0 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 3h \ on: A pleb’s journal to running BOLT12 with CLN, PART 1 bitcoin
lol, WEF listed the one legit Lightning implementation on their site and punked you into wasting time on Bolt12... the digital dollar standard for the Federal ECash Act
oh the irony
Gives you something to go on at least...
This is odd though since you didn't say it was a data loss / SCB closure, so its either the bug I mentioned before or something else altogether. You should take this to the discussion boards on the LND github to be safe.
My guess is they'll direct you here after further diagnosis: https://github.com/lightninglabs/chantools/blob/master/doc/zombierecovery.md
Because it's "waiting close", not "pending force close"
Since there's no closing txid there's nothing to bump
Use the command in my previous comment, the txid is the channel point and the vout is the :0 digit at the end of it (usually 0 but might be higher)
The fact that they're waiting_close and not pending_force_close implies they weren't actually force closed (ui you used to do this may not have handled it correctly)
Try force closing one of them again with
lncli closechannel txid vout --force and see if that changes thingsThere's a potential scan bug that could be at play too, if the force close doesn't change things the LL folks will be best to help https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/issues/8560
Your funds don't appear to be in jeopoardy though, just don't panic and do anything dumb and you'll get your coin back eventually
CoinShares Group
Ah, more cope over Lightning from a shitcoin fund...
Someone tell them the high-fee FUD only works on forktards now
Looking at comments at this point you should only be looking at the CLI to ensure you're correctly getting any errors that might be present
How did you close them? Any errors or odd behavior at the time you closed/force closed?
Did you maybe clean out the node before closing not leave enough in the wallet for anchor fees?
Use
./lncli listchannel to be sure LND doesn't they're just open./lncli pendinchannels to get the closing tx id, if the closing tx id doesn't exist in the mempool then it might not have gotten broadcast or was pruned already due to low fee./lncli listunspent to check if you have any utxo's that came back from closuresIf some closing tx's are confirmed and you're just waiting on the timelock, you can power off the node and turn it on later to spend those UTXO's, it doesn't need to be online if you just want to keep your state for later use.
Global MoE doesn't have a hard number, so you're speculating
How is a user defined? A lightning channel? Could batch a few billion over 5~ year hyper growth
But that assumes there's even that many people with assets
Reality is there's no technical ceiling in sight, it's a socio-economic ceiling of the golden billion who largely own equity and not money
Sure there's no true line if demarcation, but general adoption waves
The bigger issue is when people gripe about anyone with an SoV focus, that's always a first principle and not mutually exclusive to MoE
The MoE tools I build are only possible because they bring the prospect of being monetized with a SoV
This sounds like a time preference grief.
I came into Bitcoin as an agorist interested in MoE, but thats a latter act in the story.
The farmer needs to save in Bitcoin otherwise he has no reason to exchange for it.
Stingy people exist in fiat too, there's far more of them clutching their shekels earning yield below the rate of inflation.
Enough for what?
If you buy into the 8BN framing it's not a serious conversation, it becomes a divisibility issue long before it's ever a blockspace bottleneck. Dust will always be dust.
Just as there's not 8BN houses, 8BN refrigerators, or 8BN cars... there's not 8BN custodians. Families share things... nodes will be among those things: Lightning.Pub
Depends on your definition of onboarding the world
Your math is also wrong, we can open a billion lightning channels per year with existing batching
This is an overly simplistic view.
SoV is a pre-requisite to MoE...
I personally came into Bitcoin as an agorist interested in MoE, but without SoV we may as well do that in an SQL database.
The correct framing is Act 1 vs Act 2
realization of scaling woes
There's been no such thing, a small cohort of shitcoiners and virtue signalers PROJECT scaling woes...REALity is that fees are barely 10% of the newly halved subsidy.
Bitcoin is money. It doesn't solve for people not having money.
It does however enable permissionless earning of money, but the middle bell curve can't process that's a task now for the shell and not the core.
Wait, we don't want you to spend but also want you on Lightning?
I think you forgot your morning lithium shake, Princess
Don't need fiat shitcoin specs and bloated mint overhead to leverage Nostr for Lightning
Run Lightning.Pub and fuck the edollar spooks
It's gaslighting bullshit from Shinobi as always, Nostr obviates the webserver element as a LNURL successor.
Bxlt12 is effectively Tor, by bouncing onion messages all over the place its slow and unreliable.
I'm not using it as a pejorative, cat and mouse with regulators is necessary.
Indulge me as I'm trying to understand what property is being preferred so that I can be sure my solution possess that property.