Pages:
Author

Topic: The Lightning Network FAQ - page 44. (Read 32058 times)

legendary
Activity: 3710
Merit: 10196
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
April 06, 2021, 01:22:45 PM
Why isn't this thread in the altcoin section?  Can anyone make a shitcoin fork and tie it to Bitcoin's blockchain and be able to post wherever they want on the forum or is this something reserved only for the Core development team?

I'm just curious at the politics that are behind the lightning network getting an altcoin pass while it's supporters call other projects shitcoins...  What about this shitcoin has some Bitcoin supporters so willing to look the other way?  I'm genuinely curious.  

You have a valid point, any discussions related to 3rd party offchain systems should be in a separate topic.

Lightning Network & Liquid, and any other offchain systems should not be considered as bitcoin, IMO.
Just as any Exchange's separate offchain database is excluded from discussion here , so too should other 3rd party offchain networks.
They should have their own separate topics to avoid confusion,
but as you mentioned earlier, Politics does seem to be determining the outcomes here instead of logic.

You seem to be arguing the exact opposite of what you are proclaiming to want to achieve in your labelling the decision regarding what is separate from bitcoin and what is connected to bitcoin as politics rather than logic.

In that respect, to cause separate sections for bitcoin related projects by proclaiming them NOT sufficiently connected to bitcoin (on chain blah blah blah) would seem to be a political decision rather than a logical one.. for some of the reasons that have already been asserted in responses from ETFbitcoin and mine.
legendary
Activity: 2856
Merit: 7410
Crypto Swap Exchange
April 06, 2021, 04:53:30 AM
Why isn't this thread in the altcoin section?

Because this thread actually about LN for Bitcoin (although LN support many cryptocurrency) and some parts of LN directly involve Bitcoin network (such as HTLC script used to open and close channel).

You have a valid point, any discussions related to 3rd party offchain systems should be in a separate topic.

Lightning Network & Liquid, and any other offchain systems should not be considered as bitcoin, IMO.
Just as any Exchange's separate offchain database is excluded from discussion here , so too should other 3rd party offchain networks.

While Lightning Network is off-chain system, IMO it can't be categorized as 3rd party since it's possible user have control over their Bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 3626
Merit: 2209
💲🏎️💨🚓
April 06, 2021, 12:22:19 AM
Quote
Another 24 hours went by and still no inbound channels were created, so I sent via LN (from a secondary LN source) ~2,500 sats bringing the balance just above 902,000 sats.  But no secondary LN channel was forthcoming.
In my experience, the inbound capacity occurred instantly when the channel was opened. It would have been interesting to see what happens if you sent more than 3,750 to the wallet. I would expect Phoenix to open another channel, but haven't tried that from a LN deposit yet.

Just for a laugh I sent 500,000 sats via LN from my Eclair (mobile phone) wallet to the Phoenix (Tablet) wallet in one TX costing 51 sats.  The original 1,000,000 on chain TX cost ~7,250 sats so it's a stark contrast in TX fees for on-chain Vs off chain.  (I haven't tweeked any TX request fees on either device).

As we supposed, a new channel was created in under two minutes with an outbound figure of 499,000 sats (1,000 sat fee to open a new channel) and an inbound component of ~ 239,000 sats.

So...

I have 1,501,000 sats OUTBOUND capacity in my Phoenix Wallet with three channels open and ~ 455,000 sats INBOUND capacity combined.




Now all I have to do is find venues around Brisbane that accept BTC either on or off chain and test out transactions in a real world setting which is something I've been meaning to do for quite a long time now.
member
Activity: 266
Merit: 20
April 05, 2021, 07:44:00 PM
Why isn't this thread in the altcoin section?  Can anyone make a shitcoin fork and tie it to Bitcoin's blockchain and be able to post wherever they want on the forum or is this something reserved only for the Core development team?

I'm just curious at the politics that are behind the lightning network getting an altcoin pass while it's supporters call other projects shitcoins...  What about this shitcoin has some Bitcoin supporters so willing to look the other way?  I'm genuinely curious.  

You have a valid point, any discussions related to 3rd party offchain systems should be in a separate topic.

Lightning Network & Liquid, and any other offchain systems should not be considered as bitcoin, IMO.
Just as any Exchange's separate offchain database is excluded from discussion here , so too should other 3rd party offchain networks.
They should have their own separate topics to avoid confusion,
but as you mentioned earlier, Politics does seem to be determining the outcomes here instead of logic.
legendary
Activity: 3710
Merit: 10196
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
April 05, 2021, 05:14:12 PM
Why isn't this thread in the altcoin section?  Can anyone make a shitcoin fork and tie it to Bitcoin's blockchain and be able to post wherever they want on the forum or is this something reserved only for the Core development team?

I'm just curious at the politics that are behind the lightning network getting an altcoin pass while it's supporters call other projects shitcoins...  What about this shitcoin has some Bitcoin supporters so willing to look the other way?  I'm genuinely curious.  

I don't claim to be any kind of expert in terms of what is a shitcoin and what is not (and even worse when it comes to overviewing what topics go in which sections of the forum), but on the idea of whether lightning network is a shitcoin, that seems so 2017/2018 or perhaps there might have been some recent valid assertions that did not get significantly and sufficiently rebutted in recent times.

Anyhow, it seems to me that even if there are some implementation difficulties with lightning over the past few years, through lightning network, there is no attempt to print some kind of token separate from bitcoin.. so merely attempting to improve bitcoin's liquidity through second-layer solutions, such as lightning network does not even seem close to what various shitcoins (I think that you were referring to them as alts) are doing and have been doing..  

Shitcoins, such as ethereum and its various scam projects such as ICOs and DEFI (and cannot forget about the shitty NFT scams), the various bcashes and/or other shitcoins with their own blocks are not generally building on bitcoin but attempting to build their own ecosystem that is separate from bitcoin but rides off of bitcoins security, good will and good name to scam or deceive people, even if some of them might some day either get absorbed into bitcoin or have some kind of useful complement to bitcoin that might end up serving on as a second layer.  

I cannot think of any shitcoin whether we are referring to any of the bcashes or their related projects or Ethereum or any shit built in connection with it whether ICOs, or the current shits of the day that are called DEFI and/or NFTs, that currently is even close to having some bitcoin complements that would thereby allow them to NOT be put in the alt coin section..

but I hardly even know what various altcoin (shitcoin) threads on the forum are because I generally avoid those kinds of various non-bitcoin topics on the forum (because I do not want to fill my head up with distracting bullshit and more nonsense than my head is already tending to be filled with) except I don't really mind bashing various shitcoins and non-bitcoin related projects, scams and issues when they come up in various bitcoin related threads and present themselves as if they are either similar to bitcoin or better than bitcoin or used as a vehicle to naysay bitcoin (suggesting that they cure some assumed bitcoin defects.. blah blah blah), when I am in the mood or have time for such bashenings towards such non-bitcoin projects that bleed into bitcoin threads on a fairly regular basis...  
donator
Activity: 4718
Merit: 4218
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
April 05, 2021, 04:14:34 PM
Why isn't this thread in the altcoin section?  Can anyone make a shitcoin fork and tie it to Bitcoin's blockchain and be able to post wherever they want on the forum or is this something reserved only for the Core development team?

I'm just curious at the politics that are behind the lightning network getting an altcoin pass while it's supporters call other projects shitcoins...  What about this shitcoin has some Bitcoin supporters so willing to look the other way?  I'm genuinely curious. 
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
April 05, 2021, 03:39:01 PM
Is it true that Lightning Network uses BTC values that aren't equal to their mainnet counterparts?
No. Any site I've seen uses the same exchange rate for on-chain Bitcoin and LN Bitcoin. Only fees are different, and that might include an additional cost for on-chain consolidation (I've seen a payment processor add 0.0002 BTC to the on-chain Bitcoin amount for this).

Lightning would have been good, but I have one big problem: the value. 1 BTC ≠ 1 LBTC. Because of this, it is possible to lose a lot of money due to price fluctuations.
Lightning Bitcoin LBTC is a shitfork worth about $2. Maybe that confused him?

Quote
It would be damning if bitcoins on LN don't trade 1:1 (or at least close to it) against bitcoin, because that would impede people from moving their bitcoins to it.
If anyone's willing do to a different exchange rate in either direction, I'm totally okay paying half price for their LN or on-chain Tongue
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
April 05, 2021, 03:30:53 PM
Moved from another thread where it's on-topic. Is it true that Lightning Network uses BTC values that aren't equal to their mainnet counterparts?

Does 1 mainnet BTC really ≠ 1 LN BTC?

Lightning would have been good, but I have one big problem: the value. 1 BTC ≠ 1 LBTC. Because of this, it is possible to lose a lot of money due to price fluctuations.

It would be damning if bitcoins on LN don't trade 1:1 (or at least close to it) against bitcoin, because that would impede people from moving their bitcoins to it.
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
April 05, 2021, 02:27:46 PM
and then sent the bc1... wallet address BTC 0.01
That's about $600, a lot more than what I'd use to try a wallet.

Quote
as I'd briefly read that Phoenix is based on Eclair LN Wallet
As far as I know, both wallets come from acinq.co.

Quote
I'd paid 20sats/byte TX fee and not long later I discovered 999,000 sats had been created into a channel (The channel connects where to?  No idea at this point) with ~3,750 INBOUND capacity inbuilt into the single channel.
The channel connects to ACINQ. Click Settings > Channel list > click a channel to see the node.
That's a disappointing inbound amount. I'm starting to think it's just the closest on-chain input they have available for this, and anything above the required amount will be your inbound capacity.
I created another channel a with 3 mBTC recently, and it started with about 1.5 mBTC inbound capacity.

Quote
Another 24 hours went by and still no inbound channels were created, so I sent via LN (from a secondary LN source) ~2,500 sats bringing the balance just above 902,000 sats.  But no secondary LN channel was forthcoming.
In my experience, the inbound capacity occurred instantly when the channel was opened. It would have been interesting to see what happens if you sent more than 3,750 to the wallet. I would expect Phoenix to open another channel, but haven't tried that from a LN deposit yet.

Quote
However, when I went into the channel list I discovered a second LN channel has been opened but with 99,900 sats outbound AND ~122,000 sats inbound capacity in the one channel.
Those amounts are more in line with my experience. Maybe they didn't anticipate a 10 mBTC channel Wink

Quote
on reviewing the wallet address in mempool.space (their linked block explorer) I can only see one inbound and one out bound transaction cancelling my theory the other side sends funds to jointly open a channel then sends funds out to create inbound capacity
My theory is they open a channel, then instantly balance it so you get the required amount on your side.

Quote
which then lends me to suspecting Phoenix co-creates it's channels using your and their funds.
That's my assumption too.

Quote
Which makes me wonder just how "custodial" Phoenix really is?
The website explains which parts are custodial and which parts aren't. I don't really have the knowledge (or time) to verify it (I just use the wallet).

Quote
Unfortunately, as with the Eclair LN Wallet I seem to be in the same predicament in that as soon as the screen goes dark, the program goes into hybernation and the channels effectively go off-line (so I can't run Phoenix as a node on my tablet)
If it's screen related, an easy solution on Android is to set Stay Awake when charging. I mainly use LN to pay, so this doesn't bother me.

Quote
I also can't open channels to whomever I want to either
It's a feature, not a bug Wink



Today I couldn't send 100 sat from BlueWallet to Phoenix Wallet. But as expected, it worked by sending from Blue to  Lightning-Roulette, and from there to Phoenix. I've seen this before, it's as if the wallets can't find the correct route on their own.
legendary
Activity: 3626
Merit: 2209
💲🏎️💨🚓
April 05, 2021, 11:51:26 AM
...  That's one of the reasons I like Phoenix Wallet so much: when I sent 420,000 sat, I got a channel with 420,000 sat (minus 0.1%) outgoing capacity, and also more than 200,000 sat incoming capacity. I didn't have to do anything.  ...

OK... I'd heard of Phoenix LN Wallet a while ago, but hadn't done anything to investigate it until now.  Not long after the above post I followed the github link and downloaded the Android APK, installed it on a 7" tablet and then sent the bc1... wallet address BTC 0.01 from my mobile phone's Eclair Wallet as I'd briefly read that Phoenix is based on Eclair LN Wallet which I have been using for some time now.  (Just as an aside, none of the Eclair LN channels values on my mobile phone have changed for many weeks).

I'd paid 20sats/byte TX fee and not long later I discovered 999,000 sats had been created into a channel (The channel connects where to?  No idea at this point) with ~3,750 INBOUND capacity inbuilt into the single channel.

Having probably misread the above post, I waited 24 hours and no additional channels (with inbound capacity) were created, so I sent 100,000 to a LN wallet on another device.

Another 24 hours went by and still no inbound channels were created, so I sent via LN (from a secondary LN source) ~2,500 sats bringing the balance just above 902,000 sats.  But no secondary LN channel was forthcoming.

The next day, I sent the Phoenix Wallet BTC 0.001 from a different wallet to all previous sources thus far to a bc1... wallet address rolled by the App.  After generating the wallet address, I shut the program down and left it closed until after the funds had had a number of confirmations.

12 hours ago, roughly 12 hours after sending the BTC 0.001 I opened the Phoenix Wallet and got a near instant message stating the funds had arrived via the bc1... wallet address.

However, when I went into the channel list I discovered a second LN channel has been opened but with 99,900 sats outbound AND ~122,000 sats inbound capacity in the one channel.

on reviewing the wallet address in mempool.space (their linked block explorer) I can only see one inbound and one out bound transaction cancelling my theory the other side sends funds to jointly open a channel then sends funds out to create inbound capacity

However #2 the outbound TX has three wallet addresses sending funds to another (two) addresses.  I suspect one very close to the combined inbound/outbound/TX fee is "my" transaction which then lends me to suspecting Phoenix co-creates it's channels using your and their funds.

Which makes me wonder just how "custodial" Phoenix really is?




Unfortunately, as with the Eclair LN Wallet I seem to be in the same predicament in that as soon as the screen goes dark, the program goes into hybernation and the channels effectively go off-line (so I can't run Phoenix as a node on my tablet)

I also can't open channels to whomever I want to either, so (if my five week (and counting!!) TX from one Zap wallet to another Zap wallet ever gets confirmed) I'll be back to creating a series of Zap LN channels which I can keep open on my PC.

(mumble Now that I have a working PC again... mumble)
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
April 02, 2021, 05:09:43 AM
That 0.01% is the fee rate of Phoenix wallet isn't it?
Correct. A few examples:
|Amount sent (sat)|Fee (sat)|
|
2,000
legendary
Activity: 1876
Merit: 3131
April 02, 2021, 04:54:10 AM
Besides the fee rate, there should also be a base fee. What's the base rate of each transaction charged by Phoenix wallet?

There is no reason why you could not set the base fee to zero. I am not sure if that's the case here, though.

Edit:
Sending LN payments: as low as 1 sat + 0.01% of the amount sent. If no route can be found for this price, the fees will increase gradually up to a maximum of 12 sats + 0.3%.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!
April 02, 2021, 04:38:26 AM
But: the LN fees aren't high, it's usually around 0.01% when I send a five-digit transaction (although one 2 sat transaction took 3 sat in fee). It's a lot lower than (custodial) BlueWallet, which charges 0.3 to 1% fee (and doesn't round up, so small transactions are free).
All in all I'm happy with these fees.
That 0.01% is the fee rate of Phoenix wallet isn't it? It's the percentage that the node charges for routing the payment. Besides the fee rate, there should also be a base fee. What's the base rate of each transaction charged by Phoenix wallet?
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
April 02, 2021, 04:19:28 AM
Phoenix has a well-connected node. They are basically forcing you to route your LN transactions through their nodes, so they receive the routing fees, and are also receiving the portion of the transaction fee that is a % of the transaction amount. Since all transactions must go through their channels, they control the fees that are paid both by you and by anyone who sends a payment to you.
All true Smiley But: the LN fees aren't high, it's usually around 0.01% when I send a five-digit transaction (although one 2 sat transaction took 3 sat in fee). It's a lot lower than (custodial) BlueWallet, which charges 0.3 to 1% fee (and doesn't round up, so small transactions are free).
All in all I'm happy with these fees.
copper member
Activity: 1610
Merit: 1899
Amazon Prime Member #7
April 02, 2021, 02:20:58 AM

Quote
even if Phoenix/Breez etc begin to use these new cheaper dual-funded channels (which is also a lighter burden on the blockchain & utxo set...), they will still presumably charge a small premium to do so. Some people won't want to pay that.
At the moment, Phoenix is cheaper to fund than creating my own challel, and doesn't reduce the amount I can spend for a channel reserve either. I can't imagine this is sustainable as a business model, so if they change it, I might change my wallet too.
Phoenix has a well-connected node. They are basically forcing you to route your LN transactions through their nodes, so they receive the routing fees, and are also receiving the portion of the transaction fee that is a % of the transaction amount. Since all transactions must go through their channels, they control the fees that are paid both by you and by anyone who sends a payment to you.
legendary
Activity: 3458
Merit: 6231
Crypto Swap Exchange
March 31, 2021, 07:11:00 AM
At the moment, Phoenix is cheaper to fund than creating my own challel, and doesn't reduce the amount I can spend for a channel reserve either. I can't imagine this is sustainable as a business model, so if they change it, I might change my wallet too.

Depends on the business model. From what I can see if they get a lot of BTC in and open channels to a lot of other places they can charge a bit more in fees since they might be able to do transactions is less hops. IF and that is a big if they get large enough they can get enough fees to make a profit. Or they can SaaS it and sell it white label to people who want to run a node without doing the back end.

There are some other thoughts I have too on how to make a small profit doing this. Not sure it would work to run a real business.

Anyway having an odd issue with my nodes  that I have to take a look at so if anyone here has channels open to them they will be going up and down most of Easter weekend.
They yet again refuse to talk to each other. The rest of the LN world is fine, but as far as they are concerned the other one does not exist.

-Dave
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
March 31, 2021, 03:55:25 AM
I kinda agree that some people will use these LN-wallet phone apps that take care of all the balancing stuff for them, at least initially. I expect a significant slice of people will end up setting up their own node
I have different expectations: I expect only a small percentage to run their own node, just like only a small number of people use a full Bitcoin Core installation. Especially if LN accomplishes mass adoption, many people won't really care how it works as long as it works.

Quote
even if Phoenix/Breez etc begin to use these new cheaper dual-funded channels (which is also a lighter burden on the blockchain & utxo set...), they will still presumably charge a small premium to do so. Some people won't want to pay that.
At the moment, Phoenix is cheaper to fund than creating my own challel, and doesn't reduce the amount I can spend for a channel reserve either. I can't imagine this is sustainable as a business model, so if they change it, I might change my wallet too.
legendary
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3071
March 30, 2021, 09:48:46 AM
If I would open a channel from a well-connected node, and pay the cafe from there, I would agree the cafe can use that capacity to pay someone else again.

yeah, that's what I meant

I kinda agree that some people will use these LN-wallet phone apps that take care of all the balancing stuff for them, at least initially. I expect a significant slice of people will end up setting up their own node, because it's cheaper cutting out middlemen, and because people are more motivated to learn tech that involves managing their own money (it's the Bitcoin ethos, after all)

even if Phoenix/Breez etc begin to use these new cheaper dual-funded channels (which is also a lighter burden on the blockchain & utxo set...), they will still presumably charge a small premium to do so. Some people won't want to pay that.
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
March 30, 2021, 06:46:03 AM
Any outbound capacity the cafe needs will be to their suppliers.

no it doesn't.

It's called "Lightning Network" because... it's a network. It doesn't make any difference who you have in/out bound channel capacity from/to, you can use it to pay or receive from anybody on the network (aggregate capacity needs to be enough sats for the payment, obviously)
But.......... If I, a customer, open a channel to the cafe from my mobile wallet, my wallet is not a node so doesn't route other payments through my wallet. So if I pay 1 cup of coffee, the cafe can only use that capacity to pay me back my cup of coffee, right? Unless I'm mistaken here, this is how I understood it.

If I would open a channel from a well-connected node, and pay the cafe from there, I would agree the cafe can use that capacity to pay someone else again.
legendary
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3071
March 30, 2021, 06:38:30 AM
For me the benefit of having both sides funding the opening of a channel is that both sides already have a mixture of inbound and outbound capacity.

it's a cheap way to get incoming capacity, it doesn't make a difference if you already have other channels.

And it means the in/out ratio can be balanced right from the outset, instead of paying even more sending fees to rebalance unbalanced channels

i.e. two channels, one 100% inbound and one 100% outbound could be opened instead as 1 on-chain opening tx in just one channel, with 50% inbound and 50% outbound Cool


Any outbound capacity the cafe needs will be to their suppliers.

no it doesn't.

It's called "Lightning Network" because... it's a network. It doesn't make any difference who you have in/out bound channel capacity from/to, you can use it to pay or receive from anybody on the network (aggregate capacity needs to be enough sats for the payment, obviously)
Pages:
Jump to:
© 2020, Bitcointalksearch.org