Topic: [OUTDATED] The Lightning Network FAQ - page 3. (Read 3266 times)

Are you telling everyone in the forum to trust your word, and not the LN developers' word? Wouldn't your word make the LN developers, scammers?

Because I encourage the newbies to trust you, and learn about Bitcoin. The hard way.

1. not being broadcast is the point. people need to realise that until its settled on a blockchain using a proper/native bitcoin transaction, not a HTLC, the balance is temporary and can get lost because people can go offline and lose their HTLC (even LN dev's admit this flaw) thus lose where they stand and how much who owes who what
(its why they envision watch towers and factories to middleman manage the IOU's)

2. a HTLC is measured in Msats
thus even if it was a really secured lock "commitment" (as you call it) is not final/milestone/explicit/settled
p.s HTLC is Hashed Time Lock Contract. i see you subtly trying to slide in a new buzzword 'commitment' but it didnt work
trying to avoid things like agreements, promises by then throwing in a new word to push the conversation further out. doesnt main the basic definition/function of a HTLC any different

its meaningless because what the contract represents is just a peg to real bitcoins. all a HTLC does is let users know a balance of who owes who what amount of collateral, without actually moving, involving the collateral... in short its just a tally of temporary position/temporary tally of who owes who what

By design.  It would somewhat defeat the purpose of it being off-chain if they were broadcast to the blockchain.  They're still not IOUs.  A commitment transaction is more binding than an IOU.

The clue is in the name.  That's why they call it a "commitment transaction" and not an "owed transaction", or a "promised transaction".

there is no bitcoin in the lightning network

ok lets word it a way you would appreciate.
you yourself believe that the btc network is the bitcoin network and all other networks are just altcoins that try to borrow/fake the name.
so under your own bias you have to accept that LN using Msats that do not broadcast to the BTC network. are a non blockchain crypto network of pegged coins.

Msats are not bitcoins

now windfury.
i gave up trying to tell you about code like "chainhash" because it appears your not a coder to be able to read it
i gave up trying to tell you about devs flaw admissions because it appears you cant be bothered to watch their videos
i gave up trying to tell you about analogies because it appears your imagination cant concieve any comparisons

so please if you want to continue your rhetoric. atleast use LN
i find it so strange you are so devoted to promote and defend it, jet show little to no knowledge about it.
all you keep doing is repeating things you dont know and then just imply "wrong coz franky said it" which is lame

so please atleast learn about what your trying to promote/devote your time to. because you help no one

in short
Msats are the pegged token. they are not tokens recognised by the btc network
HTLC contracts are not bitcoin transactions that broadcast to the btc network
HTLC contracts are private, temporary and UNSETTLED agreements of who owes who what. the very definitition of an IOU

Your debate never showed, or proven to anyone that the Bitcoins in the Lightning Network are "pegged promises to pay IOU tokens". You are throwing anything to the wall to see what sticks. There's nothing.

    I suspect that a good portion of people involved in BTC are either HODL's or traders. I don't see why a HODLer would think it is a good idea to wrap up much funds in LN, since it involves keeping funds in a hot wallet. Also, I am not aware of any major exchanges coming on board. If a few of them do, I can see lightning as an excellent way to arb. However, I think coming up with an easy way to handle the channels may be a challenge for a major exchange at this time.

Is it just me or has there been way less enthusiasm for Lightning in the past 1 or 2 months?

this statement above does not show how LN works, but is just a wishy washy mashup of it kinda does this and kinda doesnt do that, all squeezed into a paragraph to basically mean nothing at all in complete context

you keep using things that make many random points that dont disprove anything as your counter to single items.
but lets try separating and individualising and translating the statement

1. in lightning no one user "deposited" Bitcoins to another party
 a. LN is a separate network. it has no blockchain. thus no bitcoin (unless you believe bitcoin can exist on multiple networks)
 b. lightning uses Msats, bitcoins remain on the bitcoin network(blockchain locked). no bitcoin is deposited to LN
 c. lightning channels are multiuser, bitcoins are locked into a multisig
 d. its not about 100% single user control

2. and then issued with a worthless token
 a. LN channels use Msats which is a token that is NOT recognised by the bitcoin network
 b. worthless/worth, is in the eye of the beholder. msats are not community audited, value is agreed between channel parties
 c. channels of Msats can be setup, agreed where collateral can be coinbase balance, altcoins, or anything human agreed

3. They are actually signed bitcoin transactions.
 a. CLTV multisigs are bitcoin recognised transactions. HTLC smartcontracts are LN payments. . learn the difference
 b. eltoo factories dont give channels the CLTV. just HTLC. its the factory(Server) that later signs a CLTV
 c. HTLC do no broadcast, are not measured in btc/sats and who owes what changes often without settlement

3c. understand it. if you have a 'agreement' of who owes who what. but its not settled. the the value is still owed. and all the agreement is, is a tally of who owes who what. the very definition of an IOU

seriously windfury. get out of the echo chamber of words and social drama.
learn the actual function of LN by using it. reading CODE,
please atleast just use LN before ever making another post concerning LN. then you can have a more practical discussion

I'm stealing a quote from amishmanish's post on page 3, https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50781071

he actually thinks people should stick with fiat (facepalm). let me guess he thinks bitcoin is not digital cash but LN's Msats are? as its very apparent h feels bitcoin is not a viable currency and how only LN's token can do the job