pull down to refresh
202 sats \ 3 replies \ @nullcount 28 Oct 2022
Zero Fee isn't sustainable. Even with his model of selling the liquidity upfront, it doesn't incentive the long term maintenance of the channel.
reply
102 sats \ 2 replies \ @faithandcredit 28 Oct 2022
routing nodes dont make economic sense i think. services can link directly with each other and serve their own liquidity needs and be a network router as well
reply
101 sats \ 0 replies \ @nullcount 28 Oct 2022
Profitable routing nodes are arbitraging the price of liquidity. But low sell high. There will always be opportunities to make a sat. But the largest nodes are service providers who route only as a byproduct of having public channels.
reply
7 sats \ 0 replies \ @2big2fail 29 Oct 2022
true. but using a node makes sense and occasionally routing as a benefit also makes sense so in that case all nodes with public channels are routing nodes. locking up utxo just to route isn't much sense now
reply
110 sats \ 0 replies \ @chungkingexpress 28 Oct 2022
Are there bigger issues around channel liquidity incentives? I have heard others channels only barely scraping by. What is the most sustainable model moving forward?
reply
55 sats \ 0 replies \ @cryptocoin 28 Oct 2022
Nitter: https://nitter.it/zerofeerouting/status/1586053522029936641
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @shyfire 29 Oct 2022
Are there any alternatives with a similar model?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @joko 28 Oct 2022
Thank you for your service, sir
reply