Topic: Will segwit reduce the number of transactions by any significant amount? - page 2. (Read 1168 times)

If segwit will be implemented to bitcoin then it will be a huge help for bitcoin because the block size will be bigger and the stuck transactions will be lessen and the flow of the transaction in the blockchain network will be faster because of the bigger sizes of blocks which is very important for us because we love fast transactions.

So you are saying that all payment channels are connected or is this a special case. Like if there is a channel between A and B and another channel between B and C , so does it mean there is automatically a channel between A and C?

Yes that is my original question, everyone can open a payment channel but those channels are useless as most bitcoin transactions are one time type of transactions unlike lightening requirement of multiple small transactions between same parties where it can help reduce the network load.

Lightning can hop through payment channels, you can pay anyone on the rest of the Network, infinitely, sometimes for free (if someone wants lots of BTC going through their channel)


The clue is in the word "Network", if you can only pay one person again and again, it's not really a Network. Lightning is a network, where you can pay anyone.

How will they gather this information, if you are running this node? You provide your own payment channel without having to store or share information with anybody? The way I understand this, anyone can host a node, not just specific companies or certain individuals.

We are totally open to the same thing, if miners are owned and run by huge corporate entities and/or financial institutions. Who says these mining farms are not funded by the Chinese government for instance? ^hmmmmm^

Yeah...just think... Your payment provider will sell the details of every last purchase you have made to your insurance company, so they can adjust your rates based upon your unhealthy lifestyle. Just like Facebook. I can't wait.


IOW, the same way bitcoin used to work, and would continue to work, we're it not for this stupid, centrally-planned production quota. Again...i can't wait!!!!!11!!!!1!1!1!!!

In case if you missed it, bitcoin miners are mining LTC ever since 2011 and now they need to sell their stash, we need to wait a bit longer for them to come back to the bitcoin table.

While every one debating about the current issue I'm more concerned about alts pumping I'm afraid it becoming a habit for people/ investors to start thinking investing on alt coins has potentially more profit than bitcoin.
Who said users should have a saying in current situation?
Bitcoin is the revolution to change the world not being kept busy with talks about a few satoshi here and there, fees, bla bla, etc, etc.

Allow me to describe the image that I see when I step back from it watching from outside;

I can see a vast network of miners with hundreds of billions invested on mining farms, getting much powerful that even governments start competing to increase their hash power.
After seeing that image suddenly I realized I'm missing on thousands of bitcoins because I could be a major player potentially in the future if I just hold 1000 coins.

Yes what I am trying to say is not many people use bitcoin the way lightening network wants ie repeated micro payments to same receiver, so basically the number of onchain transactions remain the same, which segwit/lightening claims to reduce.

But then what is the point of using bitcoin ?
The normal payment processors like visa provide the exact same service , what extra will I as a bitcoin user get using a lightening payment processor.

Objectively, it appears they are striving for consensus, not stalling.

What is that reduce the number of transactions? you can't stop people from transacting, segwit does it by reducing the size of the data included in each block. who opens channels in LN?

But think what will happen if that payment channel is between you and a "payment provider"... and that provider is being utilised by your local cafe, your local convenience store, the book shop down the street, a fast food chain that you frequently visit etc etc...

It suddenly allows you to be able to make multiple "micro" transactions without the overhead of full "on chain" transactions... you don't need to stand in the store for 4 days while you wait for your transaction to confirm due to there being 150,000 unconfirmed transactions... and you don't have to pay $5 in transaction fees to purchase your $3.50 coffee with all your faucet dust.

The provider can effectively guarantee payment and your transaction can have "insta confirmation" etc...

Granted this suddenly brings the concept of "Trusted 3rd Parties" into the mix... but a vast majority of the folks who want to use bitcoin for day to day transactions aren't going to be too worried about that... if it means their transactions get confirmed almost instantly and the fees are at an acceptable level.

Obviously, not something your hardcore anti-bank, privacy loving, bitcoin hodler is interested in... but I can certainly see the benefits for a lot of folks who want bitcoin to be like android/apple/samsung pay or debit/credit card...

I guess it all depends on your definition of "average bitcoin user"

I want to know real world use cases of segwit, it seems like segwit is similar to 3D Tv technology which though is improvement in TV technology but in reality very few users will actually use it.

Most bitcoin transactions are generally one time like: User withdraws money from any exchange/website or User buys something using bitcoin online or user buys a service using bitcoin. I dont understand how segwit/lightening can be used in this general usecase. Some services are paid monthly but is the lightening network developed for such cases to keep the payment channel open for a month?

Thus it seems segwit/lightening  is not useful in most transactions, so though theoretically it should reduce the number of bitcoin transactions but in reality it will not make much difference to the actual number of transactions because it does not cover most common bitcoin use-cases and completely useless for average bitcoin user.