1293 sats \ 0 replies \ @BTC_LN 25 Oct 2022
Let's build out the lightning network so it's ready for worldwide adoption! 🙌
reply
142 sats \ 2 replies \ @south_korea_ln 25 Oct 2022
I wonder how that LN+ number is calculated. On my now defunct node, I was close to 10 BTC public capacity. Assuming for this exercise that all of this liquidity was acquired through LN+, is the 1000 BTC number accounting for the fact that all these channels have been closed, and thus the actual number due to my node would just be 990 BTC?
Not accounting for closed channels, redeploying them again would bring the LN+ counter to 1010 BTC, although only 1000 BTC is actually in the network. Assuming that this type of behavior happens 50% of the time, i.e closing and redeploying, we'd have an LN+ number of 1500 BTC while only 1000 BTC is in the network.
reply
142 sats \ 1 reply \ @BTC_LN 25 Oct 2022
The way it's calculated is very simple. Every time a liquidity swap is completed it includes 1-5 channels. Each channel capacity is added to the total capacity opened. Therefore this is a historical total since the start: June 2021 (total 17 months).
Swaps have various expiration dates from 1m to years, and sometimes nodes may fail so the channels may close prematurely. Therefore 1,000 BTC doesn't mean that we currently have 1,000 BTC worth of channels opened on LN+.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @south_korea_ln 25 Oct 2022
Ok. Thanks for the confirmation and detailing message.
I reckon it's much less than 1000 BTC then. I closed all my channels, and I still often get messages in my swaps of other people (force-)closing channels. Also, many don't respect the 1 month to years commitment. Unlike amboss liquidity, i don't remember LN+ punishing someone for closing a channel before expiration commitment.
reply
108 sats \ 3 replies \ @aljaz 24 Oct 2022
not sure deployment is the best description for this. LN+/Amboss/Pool are more of a facilitators, only ZFR actually deploys capital directly from this list (and other users of marketplaces who participate in it).
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @kr OP 24 Oct 2022
what term do you think is more accurate?
you’re right that these are all different products, but they all have an overarching similarity of connecting nodes and moving funds from on-chain to lightning.
reply
230 sats \ 1 reply \ @aljaz 25 Oct 2022
i'm a strong supporter of using deployed instead of locked when describing bitcoin used as liquidity in lightning network as we're essentially deploying capacity not locking in value
as for the wording on this, I don't have a great replacement for deployed here - as you pointed out it kinda works, its just not the most factually correct necessarily, but maybe thats already in the nitpicking territory.
Tbh probably the thing that bothered me with the list is mixing market places (LN+, Magma, pool, liq. ads) and liquidity providers (ZFR) tho I guess one could say ZFR is also a marketplace to some extent, with only one participant.
Generally when we speak about markets we talk about volumes, tho in this case I guess the closest comparison would be cash markets for commodities as we have delivery, or in this case more deployment of purchased commodity (liquidity).
Before this gets too long - I don't have a clear answer, more of a tendency for this entire space to start naming things with some foresight and consistency to make it easier for people outside the industry to understand and have a clear mapping of what this represents in relation to existing things in the world
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr OP 25 Oct 2022
good points, the distinction between marketplaces and individual providers should have been more clear
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies 24 Oct 2022
That is so much f*cking money, omg
reply