The buttcoiners are at it again on HN. Think of the children money launderers!! I know it's not directly about Bitcoin but their great arguments equally apply to CoinJoin, etc.
I am a fan of keeping things simple. People who are not, usually have ulterior motives. Maximalism is simple, it advocates for one coin that we can rally around because thats what makes us stronger. So I dont appreciate the way that it is attempted to be shunned. In fact i liken the opponents of Maximalism with wokeness, its the same sort of people that want to argue that gender is fluid even tho it clearly isnt. So all it does is confuse and divide people. So if you go out of your way to attack maximalism you are either ignorant or evil imo. Happy to discuss
"Inbound liquidity is the amount of bitcoin that the user is able to receive over a lightning channel. Outbound liquidity is the amount of bitcoin that the user is able to send over a lightning channel. Receiving bitcoin decreases the user’s inbound liquidity and increases their outbound liquidity."
I can only spend what is outbound and get paid from the inbound.
Outbound is the sats I allocate (mine) for others to use for a fee. And if a channel closes with outbound of mine i get it all back.
Inbound is the sats that someone allocated (theirs) for me to use for a fee. I said on the post "lost" because it made my lightning node lose capacity and ranking making it less attractive for others to use or join
Most of the outbound liquidity that I can afford is already allocated. A lot of the inbound I had was because I reached out and asked if they would also open a channel to me for the same amount I was opening to them.
Funds move around drastically with my 0 base fees and 2 ppm, somehow even if 2/4 of the channels that were closed down I had originally opened, 95% of the liquidity was on their side at the time, so the software closed them down to avoid issues with HTLC im guessing u.u
Short answer: not much I can do atm, i have good channels with Wallet of Satoshi and Zero Base Fees, so hopefully organically i will get some channels connecting to me.
These channels had most of the satoshis on their side when their software must have closed the channels to me. I reached out to some of them that i know but they seem to preffer to allocate those sats on another channel atm.
No, those 20 million sats were other people's sats, they had either opened a channel to me and had sats on their side of the channel or after a while some of my channels had liquidity moved around and it allocated sats on their side because my sats had gone to on another channel.
But even if they were other people's sats they were useful to me.
If you go offline for 2-3 days. There is a chance that a peer you have a channel with could potentially try to share an old state of the channel that benefits him/her with more sats on his/her side than there really have. If your node doesn't go back
online in time to provide a channel state that is more recent then they could get away with some funds. But you can set up a thing called a watchtower to automatically store channel states for you and send them for you if you are offline and a peer tries close a channel with you with erroneous info.
Still running 11 channels, I've had like 6-7 channels closing on me this month because of issues with HTLC on their side most of the time. Onchain fees add up unfortunately. But I do this in a enthusiast manner. I have my Base Fees set to 0 and ppm to like 1-2 ( I would set it to 0 but I need to set some sort of friction to avoid channels getting extremely unbalanced which they already seem to do pretty quickly lol)
Hope that software improvements happen soon to avoid errors closing channels tbh.
One thing that I don’t think gets mentioned enough is how the lack of strong privacy tools contributes greatly to social division and hatred.
In a world where everyone’s personal details and beliefs are public, not obeying some One True Way™️ poses serious risk. And people feel needlessly threatened by their neighbors’s ways of lives.
childrenmoney launderers!! I know it's not directly about Bitcoin but their great arguments equally apply to CoinJoin, etc.