node strained with millions of connections charging 3-5x more than others
a.*-1-1-1-1-1-*

b.*-5-*

c.*-1-*

(a)maximises grabbing users to get most transaction count
it gets the entity 5x more than users that only handle 1 hop
because (a) surrounds the major exchanges/merchants its not like many usrs can avoid such st-ups to get to th srvice at the centre
also using factories the service can fractional reserve, to need actual bitcoin funding the offchain 12decimal token balance

might be worth you running scenarios

this is the whole point of LN, the investors in devs want some return on investment. its why he devs paid by investors have spent the last 3+ years with a roadmap thats only direction has been a txformat as the gateway into this other network. its why these devs rmoved fee priority mechanisms and not instead put in better fee priority mechanisms. its why the devs have stalled actual BITCOIN NETWORK scaling because they want to deburden bitcoins utility over to other networks

its kind of like you have totally forgotton and got amnesia about the whole flip flops and your own comments of the last 3 years

if you are really going to try de-railing yet another topic to just be a social drama about "franky says this" atleast stick to one narrative

..
as for your point about saying no one has ever thought/suggested that people can make income from LN
well the topic creator of this very topic has.
a quick google search shows MANY people hoping to get income via LN

its actually only a few people trying to correct that narrative by showing how average joe wont make income because most of the routes will be done via centralised services using hubs to increase thier exposure and transaction count to get most out of the 'low fee' pretense

I've never seen anyone advocating that LN is good because they thought they'd get rich from fees.  It's abundantly clear that you would not be able to earn any notable income from routing transactions.  People do realise this from everything I've witnessed here on the forum.  I don't know where you get this perception that people somehow believe LN is going to make them wealthy.  Are you projecting your own early misconceptions onto others again?

LN fees are almost the inverse of on-chain fees.  On-chain, users bid to offer the highest fees to the miners to give their transaction preference over others.  In LN, nodes compete to offer the lowest fees possible in order to attract users to route via them rather than through other nodes.

running a LN node requires initial investment, you will need some coins to maintain the chain
plus it is electricity costs and knowledge of how to set it up
as it was mentioned above running a node should not be profitable for an average Joe, unless he processes huge amounts of transactions
can't compare hosting a LN node it to participating in  signature campaigns financially , almost all of the signature campaigns  pay far more than 5 $ per week
you can do both ,by the way , I see no problem with that

when working out the numbers and playing out scenarios you start learning a few things.

such as most people wont want 100,000 connected dirctly to them 24/7.. (imagine DDoS risk) so not only for security but also for incrasing income without making it appear as increasing fee, they will set up buffer channels

EG
instead of the network being like below where blue is sender green is reciever and purple is you

oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo

it would b more like
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
where by the red is also you. thus
taking less direct connection pressure off if your main purple node as your red nodes will be doing the main work
(much like how town banks do most the work so a HQ bank just plays with the rserves of each of their own banks)
expanding your connectivity to cover more routes
when blue connects to you. you get 1millisat(left red) 1millisat(green) 1 millisat(right red)
now you can get 3millisat instead of 1 millisat while having the network still proclaim that the avrag fe per hop is 1 milllisat

...
this then moves more onto the centralisation of larger factories/ having hubs as the buffer. which then have watch towers as another buffer. so that they can reduce so many direct connections but still have more route potentials and thus more income
whihc looks more like this


where the green orange and blue are the users
the purple is your main masternode(bankHQ/factory fortknox)
the yellow is your main hubs/buffer(cloudflare DDos protection/regional banks)
and the red is you watch towers(town bank branches)

with LN being 12 decimal
0.000000000001
and people believing that fees per channel hop will be
0.000000000001

to make $~0.04 means you have to process 100k transactions
to make $~0.38 means you have to process 1 million transactions
to make $~3.8 means you have to process 10million transactions
to make $~38 means you have to process 100 milion transactions
to make $~380 means you have to process 1 billion transactions
to make $~3800 means you have to process 10billion transactions

so to make 4cents on LN you need to have enough funds to shift 100k transactions(cups of cofffee)
think about it...

(this includes running scenarios of how often youll need to do independant close/open broadcasting to shift funds(costing onchain fees))
(this includes running scenarios of how much you will have to lock into a factory(fortknox bank) to avoid broadcast when close/open funds shifting))

what people are not realising is average joe will NOT be getting rich from being a full node route channel for LN for these reasons
LN's nich will turn out to be a way to atomic swap between altcoins without as much registration KYC pressure. these nodes end up being masternodes monitoring several blockchains. thus the funny part is saying running just bitcoin is 'expensive' as the ruse to get people excited by LN will backfire, as being a full LN nod will actually require more hardware. thus defeating the initial hyp reason for LN which was to deburden bitcoin

Maybe in the future it'll make those amounts.

You should also consider that there isn't a single big crypto exchange has implemented LN yet. There isn't a well established LN casino or faucet neither.

One day hopefully they will implement the LN and then your node may route a lot more transactions than what it used to. If your node routes hundreds of thousands transactions every day, then you may make some real bucks.

Your weekend project might become a good investment later.

I haven't used Lightning Network nodes but as far I know, you need a little fee to bind the channels and the payback (the pay you receive) is a very low amount, but obviously, this is the start.

Well, this is why I wanted to discuss this. There are people claiming to run Lightning Network nodes and saying that they are

getting an income of $150 per week.    {When you request proof, they make excuses.} I was just thinking that a $2 to $5

income per week from hosting a node might be doable and people might just be incentivised by that kind of income to run a

Lightning Network node.     (I guess I was wrong then or the traffic is still too small for that)   

I was thinking too much on the passive income thing lately that's why I was looking at those masternodes.

I also don't like to trade and chase altcoin pumps. I tried it, I don't have the patience to buy low sell high. I realized I am a hodl guy so locking up $100-200 on an altcoin won't bother me.

That's also the reason I am still not buying a BSD MN. Locking up $1000 would bother me unlike $100.  

I hold %5 alts among my crypto portfolio and many of them came from give aways or airdrops.

I am very picky about choosing an altcoin investment.  

I actually agree with you that trading makes more sense than locking up funds but like I said, I don't wanna be mobile at all. In a bull run none of these matter anyway. Every shitcoin goes to moon.

not necessarily, sometimes less safe means less profit too.

I guess that is more of a preference than anything else but I can't help but think you are combining speculation (trading) with master node and if I were you I would focus on speculation and trading and make a lot more than just locking up my money and hope for the best.
in altcoin market moving money is earning a lot of profit if you jump from one pump coin to another during their pumps and leaving them as soon as their pumps are done.

I agree

Safer = Less profits/losses

Less safer = More profits/losses

It is a risk and reward thing in the end again. I wouldn't buy a damn altcoin MN when the prices was at its peak. The BSD MN I am looking at right now used to cost $30k-50k. Now it is $1k. It may go down to $100 next week. (then I would buy at least 3 )

Tbh I would rather buy a MN which is priced between $100-500. That's why I still didn't pull the trigger on the BSD MN. $1k is still overpriced imo but who knows...

I also said faucet drops making more money than a LN node. So If you are after passive income, a LN node doesn't make sense at all. It is a nice weekend project however.

but you are missing the biggest difference between running a lightning node and running a master node and that is the "coin" you need to store in order to run these successfully and profitably. when you run a master node of some altcoin, that altcoin is going down in the long term not to mention the big dumps that they always have which would guarantee a long term loss but in comparison bitcoin that you need for your LN node is gaining value. you may earn more in the beginning but there will be huge losses coming that would wipe it off.
so risk-wise, running an LN node is so much safer than anything else.

There are people who claim to make as high as $5 () a month and also as low as 5-6 satoshis. You'll probably make much more just by clicking the freebitco.in's faucet button.

It also depends on how many tx your node is routing and your liquidity on the channels but even when you set those right It probably won't be more than a few dollars at best.
In the end Bitcoin was $0.1 once too. It always started like this. Also the information you learned while setting up a LN node might come in handy later. You can't price that one.
I'm afraid what you are seeking isn't this. You want to setup a Master Node which makes you money passively.

You may wanna check this website out:

https://masternodes.online/

If you pick the right coin with fine trading volume (exchange volume is important otherwise you won't find any buyers when you want to cash out to your lambo) which is listed on a decent exchange, you might succeed it. I am looking at BSD right now tbh.  

no it won't reduce spam around this forum because to run a lightning network node you have to make some effort to learn how it works and set it up whereas joining a signature campaign doesn't require that much work or even understanding of what you are doing, you just have to make posts.

and the earning is never going to be high, specially as lightning network grows because it is a competition to offer the lowest fee for rerouting transactions and if you ask for higher, others will outbid you.