Topic: Lightning Network won't save me no money I don't think (Read 182 times)

Sorry but you did not seem to grasp what i was saying

Costs money to use hubs and as soon as you close a channel then you get hit with full transactions fees so they
just made the game of roulette harder to understand so they can cream even more off from the top using Lightning.

I would be happy to agree with your comments because what we have just now is a pile of shit but i cannot
agree so they are making out that new lightning orange carrot is going to taste nice, it's not

 

There are many Bitcoin holders and enthusiasts who are banking on the full development and full implementation of the Lightning Network which hopefully can make all transactions as fast and powerful as LIGHTNING at a low cost unlike what we are ridiculously experiencing right now which is not what Bitcoin must be. Once this scalability problem can be given enough solution then I am expecting Bitcoin to once again be surging ahead of its many rivals. We are just waiting for LN to finally arrive on the scene and make things in Bitcoin better. We are just hoping that politicking and selfish interests will not be blocking the implementation of Lightning Network as we know that many in the Bitcoin community are hard-faced and only seeking profits for their own without regard to the welfare of the whole network.

I don't see why mining fees would have to be that expensive that opening or closing a channel is an expensive act.
LN will be able to move many transactions from the blockchain which would free up the space in block and keep the mining fees low.

I think what makes most sense is that people will be opening channels with their employers, to receive salary,their local shops to buy groceries and family members for various reasons.
And if most people will be employed by the same employer or buy from the same shops, that is a centralization far more dangerous by itself then centralization of payment channels.

There is a huge difference between mining and running a payment channel and that is that you don't need a certain amount of traffic to be able to make profit channels profitable. Mining itself is perhaps decentralized, what is very centralized is pools. And pools are there to make income from mining stable and divisible (which means that an amateur mining can earn a portion of a mining reward even if he can't mine a block in reasonable time).
We do not have such dynamic in the LN. You get nothing by going to a large hub that you wouldn't get by connecting to where you spend money the most.
Not to even mention that mining rigs are far more expensive than a LN node, that can literally be as expensive as your home router.

So in short, it is more complicated than that and it is very hard to tell at this point what the future holds.
We will have to wait and see and if LN doesn't work we will just have to scale the network in a different way.

Forget about buying a Coffey every day from the same shop for the next month and lets deal in the real world.

Remember when you close a channel then your hit with full transaction fees by the miners as the
transaction hits the block-chain and that cost not only hurts, it's kills

Watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpfvhiqFw7A

See Brian in the middle, hes a hub (Small bank sub-branch) and you could keep a channel open with him
for months and lets him link to other hubs/banks in order to relay micro transactions for you but he then has running
costs to keep his network of channels open and ends up paying a transactions fee himself when ever a channel to other hubs get closed
and written to the block-chain.

Who do you think Brian is going to pass these costs on to if not Bob ?

What will happen if Bob and Alice does not have nodes that are too small to connect and talk with each other ?

Do you think we might end up with central bank type hubs that connect the small hubs to each other by interconnecting with
other central banks and won't change the small hubs for the pleasure and this then get past back down to Bob ?

So Bob sends Alice $100

Bob >>>>> Brain <><><><><>Big Bob <><><><><>Big Goldman<><><><>Paul<<<<<Transaction  count       
          5                      200                             50,000                               2,000                 1

Alice gets her $100 and closes the channel with Paul who was charging her $1 a day for the service
because she is not a crypto-freak, it's all her fault she get hit with $51 in costs because she does not
know how to use the system.

Look at the miners, ten big name control 90% of all the miners https://blockchain.info/pools

Does anyone care to say this is not centralization and what if the big banks, sorry hubs block out all the
sub branches so we end up with ten mega banks and our wallets only speak to them.

Watch it again and see how the wool is being pulled over your eyes or better still watch this one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYHFrf5ci_g and let me know if you think that I am wrong please.