Topic: More apps for LN (Read 220 times)

Exactly, I mean this we must not think that LN is not mature or that there are not yet good wallets but simply accept that other applications take advantage of LN payments exactly as they do with PayPal or the MasterCard circuit so it will be possible to see greater growth and improvement of LN also due to the fact that more transactions bring more profits to developers' coffers.

I think the limited acceptance of Bitcoin as a payment option is an obstacle to the widespread use of LN for day-to-day transactions. By integrating LN into popular apps and platforms, users will have more opportunities to interact with LN, even if they cannot directly use it in stores, which can help create a network effect and increase LN usage among users. Also, as the LN ecosystem expands with more apps integrating LN functionality and a growing community of regular LN users, it may lead to increased interest from sellers and incentivize them to accept LN as a payment option.

Nevertheless, every new idea and innovative creation is still welcome into the cryptocurrency market but if people feel there's no need for it they won't support or make use of the wallet.
I never Binance was different from FTX but the exchange integrating LN is never a defeat to Bitcoin and if you know it was to complement Bitcoin you won't have reason in an absurd manner.
Take it or you leave if things continue like this there's no way people won't learn about LN or another alternative will be introduced.

It seems to me that you said a lot of absurd things.  Meanwhile, this logic applies very well to the development of LN, smartphones have replaced cameras, video cameras, GPS navigators, home telephones, and even PCs in internet browsing, so they are also excellent for the development of LN in a very fast way.

You ask me what is a good desktop wallet, I ask "why would I want one"?  LN is a technology suitable for life on the move, for fast everyday payments, those that are made from mobile phones and furthermore you really don't understand what we are talking about because apps must be on mobile phones, they must not integrate any wallet and above all they just need to charge for the service through the use of LN, so a callback to u will suffice.  wallets like Alby or wallet of Satoshi which are custodial and work great for micropayments.

That logic and the one about phones is flawed. Would you make an app for an OS that has a buggy App Store and extremely broken kernel and UI? This is a metaphor.

This is cliché by now, but I will say this again:

Currently as far as mobile wallets are concerned, yes we have a lot of them that support Lightning Network. The situation on desktop, on the other hand, is woeful. It is so bad, that I challenge you to list at least three Lightning-enabled desktop wallets that are not full nodes (so no LND or clightning).

Most likely you'll only come up with 1. Bonus points for you if you find a second one.

What is the purpose of making apps for LN if nobody can even interact with them? Are we going to start telling people that they need to install a wallet on their mobile device in order to use Lightning? Historically, mobile phones and tablets are the #1 most stolen items, after money itself.

That is not to say that LN is perfect. There are some problems with the current design, such as quirks in channel funding making it much harder to run a non-custodial channel - and solutions for those problems (channel factories) are forthcoming, but they need to be developed too!

LN apps are the last thing on the bucket list.

the LN lemmings want exchanges to offer LN instead of onchain withdrawals..
kind of funny how they want users to select LN where the exchange does not actually give users coins confirmed on users own private key but instead where its unsettled balance still held on an exchanges keys but propositioned(promised(iou)) to the user in the form of what they call "inbound balance"

an exchange wont want to close a channel with a customer but want the customer to then request that inbound balance be pushed back to the CEX where the cex then gives it to someone elses balance. basically locking a customer in until the customer has spent all their balance back to the cex

read the article again without the utopian dream of thinking its about more people getting to use real bitcoin and realise its just more custodian held balance.... and people locking that balance in another network
(look at the average lifetime stats of a channel and realise people dont, cant, wont easily close a channel regularly, especially more difficult when the balance is on the exchanges side where users are just "renting msats" as inbound balance(the policy of the factory(custodian) ln nodes))

and a reminder
LN is not the bitcoin network
the "payment" data of an onion packet relayed around LN is nothing at all like a bitcoin transaction being relayed.
bitcoin does not understand msats. never will and never should because that would break alot of fundamental laws of bitcoin medium of exchange unit count, halving times, value proposition, utility, total shareable units and such.

trying to make bitcoin compatible with LN is breaking bitcoin, which is an insane thing to promote.. LN should be trying to be compatible with bitcoin.. not the other way around
LN has no consensus system no network wide protocol. so its easier for LN to adapt to bitcoin rules. so why are soo many people advocating to break bitcoin to try making LN work
if L cant work as is then LN is flawed. they should change LN not break bitcoin more.

in short. LN does not offer people the bitcoin experience nor will they want to offer easy methods to get out of LN to use the real bitcoin network. so stop trying to pretend that LN is bitcoin while telling people to stop using the actual bitcoin network just to promote something that is not bitcoin

What I am saying are those merchants. It's more than enough that they know Bitcoin but it seems that when the network is too traffic and people say that there's another solution which is the usage and acceptance of LN.

Yeah, we've got some duty to do to say that to them but if they don't like to try it then that's where the adoption rate should start from.

I think I'm wasting my time either you don't want to understand or you pretend you don't understand and therefore I consider all of this signature spam.  No one said Binance, I've always talked about apps that need to take advantage of LN integration in the payment process.  STOP.  As for your point of not wanting to help by coaching that is your point and I ask you to keep it to yourself or you could get someone to do nothing and wait for someone to do it for them.  You see they are points of view.

I am from a developing country btw, one question, have you used a micropayment application?  If you have, you know it has its feature like an internal transfer,  just like Binance exchanges internal transfer where the transaction is fee less and the transfer is instant.  My point is if you are planning to integrate LN into a payment application and expect users will flock into it and use that feature forgetting about the internal transfer feature of the app, I think you need to re-assess your belief.  People will always use the most convenient and cheapest method available to them and in this case, internal transfer is the most convenient and cheapest option.


Lol, LN transaction is different from on-chain transaction.  The store should specify that they are  LN ready or the customer might think that the store only do on-chain transaction. Btw,  it is not our responsibility to give lectures and teach everyone, if you wanted to volunteer then that's great but don't make it sound like we are responsible for other people's business.  we have our own business to mind too...  Please don't push your ideal to other people.  Other may find your ideal great but others might find it absurd.  People have different POV please bear that in mind.

---

I understand your point but we are just citing the other possibilities which you do not accept.  and even mistaken the examples as point of dicussion...  anyway.. whatever you say, your thread your rule.

Because it would be like having thousands of car models each doing something better than the other and ultimately having no roads to drive them on, that's why I say we don't need new portfolios, do you feel the need for other portfolios for LN?  While for Binance obviously it will be a defeat if people get to know LN through this, and if you haven't figured it out yet then you should try to study the real mission of Bitcoin and not answer with such absurd things.
Binance is the largest centralized exchange at the moment but it has nothing different than FTx or the rock trading will come its time and fuck the money of poor people because not your keys not your coins so I don't have to say more if you can understand.


Excuse me why should they display here we accept LN?  Isn't it enough for you to know that they accept Bitcoin?  It is a layer to make Bitcoin transact if the merchant does not know LN then it is our duty to tell him about it and make him understand the advantages, otherwise what are we for?  Just to write two posts in this forum?

The adoption rate of LN has to increase and all of these apps and wallets are good if there are people willing to accept LN. But as of now, it's still like an unknown thing. Just as you've said about those obsolete cameras that later on are no longer viable to use because most smartphones today have clear cameras. And just like with those more apps in the LN, they won't be useful anymore if there will be better than them in the future. We mostly see the sign in some stores about "Bitcoin accepted here" and soon we may see "Bitcoin Lightning Network is accepted here" in some occasions but as of now, I haven't seen any of it yet.

@mendace, You can't use your stance to judge what everybody in the Bitcoin community wants. Therefore, you ought to speak for yourself and dont say " Nobody wants more LN wallets we don't need them". Why is the Binance integration of LN will be the biggest defeat for BTC?
@thecodebear In situations when there's an issue people will always seek alternatives and this is what I believe triggers Binance's planning to integrate LN.  I think if Binance integrates LN it will make LN known outside the BTC community because people are unaware of it.

Your answer is given by the fact that you do not understand what we are talking about.  You are talking about apps that are wallets like many of the ones already present, however I am saying that you need applications that take advantage of LN and that they absolutely must not be other wallets in which to store Bitcoin.  In fact, in my hypothesis they don't need to be secure apps in the case but they just need to integrate the LN payment alongside the traditional Fiat one, take for example an uber that works with LN, that would be fantastic.  You are thinking that all of this should concern America or Europe, while I am thinking of the oppressed and unbanked populations who are the real engine for mass adoption.

We don't actually need more new applications for Bitcoin Lightning Network. Having new applications has pros and cons. Not all new applications will be good in security and operations especially very important problem with potential holes in their wallet security.

If current Lightning Network applications are good (secure) to use, I would like to not touch a new application and take more risk with it.

Top Bitcoin Lightning Network wallets in slow Internet
Best Bitcoin Lightning Network wallets

maybe learn about the routing and channel capacity and the bottlenecks.. because the only solution LN lemmings can come up with is custodians(CEX offering factory channels they manage
binance and bitfinex wont want to give people their "your key your value" system they will want to be the balance owner giving a user inbound balance on the CEX's side of a commitment

so goodluck with all the over promising while not actually giving users true expereince of bitcoin. where all they ever play with is msats owned by a CEX

heck even government CBDC have been sandboxing lightning with help of blockstream devs via hyperledger. and they found the only way to give users set capacity(to avoid too many setup-close-reopens) is a 3 tiered account system of unconfirmed balance which is set to their central reserves.
yep normal users are given a channel(account)with inbound balance of upto $2k  (low/no KYC requirement due to lack of value involved in that account) then another account they have to upgrade to ($2k -$100k) for middle plan users (midle incme/small business) requiring basic/moderate KYC then upgrade to $100k+ channel(account) which requires full KYC including proofs of income, tax numbers, business registration numbers and such, for the rich folk.

so expect that binance and bitfinex to do the same. because yep LN is deemed as a payment facilitator network (due to routing) and so the routers would need to register as money service businesses.

so good luck

I don't think you should have a problem with Binance, or any exchange making LN more popular by adding it to their exchange. Exchanges SHOULD be using LN because right now they are the main place Bitcoin is used. Why wouldn't we want exchanges to help popularize LN?

Also exchanges allowing deposits and withdrawals on LN likely would mean people using larger channels/capacity because if you're trading you're probably not only trading a couple hundred bucks worth of Bitcoin. So that helps the LN not only become more popular but also helps the node capacity grow and therefore improves LN scaling, since capacity is the scalability bottleneck of LN.

OP I think I agree with the person who wrote that article. We do need more non-LN apps to start implementing LN in order to further the adoption of Bitcoin. Right now there isn't much reason to use LN for most people because you can't buy anything with Bitcoin in most places. Just a couple weeks ago was the first time in my life I experienced someone mention they take Bitcoin as an option for payment (and that was just for the tip, not for the actual payment).

Like, Venmo is great, but it wouldn't have been so popular if you had to get a different currency than the USD or whatever national currency you use. That's the situation LN is in. LN wallets are like decentralized Venmo with hard money, but there aren't nearly enough people onboarded onto Bitcoin, let alone LN, yet to have it be very useful just to pay other people or pay merchants cuz nobody accepts Bitcoin yet. But it gets useful if you can start interacting with other apps using LN even if you still can't use LN at popular merchants. I think this is what that writer was saying.

Then once you get a network of various apps that are LN enabled, and you get a growing community of people using LN regularly, not just enthusiasts who have a LN wallet because they are enthusiasts and barely get to use it, then that's when merchants start thinking hey we should tap into this growing payment network that people are already using more and more.

try to learn before defaulting to ignorance

el salvador first tried what they thought was "bitcoin" via a chivo wallet. but it actually used LN channels not bitcoin network.. so using LN as the back bone of payments they gave it a try. however users experienced liquidity bottlenecks and lost connections to channels which meant they lost value. this made the chivo developers have to quickly stop letting people use the chivo wallet by december 2021 whilst they redeveloped the chivo wallet
they decided by january 2022 to use a CEX (exchange custodian called alpha) as the balance manager of chivo value without the LN stuff. where by balance was swapped in-house. and users would only get to touch bitcoin if they requested a withdrawal. which most people chose fiat instead becasue LN ([pretending to be bitcoin adoption) left them with a bad taste in their mouth in 2021

you might wanna learn the history if you ever want to dare learn from history. becasue relying on ignorance is just how history repeats itself.. as the LN lemmings are learning with strikes second failure in nigeria.. which he too is trying to run away with tail between his legs AGAIN

yep strike was singing its own praises of its own involvement of el salvator adoption mid 2021. then the complaints started by el salvadorians by december 2021
then strike ran off and didnt say a word until late 2022. saying he moved on to nigerian propositions.. then in 2023 strike wanted to say how he was not involved with el salvador at all and its nothing to do with his business..
then his nigerians proposals didnt flourish. so now he is back in 2023 trying to get back into el salvadors good graces again for a second attempt.. which he is only able to get a second step in the door becasue this time he is bringing along bitfinex.. LNs biggest liquidity holder and (for strike) the hope that it will be enough for el salv president to give strike another chance.. hoping el sav government will swap el saves reserves from 'alphapoint' to bit finex to then hope balance holders at bitfinex then request LN withdrawals via strike so he can claim fees as a middleman of all payments in and out of el salv <> bitfinex

so yea. maybe you should try learning some of the history. good and bad and ugly. it will help you..
.. dont just read the dreamy utopian hype. or you wil never learn the truth

(technically bitfinex will want to be the custodian LN channel balance owner giving el salv citizens inbound balance)

No I'm the author of the article even if what he writes is so true that I would like to be.  I wonder how you can say certain things, but at least you understand what we're talking about?  Nobody wants more LN wallets we don't need them.  Furthermore, I would NEVER see Binance as the bearer of the one who made LN known to the masses, it would be the biggest defeat for Bitcoin.

I believe we already have a lot of wallets or apps that supported the lightning network but the major problem is that the lightning service hasn't gotten the needed hype to make it known to every Bitcoin holder and based on my belief I think only the BTC community are fully aware of the functionality and benefit of the lightning network which is the reason why most of the wallet/app that supported LN never get much traffic.
In the meantime, if an exchange like Binance supported LN we may see some change.

---

When read the article almost close it because the first statement on there was about digital cameras and phones which is not what I wanted to read. If you're the writer of the article make the amendment.