Author

Topic: Random Lightning Network question (Read 557 times)

legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
April 29, 2017, 04:55:19 AM
#11
LN=Banks.
No. Hubs using LN could be "banks" which could use FRB. But LN itself has nothing to do with that.


FYI:
LN isn't a bank per se, thus won't be eligible for a license... Wouldn't laws regarding banks have to change in order to be able to give licenses to dedicated LN hubs? From the government point of view, a LN hub wouldn't operate with money, so it wouldn't be possible to give a license, or am I wrong?


There will be a clarification of the current Banking laws, that will interpret LN Hubs acting as a Bank and then require by Law they have a Bank License.
The Banks own many State Governments, look at North Carolina, Wells Fargo pretty much controls all of the NC State Government assembly.
They could have them pass a Law confirming LN Hubs are Banks in a few weeks.

LN     => Holds access to your Locked BTC funds (BTC Deposits) ,  Charge Fees, Processes LN Notes payments, & Charges penalties.
Banks=> Hold Deposits,  Process their Bank Notes (Checks/ debit),Charge Fees , & Charge penalties

LN=Banks

Thinking a Bank License will not be required , is just setting yourself up for a lot of legal problems , including jail time.

Coinbase gets away with only needing a Money transmitter license, because they actually transmit the actual item onchain.
By LN hubs using a Offchain Representation to transact , they become Banks by processing their own Notes and are not eligible for just a money transmitter license.


 Cool
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
April 29, 2017, 04:48:42 AM
#10

LN Notes are nothing more than a Offchain Representation of the Value of a BTC as such that are no real barriers preventing a fractional reserve system, it is only 1 software update away.  Tongue


My understanding is that this is NOT how LN works.  There are no "LN notes" as far as I understand.  There are essentially only threats of broadcasting transactions that are exchanged.  As far as I understand, an LN channel is nothing else but a growing stack of mutual threats to settle in the disadvantage of the cheater that are NOT broadcast, together with a "last correct balance" transaction, that can be broadcast by any of the parties when he wants to close the channel.  


LN hubs act as a offchain general ledger , the transactions are the LN Notes (the representation of Value transferred).

If the LN software grants you an representation of an amount that can be transferred by transactions.
It should be apparent to you , that a multiplier can be added so LN grants you double the amount, therefore creating fractional reserve where they are transacting with more than actually exist onchain. One software update is all it takes to add a multiplier right after locking the amount onchain.

 Cool

hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 29, 2017, 03:40:50 AM
#9
If you want to do business with a specific merchant you need to have a connection to them but I don't see the lock-in effect here. Amazon could be served by a small number of high-value channels to other well-connected nodes.

The direct connection to a merchant is not even LN, "micro payments" exist already on bitcoin in a single channel.  The "lock in" comes when the block chain is too small to contain most transactions, and hence an on-chain transaction is difficult to obtain, and very expensive (huge fees).  If on-chain transactions are easy and cheap, there's no reason to go through the LN hassle.  So we start from the premise that settling is difficult and very expensive (this is the case if LN truly scales, and allows for hundreds or thousands of transactions per on-chain transaction).  As such, once you've set up your funds in a LN channel to a partner, you cannot really settle easily: all your transactions will have to go through that channel or you will have to pay a huge fee (maybe of the order of the amount you put in the channel).  So the huge price to settle makes that you are effectively locked in.  If an on-chain fee costs, say, 0.1 BTC, and you have 1 BTC in a channel, while an LN transaction costs you about 0.001 BTC, you better not settle.  If you connect and settle 10 times, your BTC is gone entirely.  So once you committed to a LN channel, you're essentially locked into it until you spent all your content.

It might even be that LN hubs and exchanges have exclusivity deals with miners, buying in advance their block room.  As such, as a non-institutional user, maybe you won't even find a miner that will accept your settlement transaction.  Who knows.  Or only at exceptionally high fees, if the chain is really full.


sr. member
Activity: 686
Merit: 320
April 29, 2017, 03:25:13 AM
#8
LN=Banks.
No. Hubs using LN could be "banks" which could use FRB. But LN itself has nothing to do with that.
legendary
Activity: 1102
Merit: 1014
April 29, 2017, 03:15:33 AM
#7
people have no choice but to lock in their funds to one of these central hubs

If you want to do business with a specific merchant you need to have a connection to them but I don't see the lock-in effect here. Amazon could be served by a small number of high-value channels to other well-connected nodes.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 29, 2017, 02:59:23 AM
#6
For those that don't know what Fractional Reserve is .

Quote
In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.


Now back to your question,

Option 1:  (Most Likely Scenario)
At the moment , 1 Onchain BTC = 1 LN Note  , this is all controlled in the LN Hub software
At some point the LN code could easily be modified so 1 Onchain BTC = 2 LN Notes , but instead of these Notes being now worth ½ , LN Hubs still sell it as worth 1 BTC.
Basically Doubling the Supply of Fake Offchain BTC (LN Notes) overnight, and there is nothing stopping them from multiples of 10 or more just like a bank used to be required to only loan out 10 times their total deposit amount.
LN Notes are nothing more than a Offchain Representation of the Value of a BTC as such that are no real barriers preventing a fractional reserve system, it is only 1 software update away.  Tongue


My understanding is that this is NOT how LN works.  There are no "LN notes" as far as I understand.  There are essentially only threats of broadcasting transactions that are exchanged.  As far as I understand, an LN channel is nothing else but a growing stack of mutual threats to settle in the disadvantage of the cheater that are NOT broadcast, together with a "last correct balance" transaction, that can be broadcast by any of the parties when he wants to close the channel. 

So there's not much of a chance to do fractional reserve banking that way, because there is no "IOU" (your "LN note") that is to represent a coin ; there is only a stack of mutually signed transactions one bricked into the other so that when broadcasting anything else but the last settlement, you automatically allow the counter party to take all your channel funds ; but without broadcasting them, they can't.

To the OP, as far as I understand, there is no "fractional reserve banking threat" by LN, but rather a "banking threat": namely that the dynamics of the LN is such, that it can only be beneficial to some central, big hubs to keep LN channels open, and that people have no choice but to lock in their funds to one of these central hubs.  As such, these central hubs can apply AML/KYC rules, they can require the payment of fees of all kinds, they can censor certain of your transactions, and of course, they now all about every of your transactions, which they can report to authorities.  But FRB is not part of it.

BTW, FRB is not applied any more in the current banking system, because there are no "reserves".  The central bank reserves are nothing else but buffers for inter-bank settlements, which can be augmented at will by any bank.
legendary
Activity: 1102
Merit: 1014
April 29, 2017, 02:30:26 AM
#5
In a discussion of SegWit activation on LTC, one anti-comment was all about LN being the equivalent of fractional reserve banking.

My hope was that someone could explain that to me?

Not fractional reserve banking, I understand that. I just don't understand how LN somehow = FRB.

It's mostly FUD but if economic concentration is too great, there is a risk of loss which some may characterize rather imprecisely as FRB.

The idea is if you had a channel open with the same entity as many others did, they could publish many transactions stealing funds and you would not be able to get your punishment transaction confirmed.

To mitigate this channels can be kept small, the punishment time large or people can just close channels whenever they feel the risk of keeping them open outweighs the benefits.
legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
April 29, 2017, 02:07:30 AM
#4
For those that don't know what Fractional Reserve is .

Quote
In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.


Now back to your question,

Option 1:  (Most Likely Scenario)
At the moment , 1 Onchain BTC = 1 LN Note  , this is all controlled in the LN Hub software
At some point the LN code could easily be modified so 1 Onchain BTC = 2 LN Notes , but instead of these Notes being now worth ½ , LN Hubs still sell it as worth 1 BTC.
Basically Doubling the Supply of Fake Offchain BTC (LN Notes) overnight, and there is nothing stopping them from multiples of 10 or more just like a bank used to be required to only loan out 10 times their total deposit amount.
LN Notes are nothing more than a Offchain Representation of the Value of a BTC as such that are no real barriers preventing a fractional reserve system, it is only 1 software update away.  Tongue


Option 2:
By colluding with the PoW miners a LN HUB could record a large number of BTC locked, but if the miners 51% attacked and rewrote the blockchain so the BTC was never in the address to be locked, then they just counterfeit LN Notes for the duration of it's usage in the LN network , only to be discovered when someone attempts to cash out onchain.


 Cool

FYI:
With OnChain Coins , Counterfeiting was impossible , now using offchain networks like LN, counterfeiting and fractional reserves enter into the crypto world.

FYI2:
For those that say fractional reserve of LN will never happen,
I say this, open your wallet , observe the Fiat in your hand, the masses have been using fractional reserve money for a long time and the elite profit off it,
the elite plan on controlling crypto the same as they do fiat. LN=Banks.

FYI3:
https://prof77.wordpress.com/the-20/the-international-bankers-famous-quotes-about-international-bankers/
Quote
“The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.” – William Paterson, founder of the Bank of England, 1694

Quote
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks…will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered…. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” . . . “Paper is poverty. It is the ghost of money and not money itself.”– Thomas Jefferson, 1743-1826

Quote
“Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce. And when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.” – President James Garfield, 1881. He was assassinated just weeks after making this statement.

Quote
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” – Henry Ford, circa 1925
sr. member
Activity: 686
Merit: 320
April 28, 2017, 09:43:12 PM
#3
I haven't looked into LN deeply (still trying to sort out all the pros/cons about segwit) so can't answer with any solid details. Might be some good info in here https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/56ehi1/fractional_reserve_on_lightning_network/

Course you need to sort out all the FUD and comments from those with ulterior motives.

Couple more i haven't read yet myself
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4f17bd/are_we_opening_up_bitcoin_for_fractional_reserve/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5kwdsq/the_bitcoin_lightning_network_all_you_need_to_know/

Basically it appears that LN and bitcoin itself no. But that's not to stop some company doing it using LN. Which they could pretty much do now anyway.

sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
Sound. Fury. Signifying.
April 28, 2017, 09:10:22 PM
#2
It's cool how non-spam questions get so much attention and thought, while spammy nonsense gets 30 pages of verbal diarrhea.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
Sound. Fury. Signifying.
April 26, 2017, 11:44:50 AM
#1
In a discussion of SegWit activation on LTC, one anti-comment was all about LN being the equivalent of fractional reserve banking.

My hope was that someone could explain that to me?

Not fractional reserve banking, I understand that. I just don't understand how LN somehow = FRB.
Jump to: