My only disagreement comes from force closures due to issues in lightning implementations not agreeing on a “fair” fee rate. These are expensive bugs whose cost are suffered by the node runners. To near no fault of their own, a massive expense occurs only due to higher fees in the base layer and a difference in how that propagates to the lightning node compared to their peer. The fix, of course, is to improve the implementations and how they come to an agreed upon base chain fee (many smart people are working on this). This clouds whatever benefits having higher fees on the base layer may proved in giving a clearer market of opening and closing channels/node runners tuning their setup with settings.

That seems likely. Improvement usually results from a response to a challenge.

It's got to be ugly bootstrapping a small node right now, but if it weren't ugly we wouldn't be motivated to develop coinpools, Ark, and the like.

Both of those high fee examples were CPFP.

I've been thinking a lot about this. It is too risky to open channels with a potential force close being so large. Here are some some tools I think we could build to make it less risky for us node runners. What do you think?

Implement dynamic fee adjustment algorithms in your node to respond to network fee fluctuations more efficiently. These algorithms automatically adjust the fees based on current network conditions, potentially reducing costs in periods of lower demand.

Integrate fee prediction services into your node's operation to provide more accurate estimates of future fee trends, aiding in better decision-making. These services analyze past and current fee data to forecast future trends, allowing you to make informed decisions about when to open or close channels.

Employ Multi-Path Payments (MPP) to reduce the need for large channels and potentially lower the costs associated with closing these channels. MPP allows a single payment to be split across multiple channels, facilitating efficient use of your channel capacity and reducing the frequency of channel closures.

Participate in payment channels that use anchor outputs, if available, to allow for more flexibility with fee structures and reduce closure costs. Anchor outputs offer a mechanism to adjust fees after transactions have been made, providing more control over closure costs.

Engage in channel lease strategies, where you rent out liquidity to others, to provide a revenue stream that might offset high closure fees. By leasing channel capacity to others, you earn fees that can help balance the costs incurred from your own channel operations.

Explore off-chain solutions or layer 3 protocols to provide alternative ways to transact without incurring high on-chain fees. These solutions allow transactions to be settled off the main blockchain, potentially reducing the need for costly on-chain transactions.

Build a network with other node operators for mutual support and sharing strategies to gain insights into effective practices for managing fees and channels. Networking with peers lets you learn from their experiences and share successful strategies, benefiting the optimization of your own node's operations.