“Toxic Lightning Maximalist” actually a thing? Looking for a definition... \ stacker news ~lightning

pull down to refresh

“Toxic Lightning Maximalist” actually a thing? Looking for a definition...

944 sats \ 24 comments \ @Car 1 Oct lightning

I’m finalizing next week’s Startup Day Yucatán programming and my friend Chris Guida will be speaking. He is an amazing Lightning engineer + educator.

While checking his X profile I noticed the phrase “Toxic Lightning Maximalist.” is this a thing in the Lightning ecosystem?

I asked the guys in PL for a specific definition and they gave me a loose take, but I’d love to hear from the ~lightning territory here.

What does “Toxic Lightning Maximalist” mean to you?

I am more curious then anything and honestly think it would explain a lot of what goes on with the conversations we see here on SN in regards to sats, cc's and other lightning talk and infra being built in the broader ecosystem. If so whats your definition of it if there is one?

Also will ask him this question on stage at the event next week, will bring up this post.

Yes47.4%

No42.1%

Let me explain....Car10.5%

19 votes \ poll ended

view all related items

365 sats \ 8 replies \ @justin_shocknet 1 Oct

It's not enough to be a Lightning Maximalist, you must be toxic to fake L2 scams. Lightning is the only L2.

Guida seems to be pro-Ark, LN Symmetry, and Covenants that would give them a perception of legitimacy. All of which are attacks on Lightning, and at odds with Lightning maximalism. He was also very pro Bolt12... disturbing pattern of current-thing maximalism.

I hereby revoke his toxic lightning maxi card.

28 sats \ 5 replies \ @siggy47 7h

He was also very pro Bolt12... disturbing pattern of current-thing maximalism.

Maybe off topic a little here, but could you explain in a non techy accessible way your problems with Bolt12?

437 sats \ 2 replies \ @justin_shocknet 5h

Summarily, it's terrible engineering that doesn't address real problems nor does it even work well at the things it pretends to solve.

It uses "onion messages" to round trip invoices over Lightning Network peers, basically Tor, which if you've ever used Tor you know is too unreliable for real world payments
This is because when you relay messages like this, every hop along the way becomes a point of failure... bolt12 increases failure probability
In a network like lightning, these hops can be all over the globe, a request over bolt12 could circle the world multiple times... bolt12 adds latency
Bolt12 aimed to liberate mobile nodes from trusted webservers as required by LNURL... in so doing Bolt12 attempts to normalize mobile nodes which are bad for Lightning and hurt adoption by demonstrating Lightning in the worst possible environment
Bolt12 offers are static codes so you can receive ad-hoc payments, but this already existed in Lightning as LND has had static keysend for years
Despite static offers being a purported use-case, it did so in the context of mobile nodes that can't be relied on for ad-hoc payments because they are default off-line
Bolt12 claimed to enhance privacy, which was an outright lie and FUD against not using it, such privacy options exists outside of its context
Bolt12 tries to normalize arbitrary data across a payments protocol, analogous to normalizing jpegs on Bitcoin

These may all seem obvious in hindsight, but I've been pointing these out long before it was ever shipped or ratified.

The push goes on despite vindication.

Given the attitude of developers that continue to push it, we can only conclude they're arrogant bozos or outright malicious.

Despite the lack of merit, there was a lot of hype around Bolt12, because it was astroturfed by NGO's, further bringing motives into question.

The most generous view is that was an envy-driven spec from the ground up, pushed by the minor Lightning implementations that are trying to gain share vs. LND.

The use-cases that the NGO's and minor implementations used to astroturf this have all been addressed by CLINK Offers, which obviates the trusted web-server, provides static codes for ad-hoc payments, is more performant, de-coupled from Lightning identity itself for enhanced privacy, and separates a number of concerns on the implementation level. It's only been published for weeks and has more traction than Bolt12 has achieved with years of manufactured hype. Oddly zero support from the NGO's for it however, textbook not invented here syndrome.

170 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car OP 4h

Thanks for sharing Justin. Appreciate you brother.

17 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 5h

Thanks for laying this out so clearly.

36 sats \ 1 reply \ @Car OP 5h

I think he doesn’t like the dns component. But idk…it’s hard to get a clear definition on where the dividers are with all this. It’s a bit abstract tbh. At least with Bitcoin Maximalism it was clear. But maybe Justin or Darth can explain.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 4h

There's actually not a DNS component to bolt12 (Matt later came up with a BIP that combines DNS with Bolt12... but it's not a particularly offensive one... I could easily PR CLINK Offers to it just to troll)

Detailed res:

#1245819

34 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car OP 1 Oct

This is interesting and what I was looking for...I will ask him next week. Can you explain why you would classify its important to keep Lightning as the only L2? Curious as the reason for it?

17 sats \ 0 replies \ @BlokchainB 23h

Hahaha

121 sats \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby 23h

There are lots of LN maxis but they aren't very toxic. I think this is because LN has never really had to fight for its life. This means not much toxicity.

@DarthCoin is an exception.

271 sats \ 5 replies \ @DarthCoin 1 Oct

toxic maximalist is not enough. You must be lightning extremist :) That means reject anything that is not pure BTC LN. Boycott the motherfuckers with all their bullshit fiat tokens and scams.

22 sats \ 3 replies \ @kepford 1 Oct

Honestly, I like extremist much better than toxic. I have no problem being extreme if I have a firm conviction that my position is the correct one. We hear a lot of people using the word extreme and they have no clue how massive the spectrum of thought actually is. They expose their very small view of the world when they do this.

77 sats \ 2 replies \ @DarthCoin 1 Oct

LN extremist is also when you use exclusively LN for payments and onchain only to open/close LN channels. Nothing else matters.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 1 Oct

Seems pretty pragmatic to me.

188 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 1 Oct

The best representation of a LN extremist :)

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @spiderman 12h

Then what's the difference with BTC maximalists?

When I saw lightning maximalist, I thought it means someone who rejects the Blockchain itself, as in on-chain coins and puts everything on lightning.

84 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 1 Oct

LOL, never heard of this. Kinda sounds absurd to me.

Especially since I have heard that a large number of "so called" toxic bitcoin maximalists are now pushing bitcoin treasury companies.

What does “Toxic Lightning Maximalist” mean to you?

When I hear toxic in front of anything I honestly think maybe some immaturity is at work. Feels like maybe someone has turned off their mind or maybe needs to touch grass. There's more to life than bitcoin.

42 sats \ 1 reply \ @beameduplol 7h

The word "toxic" itself being used to describe your position is weird. I agree with @kepford's take tbh

Lightning's never really had to have had a "toxic" maximalist though, because half of the people that argue about Bitcoin have no clue Lightning as a scaling solution even exists, and the people that do know, are usually never 100% against Bitcoin (excluding Kaspa maxis)

The whole meaning of "maximalism" isn't even the same. It used to mean to push for decentralization, self-autonomy (is that a word?), and being devoid of any influence from banks and politics.

But now, I see self-proclaimed maxis barely touch anything technological on Bitcoin, and just say "Guys, this chart cycle shows me, Bitcoin will go to the moon!!!!" or "Trump is buying more Bitcoin, we are all gonna be rich!"

Doesn't mean there isn't people that still argue about the tech itself, but the phrase itself "maximalist" doesn't mean much

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car OP 5h

Interesting take from what I gather your saying Bitcoin Maximalism is dead. Because these, "so called" have killed it.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @zapsammy 1 Oct

https://www.etymonline.com/word/toxic

Greek toxikon (pharmakon) "(poison) for use on arrows," from toxikon, neuter of toxikos "pertaining to arrows or archery," and thus to a bow, from toxon "bow," which has been regarded as a loan-word from Scythian.

makes me think of the following proverb:

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @Fenix 18h

Do we first need to become toxic Bitcoin maximalists before becoming toxic Lightning maximalists, or can we jump straight to the latter? I ask because I'm working on the first one right now.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @aljaz 11h

i prefer to be called venomous maxi

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car OP 18h

Split vote 🤔 and no clear definition on what a “Toxic Lightning Maximalist" is?

For example "Bitcoin Maximalist." Simple and easy.

Bitcoin only, no 💩 coins.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @035736735e 1 Oct outlawed

stackers have outlawed this. turn on wild west mode in your /settings to see outlawed content.