pull down to refresh

lightning doesn't/can't scale to 8 billion active daily users and dev time spent on it has been a waste

this waste is a threat to btc, he has written and talked about this ad nauseum

https://archive.ecash.com/archive/bitcoin-lightning-network-is-broken-w-paul-sztorc-btc-layer-twos-ranked

Yes, I noted that I hadn't read prior stuff from him. Apparently you missed that part and are in the same boat as myself, but thanks for the summary. So, why can't lightning scale again?

reply

Try this, please: https://fiatjaf.com/04e9e814.html

Let me know if you have counter-arguments.

reply

Most of these are front-run by ShockNet's Razor:

"Everything stupid in Lightning is a direct result of the mobile node fantasy."

Channels are significantly more reliable when you run a real node.

Mobile nodes will always cost more in fees than it saves by re-using chain transactions.

If you're too lazy to run a real lighting node, you're the most likely user of trimmed htlcs, tinkering with a low effort mobile wallet appeals to people that send 1 or 2 sats that are not economical to resolve.

Running a real Lightning node on a real OS makes it trivial to ban Tor exit gateways and thus Tor-only nodes. Tor being retarded is not a Lightning protocol problem, but fair to say that Lightning implementations should drop tooling for it to discourage such stupidity.

Always-on nodes, that actually receive payments, have better routing heuristics to and from.

Mobile wallets hide proofs, because mobile wallet users don't care, that's why they use mobile wallets. Tooling to use proofs necessitates a proper node stack.

LSP's are a product of the broken incentives of mobile wallets, mobile wallets exist to sell LSP services to people that are guaranteed to lose sats anyway playing around with LN unseriously.

Any protocol that extends Bitcoin's functionality inherits Bitcoin's complexity and as emergent from its constraints. Few understand how Bitcoin works, so the expectation that users understand how Lightning works must also expect they understand Bitcoin (they don't)... or anything else along the stack like their OS or TCP/IP.

In fact, if people understood anything, they wouldn't use mobile wallets to begin with.

reply

Thanks. Your summary makes a lot more sense why. Helpful. Has me thinking about a permanent node setup.

reply

I can't find any information about ShockNet's Razor, but it this reasonable? Isn't the idea of Lightning that it can be used by everybody for daily payments?

If yes, then you can't escape having it running on mobile.
If no, then why are we wasting time on it anyway?

By the way, it should be running on mobile phones, for free, with very easy setup, otherwise what are we doing?

reply
Isn't the idea of Lightning that it can be used by everybody for daily payments?

Define use. But generally, no, that's silly virtue signaling nonsense... not practical. Bitcoin isn't even used by everybody... nor can it be.

It can however be the lingua franca of payments.

why are we wasting time on it anyway?

It's reusable, instant Bitcoin transactions, if it's a waste of time so is Bitcoin.

it should be running on mobile phones, for free, with very easy setup

No, that's so stupid its upstream of everything stupid in Lightning. You don't run an email server or nostr relay on your phone, the internet is inherently online, phones are default off-line.

Servers should be easy to set up, if more people spent time on that than wasting time on mobile Lightning.Pub wouldn't be going it alone.

reply

classic treatise

up there with your drivechain treatment

personal tide turner signal for me back then

Not enough blockspace

unreliable infrastructure

requires inbound LQ to even start using, ux nightmare

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EhJoJPf76Pw&feature=youtu.be