Liquid could be the scaling solution for LN
reply
No, is something else. Is not BTC --> LN --> Liquid. It is BTC --> LN and BTC -->Liquid.
reply
I wouldn't say it's a scaling solution, Liquid block space can also be bid up and become expensive, just another way to offset settlement
reply
As I understood, if LN were to ever run over BTC-bound side-chains (such as Liquid), it would enable rapid and low-cost opening / closing of millions of LN channels - necessary to serve a global population
By rolling up channel opening / closing fees on a side chain, high fees on the base chain would become acceptable, which is great for long term BTC security
A "third layer" basically.
Unfortunately I have no idea how any of that would work in practice and how interoperable it would be with existing LN standards.
reply
I could see that happening I think LN channels can be offset in a range of ways, Base-chain, LIquid, Channel factories, and if we do get drive-chains you could probably broadcast off those UTXOs too, if you have 4 environments to choose from you can pick the ones or the time in which to settle back at the cheapest rate
Hopefully, we could have something that can recommend the best paths, even something like payjoins in and out of LN could help make open and closing cheaper
reply
I've used liquid as a way to keep some of my BTC private
Peg in & out with different amounts at different times.
Not sure how private that makes it, or how it compares to mixing on samurai/wasabi.
I would like to see more happening on liquid though. I guess it all takes time
reply
I've been doing that too, buying small amounts of L-BTC and using it on their chain and then swapping to main chain not for privacy but more for UTXO management on-chain, I guess you could also add layers to it like swapping L-BTC to LN-BTC and then closing the channel or swapping LN for on-chain into a coinjoin
reply