i have many opinions about many things.. i dont just suck up to one groups roadmap.. and just echo their hymns of heaven
by you using the same buzzwords as a group makes me think you are not independent at all, well occasionally you try, but then backtrack
i called you out on this ages ago. but you keep sinking back into the hole again
maybe instead of falling into traps, you start to learn about things first. then use it with nonsense small amounts to test the risk.. instead of falling flat into a trap and then suffering the consequences of trying to dig yourself out
this is why people dont want the suck-up utopian sales pitch but do want the scrutiny included critique so that people can actually learn the limits before the limits hit them in the face
i know your accustom to only reading ass kissery friendly posts from others, who will dupe you into crazy things. and your shocked at my approach so want to plead ignorance of what i write and just claim it must be misleading if you are hearing 12x other voices swaying you into traps
as for you pretending i dont know what im talking about. .. i know a heck of alot more then you do. because i do my research
heck i was telling people that most LN close sessions are 2 payments.. but you had to learn the hard way,
maybe next time dont just jump into the newest fad without realising what its going to cost you in the long run. do some research
part of lightning observer is to look into and research and watching it.. not just jumping into the newest hyped service and then paying the entry/exit fee's and losing out
Topic: Lightning Network Observer - page 4. (Read 13806 times)
funny part is i was calling out the segwit flaws in 2016.. and look what happened JUNK
you may not like that i dont ass kiss things.. but there are too many ass kissers already. people actually want to learn how things actually work and not just be told the utopian sales pitch
i sorry if im ruining anyones opportunity to syphon money from victims of these flaws, but im more sorry for the victims getting fund syphoned from folk that care more about greed than a payment system thats secure
secondly. legacy(old) nodes wont benefit from it. also old nodes will have more issues to contend with. such as seeing 'funky' transactions. aswell as still not being able to trust unconfirmed transactions due to RBF and CPFP.
..
fifthly, the 4mb weight. is only going to be filled with 1.8mb tx +witness data. leaving 2.2mb unused. but guess what. people will use it by filling it with arbitrary data. such as writing messages, adverts, even writing a book into the blockchain. what should have been done was allow 2mb base thus needing ~3.6mb weight.. and also adding a rule that 'messages' could not be added. thus keeping the blockchain lean and utilised just for transactions and not novels/adverts/messages. afterall if a communication tool like twitter or SMS can limit how much someone writes.. then so should bitcoin.
we will definetly see people purposefully bloating up the blockchain with passages of mobydick or over nonsense. and core have done nothing to stop it but done everything to allow it.
sixthly, as i slightly hinted before. by not limiting sigops, not preventing arbitrary data being added, core have incentivised bloating by discounting it. but have then added the fee's to reduce bitcoins utility of an actual transaction ledger..
this has to be emphasized over and over.. adding bloat is discounted(free) but sending a real transaction is costly
LN has bottlenecks and flaws that then require watchtowers and custodian hubs.. and look whats happening, majority of LN nodes are centralised custodian hubs..
fifthly, the 4mb weight. is only going to be filled with 1.8mb tx +witness data. leaving 2.2mb unused. but guess what. people will use it by filling it with arbitrary data. such as writing messages, adverts, even writing a book into the blockchain. what should have been done was allow 2mb base thus needing ~3.6mb weight.. and also adding a rule that 'messages' could not be added. thus keeping the blockchain lean and utilised just for transactions and not novels/adverts/messages. afterall if a communication tool like twitter or SMS can limit how much someone writes.. then so should bitcoin.
we will definetly see people purposefully bloating up the blockchain with passages of mobydick or over nonsense. and core have done nothing to stop it but done everything to allow it.
sixthly, as i slightly hinted before. by not limiting sigops, not preventing arbitrary data being added, core have incentivised bloating by discounting it. but have then added the fee's to reduce bitcoins utility of an actual transaction ledger..
this has to be emphasized over and over.. adding bloat is discounted(free) but sending a real transaction is costly
you may not like that i dont ass kiss things.. but there are too many ass kissers already. people actually want to learn how things actually work and not just be told the utopian sales pitch
i sorry if im ruining anyones opportunity to syphon money from victims of these flaws, but im more sorry for the victims getting fund syphoned from folk that care more about greed than a payment system thats secure
I doubt that your sticking to the same complaints makes you any kind of a genius. I am thinking that you probably have not even tried anything related to lightning network? such as running a node or using any of the lightning network wallets? My own experiences still are pretty limited, but I try to follow some of the lightning network happenings, to the extent that I understand matters.. sometimes it can be more difficult to follow some of the discussion if you are not using some of the systems that are being discussed..
they don't need to provide the same level of security bitcoin itself provides. and what SHOULD BE doesn't really matter, regardless of how you feel about it, the masses might never understand or benefit from Bitcoin layer 1. they might all be offramped into a Layer 2 that isn't permissionless, requires middle men to work properly, etc...And "THEY" will have watchtowers watching over everyones transactions with government mandates imposing spending limits for various goods. "they" will have won!
Some of us are likely just getting used to using lighting network, even though it has been running for nearly 7 years (in January is the b-day of its going live)... so yeah, there are some user-friendly (or lack thereof) aspects to lightning network, and so far I have ONLY some limited exposure to it myself... . and maybe I should have had posted my question about my Breez wallet here (here's a link to the other LN thread for my Breez wallet question).
Thank god for that.
go back and read frankys posts.
Are you trying to torture me?
the root of your problem with Breez walllet is that its build on a network with fundmental flaws.
Could be. At some point, I might recharge it with additional funds, yet right now I am using Phoenix for my quasi-self-custody lightning network wallet.
they don't need to provide the same level of security bitcoin itself provides. and what SHOULD BE doesn't really matter, regardless of how you feel about it, the masses might never understand or benefit from Bitcoin layer 1. they might all be offramped into a Layer 2 that isn't permissionless, requires middle men to work properly, etc...And "THEY" will have watchtowers watching over everyones transactions with government mandates imposing spending limits for various goods. "they" will have won!
Some of us are likely just getting used to using lighting network, even though it has been running for nearly 7 years (in January is the b-day of its going live)... so yeah, there are some user-friendly (or lack thereof) aspects to lightning network, and so far I have ONLY some limited exposure to it myself... . and maybe I should have had posted my question about my Breez wallet here (here's a link to the other LN thread for my Breez wallet question).
sounds like you havn't been franked yet. go back and read frankys posts. the root of your problem with Breez walllet is that its build on a network with fundmental flaws.
problem is he didnt use a self custody node, but used a mobile wallet that is managed from a central server, terms of which would close inactive channels
in short to avoid having to lose value paying closing sessions you need to continually spend value through the service.. catch 22
they don't need to provide the same level of security bitcoin itself provides. and what SHOULD BE doesn't really matter, regardless of how you feel about it, the masses might never understand or benefit from Bitcoin layer 1. they might all be offramped into a Layer 2 that isn't permissionless, requires middle men to work properly, etc...And "THEY" will have watchtowers watching over everyones transactions with government mandates imposing spending limits for various goods. "they" will have won!
Some of us are likely just getting used to using lighting network, even though it has been running for nearly 7 years (in January is the b-day of its going live)... so yeah, there are some user-friendly (or lack thereof) aspects to lightning network, and so far I have ONLY some limited exposure to it myself... . and maybe I should have had posted my question about my Breez wallet here (here's a link to the other LN thread for my Breez wallet question).
sounds like you havn't been franked yet. go back and read frankys posts. the root of your problem with Breez walllet is that its build on a network with fundmental flaws.
funny part is i was calling out the segwit flaws in 2016.. and look what happened JUNK
LN has bottlenecks and flaws that then require watchtowers and custodian hubs.. and look whats happening, majority of LN nodes are centralised custodian hubs
you may not like that i dont ass kiss things.. but there are too many ass kissers already. other people actually want to learn how things actually work and not just be told the utopian sales pitch of ass kissery dreamers
i sorry if im ruining anyones opportunity to syphon money from victims of these flaws, but im more sorry for the victims getting fund syphoned from folk that care more about greed than a payment system thats secure
secondly. legacy(old) nodes wont benefit from it. also old nodes will have more issues to contend with. such as seeing 'funky' transactions. aswell as still not being able to trust unconfirmed transactions due to RBF and CPFP.
..
fifthly, the 4mb weight. is only going to be filled with 1.8mb tx +witness data. leaving 2.2mb unused. but guess what. people will use it by filling it with arbitrary data. such as writing messages, adverts, even writing a book into the blockchain. what should have been done was allow 2mb base thus needing ~3.6mb weight.. and also adding a rule that 'messages' could not be added. thus keeping the blockchain lean and utilised just for transactions and not novels/adverts/messages. afterall if a communication tool like twitter or SMS can limit how much someone writes.. then so should bitcoin.
we will definetly see people purposefully bloating up the blockchain with passages of mobydick or over nonsense. and core have done nothing to stop it but done everything to allow it.
sixthly, as i slightly hinted before. by not limiting sigops, not preventing arbitrary data being added, core have incentivised bloating by discounting it. but have then added the fee's to reduce bitcoins utility of an actual transaction ledger..
this has to be emphasized over and over.. adding bloat is discounted(free) but sending a real transaction is costly
..
fifthly, the 4mb weight. is only going to be filled with 1.8mb tx +witness data. leaving 2.2mb unused. but guess what. people will use it by filling it with arbitrary data. such as writing messages, adverts, even writing a book into the blockchain. what should have been done was allow 2mb base thus needing ~3.6mb weight.. and also adding a rule that 'messages' could not be added. thus keeping the blockchain lean and utilised just for transactions and not novels/adverts/messages. afterall if a communication tool like twitter or SMS can limit how much someone writes.. then so should bitcoin.
we will definetly see people purposefully bloating up the blockchain with passages of mobydick or over nonsense. and core have done nothing to stop it but done everything to allow it.
sixthly, as i slightly hinted before. by not limiting sigops, not preventing arbitrary data being added, core have incentivised bloating by discounting it. but have then added the fee's to reduce bitcoins utility of an actual transaction ledger..
this has to be emphasized over and over.. adding bloat is discounted(free) but sending a real transaction is costly
LN has bottlenecks and flaws that then require watchtowers and custodian hubs.. and look whats happening, majority of LN nodes are centralised custodian hubs
you may not like that i dont ass kiss things.. but there are too many ass kissers already. other people actually want to learn how things actually work and not just be told the utopian sales pitch of ass kissery dreamers
i sorry if im ruining anyones opportunity to syphon money from victims of these flaws, but im more sorry for the victims getting fund syphoned from folk that care more about greed than a payment system thats secure
isnt it interesting that when talking about the multitude of subnetworks.. many people just want to know, discuss, mention LN and liquid.. both being products of blockstream
When you start out with such ridiculous, then it can be quite difficult to go along with some of your other points, even though some of them may well be valid.
I am pretty sure that liquid was developed by blockstream, but not lightning network, even if blockstream is involved in lightning network in a variety of ways and even though blockstream did back segwit, which apparently made lightning network easier to introduce as a bitcoin second layer solution.
im not a fan of any current lineup of subnetworks because they all miss key security features thus should not be the "solutions". they all break promises and are mostly hype.. i was just suggesting that LN is not the solution, nor even the top capacity subnetwork
there will new other subnetworks that fill niches for certain activities(once devs learn from mistakes) but none should be the offramp where everyone should use, instead of or to avoid using bitcoin
maybe you are overly critical of these subnetworks and LN, there will new other subnetworks that fill niches for certain activities(once devs learn from mistakes) but none should be the offramp where everyone should use, instead of or to avoid using bitcoin
Yeah.. what else is new. Franky1 is already known for being both a segwit and a LN party poop, and it had been kind of ambiguous about his big blocker promotional status, even though he claims to be an "independent thinker" but he gets into a lot of trouble regarding his repeatedly spreading misleading information about some of the technical aspects of bitcoin, and not seeming to want to account for points made by others - including even repeating some of the suggestions that LN is being promoted as if it were the same as bitcoin, which we know that it is a different tool in the shed that may well be used for different purposes, even though surely not any kind of perfect tool.
they don't need to provide the same level of security bitcoin itself provides. and what SHOULD BE doesn't really matter, regardless of how you feel about it, the masses might never understand or benefit from Bitcoin layer 1. they might all be offramped into a Layer 2 that isn't permissionless, requires middle men to work properly, etc...And "THEY" will have watchtowers watching over everyones transactions with government mandates imposing spending limits for various goods. "they" will have won!
Some of us are likely just getting used to using lighting network, even though it has been running for nearly 7 years (in January is the b-day of its going live)... so yeah, there are some user-friendly (or lack thereof) aspects to lightning network, and so far I have ONLY some limited exposure to it myself... . and maybe I should have had posted my question about my Breez wallet here (here's a link to the other LN thread for my Breez wallet question).
i got no problems with functional subnetworks that meet promises for certain niches..
but the empty broken promises being sold as 'the utopian solution everyone should use'.. just tarnishes bitcoins reputation by association, because when people do use these snake oil sales pitched stuff, they have bad experiences and they wrongly think their experience is of "bitcoin"
el salvador in 2021 said they wanted to get into bitcoin. but were schemed into using LN as the backbone of payment processing in september 2021.. and by december 2021 el salvador experienced the lies and empty promises and all the flaws.. they dropped using LN
they now use a CEX as the payment processor and account balance custodian
and yet years later idiots still promote LN as the thing el salvador use and pretend LN is used by most people trying to move funds offchain. when in reality there are millions of people prefering CEX and stable coins and other bridge subnetworks
i have no mental implosions when i see how the LN affiliates, promoters and corporations operate.. i just feel pitty for the victims and just face palm the idiots promoting LN using old-outdated sales pitches
my only wish is that devs actually stop ass kissing each other as gods. and instead ass kick each other into actually innovating
but the empty broken promises being sold as 'the utopian solution everyone should use'.. just tarnishes bitcoins reputation by association, because when people do use these snake oil sales pitched stuff, they have bad experiences and they wrongly think their experience is of "bitcoin"
el salvador in 2021 said they wanted to get into bitcoin. but were schemed into using LN as the backbone of payment processing in september 2021.. and by december 2021 el salvador experienced the lies and empty promises and all the flaws.. they dropped using LN
they now use a CEX as the payment processor and account balance custodian
and yet years later idiots still promote LN as the thing el salvador use and pretend LN is used by most people trying to move funds offchain. when in reality there are millions of people prefering CEX and stable coins and other bridge subnetworks
i have no mental implosions when i see how the LN affiliates, promoters and corporations operate.. i just feel pitty for the victims and just face palm the idiots promoting LN using old-outdated sales pitches
my only wish is that devs actually stop ass kissing each other as gods. and instead ass kick each other into actually innovating
im not a fan of any current lineup of subnetworks because they all miss key security features thus should not be the "solutions". they all break promises and are mostly hype.. i was just suggesting that LN is not the solution, nor even the top capacity subnetwork
there will new other subnetworks that fill niches for certain activities(once devs learn from mistakes) but none should be the offramp where everyone should use, instead of or to avoid using bitcoin
there will new other subnetworks that fill niches for certain activities(once devs learn from mistakes) but none should be the offramp where everyone should use, instead of or to avoid using bitcoin
maybe you are overly critical of these subnetworks and LN, they don't need to provide the same level of security bitcoin itself provides. and what SHOULD BE doesn't really matter, regardless of how you feel about it, the masses might never understand or benefit from Bitcoin layer 1. they might all be offramped into a Layer 2 that isn't permissionless, requires middle men to work properly, etc...And "THEY" will have watchtowers watching over everyones transactions with government mandates imposing spending limits for various goods. "they" will have won!
will your head explode when that day comes?
are you going to be OK?
wow that got dark.
lmao good day dude love your contrabutions to the fourm.
I agree not enough focus has been placed on layer1 scaling and that is probably for the benefit of Layer2. but imo establishing early on that layer1 isn't meant for micro transaction, isn’t the worst thing.
yet the same devs shouting bitcoin should not be used by unbanked, small payments are perfectly fine with scammers moving a single sat to scam idiots for $200k with added pixel junk in metadata.. strange huh
funny to hear idiots shouting bitcoin should not be used for cupcakes or pizza (0.00005-0.0005) but if someone wants to move 0.00001001 they are told they can and should not be stopped as its "censorship"
and how the junk and spam should continue on bitcoin and how the genuine goods and services should be done on subnetworks
and no im not talking about altcoins.
SUB NETWORKS vs altcoins are 2 different things
im not a fan of any current lineup of subnetworks because they all miss key security features thus should not be the "solutions". they all break promises and are mostly hype.. i was just suggesting that LN is not the solution, nor even the top capacity subnetwork
there will new other subnetworks that fill niches for certain activities(once devs learn from mistakes) but none should be the offramp where everyone should use, instead of or to avoid using bitcoin
and sorry to even inform this topic. but LN has had its day..
its far better people learn from LN mistakes and start afresh to make a better subnetwork without the flaws, and with a proper goal of what niche subgroup of people they want to populate it
trying to be a be-all do-all network but never achieve its promises. will never work
trying to kick the LN tin can down the path hoping it will fix itself will just end up putting more dings and dents into it
isnt it interesting that when talking about the multitude of subnetworks.. many people just want to know, discuss, mention LN and liquid.. both being products of blockstream
blockstream founded by core devs and funded using HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars to create the gateway(segwit)keys into those particular subnetworks. by which the same devs sponsored to spend years creating the subnetworks and altering bitcoin to add features purely to be used as access keys to those subnetworks to benefit features of those subnetworks.. meanwhile for years ignoring the communities desires for onchain scaling and onchain mitigation of spam and junk
now ask yourself why have core devs done nothing to mitigate spam and junk on bitcoin for years... by either preventing or independently penalising those spammers/junkers.. why instead prefer the whole community get penalised or transact less on bitcoin to instead promote they should use another network
seems to me these devs are no longer bitcoin devs and instead sponsored subnetwork devs..
now the next question. follow the money. then you see whom is behind all the shinanigans and who is ripe to receive all the ROI via the middle men routing payment fee's.. to reimburse them for their initial blockstream investment.. well thats if they can promote and populate their subnetwork enough to make it worthy of an ROI
meanwhile other people that just got annoyed by the blockstream roadmap and ejected from proposing idea's that differ from the roadmap, decided to make other subnetworks
and now many people are wising up to the fact that LN/liquids promises are breaking. or never flourished.. are starting to use/create other subnetworks
now if anyone is stil promoting LN as utopian "the solution", you are obviously reiterating a sales pitch of empty promises made 6 years ago. its time you moved forward from those archaic words
I agree not enough focus has been placed on layer1 scaling and that is probably for the benefit of Layer2. but imo establishing early on that layer1 isn't meant for micro transaction, isn’t the worst thing.blockstream founded by core devs and funded using HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars to create the gateway(segwit)keys into those particular subnetworks. by which the same devs sponsored to spend years creating the subnetworks and altering bitcoin to add features purely to be used as access keys to those subnetworks to benefit features of those subnetworks.. meanwhile for years ignoring the communities desires for onchain scaling and onchain mitigation of spam and junk
now ask yourself why have core devs done nothing to mitigate spam and junk on bitcoin for years... by either preventing or independently penalising those spammers/junkers.. why instead prefer the whole community get penalised or transact less on bitcoin to instead promote they should use another network
seems to me these devs are no longer bitcoin devs and instead sponsored subnetwork devs..
now the next question. follow the money. then you see whom is behind all the shinanigans and who is ripe to receive all the ROI via the middle men routing payment fee's.. to reimburse them for their initial blockstream investment.. well thats if they can promote and populate their subnetwork enough to make it worthy of an ROI
meanwhile other people that just got annoyed by the blockstream roadmap and ejected from proposing idea's that differ from the roadmap, decided to make other subnetworks
and now many people are wising up to the fact that LN/liquids promises are breaking. or never flourished.. are starting to use/create other subnetworks
now if anyone is stil promoting LN as utopian "the solution", you are obviously reiterating a sales pitch of empty promises made 6 years ago. its time you moved forward from those archaic words
but...
what are these other subnetworks besides LN/Liquid?
are you refering to altcoins?
isnt it interesting that when talking about the multitude of subnetworks.. many people just want to know, discuss, mention LN and liquid.. both being products of blockstream
blockstream founded by core devs and funded using HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars to create the gateway(segwit)keys into those particular subnetworks. by which the same devs sponsored to spend years creating the subnetworks and altering bitcoin to add features purely to be used as access keys to those subnetworks to benefit features of those subnetworks.. meanwhile for years ignoring the communities desires for onchain scaling and onchain mitigation of spam and junk
now ask yourself why have core devs done nothing to mitigate spam and junk on bitcoin for years... by either preventing or independently penalising those spammers/junkers.. why instead prefer the whole community get penalised or transact less on bitcoin to instead promote they should use another network
seems to me these devs are no longer bitcoin devs and instead sponsored subnetwork devs..
now the next question. follow the money. then you see whom is behind all the shinanigans and who is ripe to receive all the ROI via the middle men routing payment fee's.. to reimburse them for their initial blockstream investment.. well thats if they can promote and populate their subnetwork enough to make it worthy of an ROI
meanwhile other people that just got annoyed by the blockstream roadmap and ejected from proposing idea's that differ from the roadmap, decided to make other subnetworks
and now many people are wising up to the fact that LN/liquids promises are breaking. or never flourished.. are starting to use/create other subnetworks
now if anyone is stil promoting LN as utopian "the solution", you are obviously reiterating a sales pitch of empty promises made 6 years ago. its time you moved forward from those archaic words
blockstream founded by core devs and funded using HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars to create the gateway(segwit)keys into those particular subnetworks. by which the same devs sponsored to spend years creating the subnetworks and altering bitcoin to add features purely to be used as access keys to those subnetworks to benefit features of those subnetworks.. meanwhile for years ignoring the communities desires for onchain scaling and onchain mitigation of spam and junk
now ask yourself why have core devs done nothing to mitigate spam and junk on bitcoin for years... by either preventing or independently penalising those spammers/junkers.. why instead prefer the whole community get penalised or transact less on bitcoin to instead promote they should use another network
seems to me these devs are no longer bitcoin devs and instead sponsored subnetwork devs..
now the next question. follow the money. then you see whom is behind all the shinanigans and who is ripe to receive all the ROI via the middle men routing payment fee's.. to reimburse them for their initial blockstream investment.. well thats if they can promote and populate their subnetwork enough to make it worthy of an ROI
meanwhile other people that just got annoyed by the blockstream roadmap and ejected from proposing idea's that differ from the roadmap, decided to make other subnetworks
and now many people are wising up to the fact that LN/liquids promises are breaking. or never flourished.. are starting to use/create other subnetworks
now if anyone is stil promoting LN as utopian "the solution", you are obviously reiterating a sales pitch of empty promises made 6 years ago. its time you moved forward from those archaic words
After reading a little bit about Liquid and Wrapped bitcoin, i like the idea. it seems like a totally viable Layer2 solution, ofc there are trade offs it is a layer 2 after all, but seems legit. LN gets the spotlight as THE scaling solution, but i think franky1 is right there are other promising alternative scaling solutions. with fees on L1 growing rapidly i suspect these L2 will get alot more action in the coming year. Maybe in the furutre poeple wont be so conserned about which shitcoins to buy but rather which L2 network to store BTC into.
There I see a massive role for Lighting Netowrk. The sole contender for a trustless, fast and cheap way of exchanging micropayments over the internet.
When we will use an AI to generate an image, the micropayment from this AI to the one providing animation of the above image. Will be done autonomously via LN.. or the payment to publish it online, or to add a soundtrack: all powered by LN
When we will use an AI to generate an image, the micropayment from this AI to the one providing animation of the above image. Will be done autonomously via LN.. or the payment to publish it online, or to add a soundtrack: all powered by LN
there are many subnetworks.. and LN is not the one with the larget liquidity so its not the sole contender
if you ever want to dare challenge yourself to learn about LN you will learn that it is not trustless
much like people cant trust unconfirmed bitcoin transactions until settled. you shouldnt trust unsettled LN balance
so LN is not trustless
why do you think even the main LN devs are resorting to centralised hubs and watchtowers and factory nodes for channel creation..
stop selling the snake oil utopian dream and instead atleast try to learn what LN is and does, especially what it doesnt do
Regarding your points, you are right about the trustlessness part of my earlier statement.
Regarding the usage of centralised nodes and liquidity hubs, that is convenience, and nothing implied at protocol level. Of course there is space for improvement.
Instead I am interested on your first statement, regarding other subnetwork with more liquidity. Which are you referring to in particular? Liquid maybe?
There I see a massive role for Lighting Netowrk. The sole contender for a trustless, fast and cheap way of exchanging micropayments over the internet.
When we will use an AI to generate an image, the micropayment from this AI to the one providing animation of the above image. Will be done autonomously via LN.. or the payment to publish it online, or to add a soundtrack: all powered by LN
When we will use an AI to generate an image, the micropayment from this AI to the one providing animation of the above image. Will be done autonomously via LN.. or the payment to publish it online, or to add a soundtrack: all powered by LN
there are many subnetworks.. and LN is not the one with the larget liquidity so its not the sole contender
if you ever want to dare challenge yourself to learn about LN you will learn that it is not trustless
much like people cant trust unconfirmed bitcoin transactions until settled. you shouldnt trust unsettled LN balance
so LN is not trustless
why do you think even the main LN devs are resorting to centralised hubs and watchtowers and factory nodes for channel creation..
stop selling the snake oil utopian dream and instead atleast try to learn what LN is and does, especially what it doesnt do
AI assistants will start using crypto to pay for things online, affirming crypto as “the native currency of the internet.”
The biggest technological developments of our generation have come from combining multiple breakthroughs. “The personal computer + the internet.” “A phone + a camera + GPS.” And so on.
The same will be true for the technology of the future.
The emergence of semi-autonomous AI “agents”—digital assistants that you can direct to carry out specific tasks, like changing a flight or ordering new headphones if yours break—promises to be a
defining theme of 2024 and beyond. But without the ability to easily transact in the world, AI agents will have limited capabilities. That’s where crypto fits in.
We think AI agents will prefer digitally native money, like bitcoin or stablecoins. And we think that starts happening at a small scale in 2024.
There I see a massive role for Lighting Netowrk. The sole contender for a trustless, fast and cheap way of exchanging micropayments over the internet.
When we will use an AI to generate an image, the micropayment from this AI to the one providing animation of the above image. Will be done autonomously via LN.. or the payment to publish it online, or to add a soundtrack: all powered by LN
The biggest technological developments of our generation have come from combining multiple breakthroughs. “The personal computer + the internet.” “A phone + a camera + GPS.” And so on.
The same will be true for the technology of the future.
The emergence of semi-autonomous AI “agents”—digital assistants that you can direct to carry out specific tasks, like changing a flight or ordering new headphones if yours break—promises to be a
defining theme of 2024 and beyond. But without the ability to easily transact in the world, AI agents will have limited capabilities. That’s where crypto fits in.
We think AI agents will prefer digitally native money, like bitcoin or stablecoins. And we think that starts happening at a small scale in 2024.
There I see a massive role for Lighting Netowrk. The sole contender for a trustless, fast and cheap way of exchanging micropayments over the internet.
When we will use an AI to generate an image, the micropayment from this AI to the one providing animation of the above image. Will be done autonomously via LN.. or the payment to publish it online, or to add a soundtrack: all powered by LN
Lightning Network being a layer-2 payment protocol enables faster withdrawals and it lowers transaction fees due to which its use and popularity is increasing in various countries that legalize Bitcoin. In many countries, payments after purchasing goods are being paid through the Bitcoin Lightning Network, as we saw in a store in Vietnam. A new homemade-style hamburger restaurant located in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, is in the neighborhood of Thao Dien. This place is famous for their excellent food and friendly atmosphere and good service. A few days ago, the restaurant decided to accept Bitcoin as payment through the Lightning Network.
picture from
Thank you for providing such valuable information. I am interested in LN but first need to learn more about it and the information you provided is really valuable.
Bitwise published their 10 predictions for the 2024:
Bitwise The Year Ahead: 10 Crypto Predictions for 2024
I guess the most important one is the number 8:
AI assistants will start using crypto to pay for things online, affirming crypto as “the native currency of the internet.”
The biggest technological developments of our generation have come from combining multiple breakthroughs. “The personal computer + the internet.” “A phone + a camera + GPS.” And so on.
The same will be true for the technology of the future.
The emergence of semi-autonomous AI “agents”—digital assistants that you can direct to carry out specific tasks, like changing a flight or ordering new headphones if yours break—promises to be a
defining theme of 2024 and beyond. But without the ability to easily transact in the world, AI agents will have limited capabilities. That’s where crypto fits in.
We think AI agents will prefer digitally native money, like bitcoin or stablecoins. And we think that starts happening at a small scale in 2024.
There I see a massive role for Lighting Netowrk. The sole contender for a trustless, fast and cheap way of exchanging micropayments over the internet.
When we will use an AI to generate an image, the micropayment from this AI to the one providing animation of the above image. Will be done autonomously via LN.. or the payment to publish it online, or to add a soundtrack: all powered by LN
Bitwise The Year Ahead: 10 Crypto Predictions for 2024
I guess the most important one is the number 8:
Quote
AI assistants will start using crypto to pay for things online, affirming crypto as “the native currency of the internet.”
The biggest technological developments of our generation have come from combining multiple breakthroughs. “The personal computer + the internet.” “A phone + a camera + GPS.” And so on.
The same will be true for the technology of the future.
The emergence of semi-autonomous AI “agents”—digital assistants that you can direct to carry out specific tasks, like changing a flight or ordering new headphones if yours break—promises to be a
defining theme of 2024 and beyond. But without the ability to easily transact in the world, AI agents will have limited capabilities. That’s where crypto fits in.
We think AI agents will prefer digitally native money, like bitcoin or stablecoins. And we think that starts happening at a small scale in 2024.
There I see a massive role for Lighting Netowrk. The sole contender for a trustless, fast and cheap way of exchanging micropayments over the internet.
When we will use an AI to generate an image, the micropayment from this AI to the one providing animation of the above image. Will be done autonomously via LN.. or the payment to publish it online, or to add a soundtrack: all powered by LN
this very detailed article argues that the ln is not dead because of the high fees, but is used in other ways. it is used as a kind of settlement layer for custodial apps:
Quote
A reality check on the limitations of Lightning Network, and what that means in terms of its long term viability. No, it's not doomed, but it probably won't be used the way you expected it to be.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/lightning-is-doomed it seemed that in earlier times (with many incidents between 2013 and 2021), China was the seemingly overbearing regulator, but now the USA seems to be stepping in that role in a variety of ways, even though surely it is interesting to see various extents that some of the jurisdictions seem to be in line with each other and other ways that they seem to not want to align, whether it is aligning with the USA, aligning with China or maybe creating some other alliance..
It's almost as though it were a dick-swinging contest between USA and China. Like it's somehow important for both of them to be seen as the "World Leader" by childishly stamping on free enterprise wherever they find it. Whoever is the most draconian seemingly gets the bragging rights or something. It's weird.I think that bitcoin was largely designed for this, including that game theory is likely going to have some defectors, if we are considering prisoner's dilemma kinds of situations, even though sometimes there are going to be seeming periods of cooperation, but from time to time, there also is going to likely be defections because I doubt anyone really wants a world government that is controlled by the other, and even if they are trying to forestall matters related to bitcoin, is also seems likely that shelling points are going to continue to revolve around bitcoin as the most trustworthy neutral of currencies, and even if governments cannot really control bitcoin as much as they would like, there are quite a fiew advantages to agreeing upon a neutral currency, and there is nothing that is even close to bitcoin in terms of a possible competitor.. what are they going to do settle in Ethereum.. that would be fucking retarded, even though some will likely give some lip services to their supposed enlightenment about various blockchains or whatever else might be their distracting talking points in which they are ongoingly failing/refusing to recognize king daddy bitcoin for the decentralized power that it is.
other things are the BOI
https://www.fincen.gov/boi
businesses as of january 2024 need to file the true human beneficiary owners of a company. meaning they cant just put virtual mailboxes and hire an accountant to be the businesses 'company correspondence' on file
shell companies and anonymous CEO's are about to have a shake up
https://www.fincen.gov/boi
businesses as of january 2024 need to file the true human beneficiary owners of a company. meaning they cant just put virtual mailboxes and hire an accountant to be the businesses 'company correspondence' on file
shell companies and anonymous CEO's are about to have a shake up
Jump to: