pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @Rsync25 31 Oct 2023
I'm reading only FUD
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @td 31 Oct 2023
In your opinion why can these be dismissed as not serious?
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rsync25 31 Oct 2023
I'm calm about Lightning's problems. It's a young protocol. I know that we can solve this type of problem even without doing soft forks.
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 31 Oct 2023
crap misleading article
reply
1 sat \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 31 Oct 2023
He has been a lightning detractor for awhile. I think it is great everyone is discussing lightning's potential flaws and shortcomings so that they can be addressed or competing protocols with different solutions can be created. Only problem I have is bitcoiners who are concerned about lightning succumbing to shitcoiner tropes like lightning is broken, will never work, no one uses it, that shitcoiners use to shill their tokens/protocols. Lightning is clearly not a scam. Many of us are using it everyday without issue. Calling it a scam is unproductive and just fuels the shitcoiners narratives and keeps people in "crypto" for all its false promises.
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @PRA3S3NT1A OP 31 Oct 2023
Nice way to put it. Agree with you !!🙏
reply
1 sat \ 1 reply \ @blocktock 31 Oct 2023
To call it a scam, is only going to hurt his own credibility. Lightning's issues are fixable. This might just be a Roger Ver moment.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @PRA3S3NT1A OP 31 Oct 2023
agree
reply