~
Unfortunately I don't have much time for YouTube videos, but looking at his upload list it seems it's one of the hillbilly BCH big blockers who still think it's a good idea to scale on-chain, just because it works on their un-used network and they resist development and evolution of the network. If he argues against LN because he thinks it's too hard to run on low-power hardware due to size constraints (I would get processing power, but storage? Really?) he is basically saying his own coin (that needs more space) is not decentraliseable because low-power device can't handle a lot of data. He is then actually arguing against the security of his own preferred coin (BCH it seems).
The use of Go (lnd) can be a concern on low-power hardware in the future, but c-lightning should run easy smooooth and cool on most devices.
So without even watching it, from what you wrote and seeing the video thumbnails & titles, I'd say this guy is clueless.
I understand. Many people don't like youtube videos. But, at least me, I can't deny that there is smart people everywhere, so watching other opinions, no matter if in youtube, facebook or reddit or whatever, is not a reason to say it's not valid thoughts of those people. And when we read/watch/whatever other opinions, we also open our own horizons.
Anyway, c-lightning, mostly being written in C, I think the same way you think about running in low power devices but still, it's not the application code itself that may put some stress on the hardware, is what that code "tells" the hardware to do in terms of data processing.
I didn't even knew but some people on Blockstream started a project to simulate, test and improve path finding algorithms using a large test Lightning network with an accurate topology extrapolated from the current topolgy with 1 millions channels. You guys can check it on Rusty Russel github here:
https://github.com/rustyrussell/million-channels-projectThere is also this post on medium from Rusty Russel talking about the supposed issue, here:
https://medium.com/blockstream/letting-a-million-channels-bloom-985bdb28660bSo, I'm just glad this claims were settled and we can rest assured that LN will be able to overcome any possible issues.
~
like n0nce i won't go into details (although i watched the video)
1. the video is 3 years old. just keep that in mind. a lot happened since then. but you recognized that yourself, mentioning the quote from rusty which is 4 years old
2. towards the end of the video, he says something like:
every attempt to raising the blocksize in the last several years have all been shutdown immediately
which obviously is wrong, the blocksize was increased with segwit
3. looking at the other videos on the channel, that guy is/was clearly on the wrong site of history
mostly ad hominem, i know, but sometimes i don't have the time for more...
Yeah, I understand that it is 3 or 4 years old.
This guy was clearly trying to create fear on the LN or something. But yes, he's (or at least was) completely on the wrong side when he says that the attempts to increase the block size were immediately shut down. This says we would agree with it, completely ignoring the consequences of that regarding centralization, storage issues, etc. And, yes, segwit did it and more, in a very clever way, no doubts about it.