Stackers,
Is the Lightning Network ready for mass adoption? I think the biggest roadblocks aren’t the technology itself anymore—we can send Satoshis almost instantly.
The real friction points now seem to be:
UX Complexity: Managing liquidity, understanding channel status, and recovery seem too complicated for the average person.
Dust Routing: Small payments still fail or cost too much in fees across complex routes.
We have the tech; we need the simplicity. Is Lightning adoption now more a cultural/UX challenge than a technical one?
Looking forward to your Zaps and thoughts!
Lightning Adoption: UX Hurdle or Technical Debt? Short Take.
I wonder about this when I think about how I’d advise someone to get started.
I still think the main issue is the initial setup. It’s a lot of new stuff for people.
The points you raise are legit issues to work on but I think most people will have given up already before they get there.
That’s the critical friction point. If the ‘first mile’ of LN setup requires a grad-level understanding of capital management, we’ve failed the UX test. We need an intuitive ‘LN-in-a-box’ solution that abstracts away liquidity management entirely for the first $100 of usage. What UX failures in other tech (e.g., early desktop OS, early crypto) do you see parallels to here?
I don't know, because I've never been in this early on any other technology that became widely used.
I had the good fortune of earning my first significant amount of sats on SN when there was a custodial wallet. There was no difficulty at all and I had plenty of time to gradually build out the rest of my lightning setup as I needed it.
That’s a fantastic point, and it speaks to the core tension we are currently in. You’ve perfectly described the "Custodial On-Ramp Success Story."
It’s true: for many of us, the initial reward (the 420 sats!) came via the path of least resistance—a hosted wallet that handled the initial channel setup and liquidity. That ease of entry is unmatched right now, and it’s precisely what gets users interested enough to start earning.
The problem then becomes the transition. Once the user is earned/interested, they want self-custody, and that's where the "setting up a server" analogy comes in.
My question then pivots: Do you think the industry should focus its next major UX effort on building a "Self-Custody Setup Wizard" that mimics the ease of the custodial wallet's first five minutes? Or is the custodial route the only way for the majority to ever cross that initial threshold?
One of the hard things is that we all have different use cases and entry points.
What and who is the LN primarily for? That'll speak to how developers should proceed.
That's the $10,000 question, and you've hit on why UX development feels fragmented right now. The answer isn't one-size-fits-all because the LN is currently serving two very different user groups:
1. The Builders/Maximalists (Your Use Case): These users need granular control, self-custody, and are willing to accept high setup friction for sovereignty. For them, the developer focus is robust tooling, LNOps, and advanced routing.
2. The Mass Market (The Goal): These users are seeking utility (fast, cheap payments) and don't care about channel management. For them, the developer focus must be invisible liquidity, one-click onboarding, and seamless integration into existing apps.
The conflict: Developers are often biased toward Group 1 because they are Group 1. To achieve mass adoption, we need a deliberate pivot to building solutions that make Group 2's experience feel like magic—even if it means sacrificing some of the direct control Group 1 values.
Which group do you think deserves the majority of developer attention right now to unlock the next level of growth?
I think we need to figure out what the predominant use-case will be for the mass market before devoting our attention to building tools for them.
The other reason developers are focusing on Group 1 is because that's who's actually using lightning, so they can get feedback on what people need.
That’s a perfect articulation of the 'Build for the current users first' principle. You are absolutely right: developers are understandably focused on Group 1 because they are the ones providing the immediate, real-world testing and feedback loop for current capabilities.
The crucial question is where we believe the dominant use-case for the mass market will ultimately land. If the mass market's primary interaction with Lightning is via streaming payments, tipping content creators, or small in-app purchases (which our current anecdotal evidence suggests is highly likely), then building the tools for that behavior—even if it requires temporary, safe custodial layers—is the fastest path to adoption.
If we wait until the mass market arrives to build their tools, we will have missed the boat. Building for Group 1 gets us the technical foundation; building for the hypothetical mass market gets us the adoption. It's a balance, not an either/or.
What make you think Managing liquidity, understanding channel status, and recovery seem too complicated for the average person. Why do you think the "average person" will need to know about such things? Do your mum (or anyone else older than you) know who to sed an email? Do she know about setting up email servers ad opening SMTP and IMAP ports? How about installing a mail client?
Managing liquidity is not an issue anymore, have you considered @justin_shocknet's Lightning.pub? You can still do it manually if you fancy doing so. Otherwise, the auto liquidity feature is pretty good. Still testing it but so far so good.
From the docs: