The Lightning Network FAQ - page 50.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2884

Merit: 1810

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 21, 2020, 12:49:40 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 21, 2020, 01:21:53 AM

I believe the "race to the bottom" hypothesis holds IF capital is unlimited, and if there wasn't an opportunity cost.

neither of those things matter, that's like saying "people avoid keeping cash in their pockets when they leave the house, because they could've invested it better and made more money"

people selling newspapers in kiosks don't accept ACH transactions from your savings account, because it's inconvenient.

Lightning is about convenience of use, not optimum investing.

From our standpoint, yes. But from a serious long term LN node maintainer's standpoint, it might be different.

Quote

and so, if this means big nodes can't ever make money, and the LN will just be like the cash system (people transferring around everything from their weekly takings, down to the pennies lost under their couches), again, what's not to like?

That wasn't the point. The point is about limited capital, labor and specialization, and about a natural gravitation towards a practical incentives structure to maintain the network.

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3444

Merit: 6182

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 21, 2020, 12:49:40 PM

and so, if this means big nodes can't ever make money, and the LN will just be like the cash system (people transferring around everything from their weekly takings, down to the pennies lost under their couches), again, what's not to like?

With multi-path payments working, it's not as big a deal as it was.
But still, you don't want to rely on people providing a free service so others can make payments.

In an ideal world yes, but here in the real world businesses want to make money.

Do you really not want to have any large hubs with a large amount of liquidity?

As I said a few posts up, I don't think most people here really care about making any money.
But for a commercial business to tie up funds without the potential for some profit, it's going to be a tough sell.

-Dave

PrimeNumber7

copper member

Activity: 1610

Merit: 1898

Amazon Prime Member #7

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 21, 2020, 12:49:40 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 21, 2020, 01:21:53 AM

I believe the "race to the bottom" hypothesis holds IF capital is unlimited, and if there wasn't an opportunity cost.

neither of those things matter, that's like saying "people avoid keeping cash in their pockets when they leave the house, because they could've invested it better and made more money"

people selling newspapers in kiosks don't accept ACH transactions from your savings account, because it's inconvenient.

Lightning is about convenience of use, not optimum investing.

and so, if this means big nodes can't ever make money, and the LN will just be like the cash system (people transferring around everything from their weekly takings, down to the pennies lost under their couches), again, what's not to like?

People will typically carry around modest amounts of money in their pockets, and not significantly more than they expect to need. One reason for this is the risk they will lose some or all their money.

I believe the same principle applies to LN node operators. There is not a zero risk of running a LN node. The risks are similar to having a hot wallet on their computer. Many businesses and bitcoin holders will keep their coin on an offline wallet, sacrificing convenience for security.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3071

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 21, 2020, 01:21:53 AM

I believe the "race to the bottom" hypothesis holds IF capital is unlimited, and if there wasn't an opportunity cost.

neither of those things matter, that's like saying "people avoid keeping cash in their pockets when they leave the house, because they could've invested it better and made more money"

people selling newspapers in kiosks don't accept ACH transactions from your savings account, because it's inconvenient.

Lightning is about convenience of use, not optimum investing.

and so, if this means big nodes can't ever make money, and the LN will just be like the cash system (people transferring around everything from their weekly takings, down to the pennies lost under their couches), again, what's not to like?

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3444

Merit: 6182

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 21, 2020, 01:21:53 AM

OR invest in something else that could profit more. Opportunity cost.

Would you have pulled funds from all your nodes if you were making profit?

Opportunity cost is a tough one to call. Would depend on many factors.

If there were making a profit, depends on the amount.
I moved ~$400 out of LN. So if I was making $0.25 a day, probably yeah still would have.
$2. a day would have to think about it.
Some where in between would depend on many factors.

But LN nodes with that little amount of BTC don't make that much money so it's kind of a moot point.
I put myself in the tech nerd side. So I run them for fun. And are operated a such. A few satoshi here or there that they throw off are a bonus.

-Dave

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2884

Merit: 1810

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 20, 2020, 12:02:21 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 20, 2020, 05:49:39 AM

For the sake of debate. Don't you believe that those two, "profit as a canard", and "taking the competing part seriously" are contradictory?

yes, but that didn't stop you and DaveF lamenting the fact that profit is a canard up-thread, made more painful by clinging to the possibility that you could compete seriously

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: the market dynamics of the LN are an absolute race to the bottom: if anyone tries to charge higher fees than their operating costs, some upstart will try to undercut them, in the belief that they can push their competitor/s out of the marketplace by running at a loss "short term". This will probably be a mistake, but it won't stop them trying. When everyone wants to participate (because fast cheap transactions), there will always be transactions to route, and always a procession of people thinking they can use routing as a way to earn income... and people with alot of BTC in channels that want to troll such profit-seekers by undermining their ability to make any money. Thusly, the margins are cut to nothing, and the balance of routing rewards trends to zero.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but I think that secretly, you already knew. Really though, what's not to like?

There wasn't a "bubble" bursted, but I am always open to new possbilities, and new theories, regarding the fee-market in LN.

I believe the "race to the bottom" hypothesis holds IF capital is unlimited, and if there wasn't an opportunity cost.

Quote from: DaveF on November 20, 2020, 05:01:16 PM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 20, 2020, 12:02:21 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 20, 2020, 05:49:39 AM

For the sake of debate. Don't you believe that those two, "profit as a canard", and "taking the competing part seriously" are contradictory?

yes, but that didn't stop you and DaveF lamenting the fact that profit is a canard up-thread, made more painful by clinging to the possibility that you could compete seriously

I pulled my funds from all my nodes without a thought because I wanted to spend the BTC on something else. And since there is no real profit to me made, it was just easier for me to do that then pulling from cold storage.

OR invest in something else that could profit more. Opportunity cost.

Would you have pulled funds from all your nodes if you were making profit?

Timelord2067

legendary

Activity: 3626

Merit: 2209

💲🏎️💨🚓

Quote from: DaveF on November 20, 2020, 05:01:16 PM

...

Hi, I can still do top up's of your LN by sending funds from my Eclair wallet if you would like to send back via on-chain 1:1 - the only thing I ask is that you pay your own on-chain TX fees (this would enable you to make just one on-chain TX but top up multiple LN)

I'll be back on in about ten - twelve hours.

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3444

Merit: 6182

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 20, 2020, 12:02:21 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 20, 2020, 05:49:39 AM

For the sake of debate. Don't you believe that those two, "profit as a canard", and "taking the competing part seriously" are contradictory?

yes, but that didn't stop you and DaveF lamenting the fact that profit is a canard up-thread, made more painful by clinging to the possibility that you could compete seriously

Don't drag me into this about profit.
I don't run any of my nodes expecting a profit.

I just pointed out the fact that since there is no profit to be made that people are not going to treat it like a business.

I pulled my funds from all my nodes without a thought because I wanted to spend the BTC on something else. And since there is no real profit to me made, it was just easier for me to do that then pulling from cold storage.

bitrefill / ln.pizza / etc. they are businesses and run their LN nodes as such.
99% of everyone here is an enthusiast / hobbyist / tech nerd and run their nodes as such.

Case in point. As of now I am going to refill one of my nodes. On chain fees are above 50 sat/vB
Guess what, I am not going to start to refill till they drop a bit over the weekend.

A business can't play that game if they have to move on chain funds to open / close / do something else with a channel. They eat the fee and open it now.

-Dave

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3071

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 20, 2020, 05:49:39 AM

For the sake of debate. Don't you believe that those two, "profit as a canard", and "taking the competing part seriously" are contradictory?

yes, but that didn't stop you and DaveF lamenting the fact that profit is a canard up-thread, made more painful by clinging to the possibility that you could compete seriously

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: the market dynamics of the LN are an absolute race to the bottom: if anyone tries to charge higher fees than their operating costs, some upstart will try to undercut them, in the belief that they can push their competitor/s out of the marketplace by running at a loss "short term". This will probably be a mistake, but it won't stop them trying. When everyone wants to participate (because fast cheap transactions), there will always be transactions to route, and always a procession of people thinking they can use routing as a way to earn income... and people with alot of BTC in channels that want to troll such profit-seekers by undermining their ability to make any money. Thusly, the margins are cut to nothing, and the balance of routing rewards trends to zero.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but I think that secretly, you already knew. Really though, what's not to like?

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2884

Merit: 1810

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 19, 2020, 07:46:44 AM

"profit" is a canard imo.

With Lightning, you have access to cheap, anonymous transactions. If you break even on routing fees, that's a pretty good outcome.

LN routing supply is market driven, because it's an open competition. Therefore, you can expect some people to take the competing part seriously, and so try to be better at routing than others. The key point is that this cannot lead to monopolization while the ability to compete remains open, and so fees will be pushed as low as routing nodes can tolerate. I expect many will figure out some way to run at a marginal loss, and recoup the costs some other way (e.g. miners/pools are well positioned to run loss-making LN nodes, as they're the ones confirming the open/close transactions on chain in the first instance).

For the sake of debate. Don't you believe that those two, "profit as a canard", and "taking the competing part seriously" are contradictory?

Plus consider that LN routing supply is limited by the capital one holds. It has to be for profit to grow capital, and compete more effectively.

Timelord2067

legendary

Activity: 3626

Merit: 2209

💲🏎️💨🚓

Quote from: gmaxwell on November 19, 2020, 01:49:17 PM

Quote from: LoyceV on November 19, 2020, 11:42:13 AM

Makes me wonder how many customers would be willing to pay 10 or 100 cups of coffee up front to fund their channel. I don't expect direct channels (where you don't pay any routing fees) to become a big thing.

They wouldn't open a direct channel because they can pay via existing channels... but it should be emphasized that funds in a channel aren't "paid". If they create a channel to the coffee shop with 100 cups of coffee worth of funds, they can use those funds for whatever still. They can close the channel to move the funds offline or they can pay payments to other people using those funds, routing across the coffee shop.

I totally agree with this, however, it could be assumed that the new user who only has one active channel (to the coffee shop) is probably going to *just* be buying a coffee and bagel a dozen times with what they opened the channel with. They *might* open a second channel once the first is empty/near empty, which would then give them inbound+outbound on their portable device via two channels.

GGUL

legendary

Activity: 1468

Merit: 1102

Quote from: LoyceV on November 19, 2020, 11:42:13 AM

Makes me wonder how many customers would be willing to pay 10 or 100 cups of coffee up front to fund their channel. I don't expect direct channels (where you don't pay any routing fees) to become a big thing.

Correct thinking. Just by thinking about it for a while, you can understand that neither the buyer nor the seller can benefit from creating a direct channel between them.
It is profitable for the buyer to make 1 channel to a large reliable node that has channels to other large nodes. This makes it possible to use LN for purchases from any seller.
It is also profitable for the seller to make 1 thick channel with a large node in order to receive payments from all buyers through it, and use the amount collected inside the channel for their purchases or for selling on the exchange.

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4158

Merit: 8382

Quote from: LoyceV on November 19, 2020, 11:42:13 AM

Makes me wonder how many customers would be willing to pay 10 or 100 cups of coffee up front to fund their channel. I don't expect direct channels (where you don't pay any routing fees) to become a big thing.

They wouldn't open a direct channel because they can pay via existing channels... but it should be emphasized that funds in a channel aren't "paid". If they create a channel to the coffee shop with 100 cups of coffee worth of funds, they can use those funds for whatever still. They can close the channel to move the funds offline or they can pay payments to other people using those funds, routing across the coffee shop.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Timelord2067 on November 19, 2020, 09:35:12 AM

Also LN related to above I can't envisage rocking up to a coffee shop and creating a channel to said shop to then buy a cup of Joe (giving the shop a small amount of inbound and outbound capacity) - unless of course you were planing on being a regular customer as confirmation time to open a channel will be an initial issue.

Makes me wonder how many customers would be willing to pay 10 or 100 cups of coffee up front to fund their channel. I don't expect direct channels (where you don't pay any routing fees) to become a big thing.

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3444

Merit: 6182

Crypto Swap Exchange

Stupid question. Has anyone written a script or any kind of monitoring that will alert you if your LN node is down?
I have been running around dealing with some family & work stuff all week and only now noticed after 3+ days that my office node was down.
Did not try to spend anything and was not in the office to see it so it has just been sitting there offline. Sad

-Dave

Timelord2067

legendary

Activity: 3626

Merit: 2209

💲🏎️💨🚓

Quote from: LoyceV on November 19, 2020, 09:00:20 AM

Quote from: GGUL on November 19, 2020, 08:03:18 AM

The user doesn't need LN.

I think we can agree to disagree here. I like to be able to buy a coffee with Bitcoin, and it's possible here. Also with LN for much less fees on said coffee.

You've just reminded me there is/was a small group of takeaway cafes in Fortitude Valley that were trading in Crypto, I went down the Valley a while back (prob two years ago now) and they bamboozled me with wanting me to connect to them *and then* make a purchase with crypto. I'm wondering now if they were early LN adopters (and I'm also wondering why I haven't been back in all that time??)

Things are almost back to normal with just one or two active cases, so if those shops survived our mini lock-down (some didn't) then I should go check them out and report back.

Also LN related to above I can't envisage rocking up to a coffee shop and creating a channel to said shop to then buy a cup of Joe (giving the shop a small amount of inbound and outbound capacity) - unless of course you were planing on being a regular customer as confirmation time to open a channel will be an initial issue.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: GGUL on November 19, 2020, 08:03:18 AM

The user doesn't need LN.

I think we can agree to disagree here. I like to be able to buy a coffee with Bitcoin, and it's possible here. Also with LN for much less fees on said coffee.

GGUL

legendary

Activity: 1468

Merit: 1102

Quote from: LoyceV on November 19, 2020, 05:16:08 AM

I'm basically just speculating here. But I do know many people believe in LN. Why else would there already be so many different wallets out there, some with very active development?

Just because someone is developing a product doesn't mean that the product will be successful. All developers believe in their product, and all hope that they will be a great success. But only a few out of hundreds achieve success.

It took me a couple of days to understand how cool Bitcoin is. But I spent about six months intermittently on LN, but I still didn't understand what the optimism of LN developers is based on. There are too many unavoidable design flaws. My experience and my intuition tell me that LN has ~1% chance of great success.

Quote

Either fools or fans will risk their money for a profit of less than 1% per year.

If fools and fans make LN grow, I'm okay with that

Do you draw an optimistic conclusion from each fact?

The ranks of fools with money and fans with money are not so numerous.

Quote

If people use custodial services, they don't need LN.

That's not true. Any exchange, casino or random website can create their own custodial "tipping service". The great thing from making a LN custodial service is that it also works externally. BlueWallet for instance is custodial, if I make a payment to another BlueWallet user, nothing happens on the Lightning Network. But I can use the same wallet to make an external payment too. Without that, there wouldn't be any use for this wallet.

The user doesn't need LN. The custodial service needs LN.

If your external recipient also uses a custodial service, then they don't need LN either. And two custodial services can agree among themselves and without any LN. Why would they invest heavily in a particular channel? The way banks work with each other now.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3071

"profit" is a canard imo.

With Lightning, you have access to cheap, anonymous transactions. If you break even on routing fees, that's a pretty good outcome.

LN routing supply is market driven, because it's an open competition. Therefore, you can expect some people to take the competing part seriously, and so try to be better at routing than others. The key point is that this cannot lead to monopolization while the ability to compete remains open, and so fees will be pushed as low as routing nodes can tolerate. I expect many will figure out some way to run at a marginal loss, and recoup the costs some other way (e.g. miners/pools are well positioned to run loss-making LN nodes, as they're the ones confirming the open/close transactions on chain in the first instance).

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: GGUL on November 18, 2020, 08:15:44 PM

You have an interesting way to lead a discussion.

I'm basically just speculating here. But I do know many people believe in LN. Why else would there already be so many different wallets out there, some with very active development?

Quote

Either fools or fans will risk their money for a profit of less than 1% per year.

If fools and fans make LN grow, I'm okay with that

Quote

If people use custodial services, they don't need LN.

That's not true. Any exchange, casino or random website can create their own custodial "tipping service". The great thing from making a LN custodial service is that it also works externally. BlueWallet for instance is custodial, if I make a payment to another BlueWallet user, nothing happens on the Lightning Network. But I can use the same wallet to make an external payment too. Without that, there wouldn't be any use for this wallet.

Topic: The Lightning Network FAQ - page 50. (Read 32006 times)