Bcash businessmen trying to cure cancer by chopping off tumors while experts at Core try chemotherapy, Stem cells transplant, good Nutrition etc.?
We need to cage our emotions to see the truth.
Topic: Lightning Network VS SegWit2Mb(S2X) - page 3. (Read 630 times)
It seems for me that lightning network makes bitcoin more centralized. I do not like this. How do you think?
This will definetly be the lightning network.
The lightning network is an implementation of hashed timelock contracts (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Hashed_Timelock_Contracts).
The pro's of LN are pretty clear i think. The only contra argument (in my eyes) is that its not ready yet. It still takes some time until tests are done.
The first tests went successfull. But this hasn't been tested with massive amounts of transactions yet.
But once LN will get ready (and used) it will be able to process thousands to ten thousands of TX/s (with a 'very low' fee).
Theoretically 100k-1 million should be possible. But again.. there hasn't been any tests on this. And this (if posible to achieve) will take quite some time
until its smooth enough to process such a huge amount of transaction.
Doubling the blocksize on the other hand is just a short-term solution. And to be more precise: A bad one.
If increasing the blocksize is the only attempted solution to the scalability problem, this will fail in (probably) less than 10 years.
Blocks will get full again in a few years. Especially with such a high adoption rate as currently. Doubling the blocksize will seem to be a
solution again. But at some point, the time it takes for a nodes with non-high-tech-computing-machines to validate a block, will exceed
the amount it takes for big mining farms to mine a new block. This will lead to centralization and is exactly what bitcoin was not made for.
Additionally there hasn't been any tests on how the network would react to bigger blocks.
If you look at BCH for example: The blocks have an average size of 100kb. Thats far away from their double blocksize from BTC.
Segwit (not segwit2x) already increased the blocksize from 1mb to 4mb. Thats more than enough short-term solution until LN comes into play.
The lightning network is an implementation of hashed timelock contracts (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Hashed_Timelock_Contracts).
The pro's of LN are pretty clear i think. The only contra argument (in my eyes) is that its not ready yet. It still takes some time until tests are done.
The first tests went successfull. But this hasn't been tested with massive amounts of transactions yet.
But once LN will get ready (and used) it will be able to process thousands to ten thousands of TX/s (with a 'very low' fee).
Theoretically 100k-1 million should be possible. But again.. there hasn't been any tests on this. And this (if posible to achieve) will take quite some time
until its smooth enough to process such a huge amount of transaction.
Doubling the blocksize on the other hand is just a short-term solution. And to be more precise: A bad one.
If increasing the blocksize is the only attempted solution to the scalability problem, this will fail in (probably) less than 10 years.
Blocks will get full again in a few years. Especially with such a high adoption rate as currently. Doubling the blocksize will seem to be a
solution again. But at some point, the time it takes for a nodes with non-high-tech-computing-machines to validate a block, will exceed
the amount it takes for big mining farms to mine a new block. This will lead to centralization and is exactly what bitcoin was not made for.
Additionally there hasn't been any tests on how the network would react to bigger blocks.
If you look at BCH for example: The blocks have an average size of 100kb. Thats far away from their double blocksize from BTC.
Segwit (not segwit2x) already increased the blocksize from 1mb to 4mb. Thats more than enough short-term solution until LN comes into play.
Which one will be the solution to the bitcoin scalability problem (Dream of instant payments with low fees)?
Lightning Network: off-chain protocol
It would feature a P2P system for making micropayments of digital cryptocurrency through a scale-free network of bidirectional payment channels without delegating custody of funds or trust to third parties.[1]
SegWit2x: block size limit
was a failed contentious hardfork outlined in the New York Agreement that intended to double the block size limit. The hardfork has been denounced as an attempt made by CEOs and owners of large Bitcoin businesses to introduce changes to the currency's protocol and development cycle with ulterior motives.[2]
Jump to: