reply on: Things Bitcoiners Don’t Want To Hear (2020) \ stacker news ~lightning

pull down to refresh

360 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 10 May \ on: Things Bitcoiners Don’t Want To Hear (2020) lightning

On LN fees being derivative of on-chain fees

True, but LN fees are also derivative of the circularity of the lightning network. If there is enough circularity to the LN economy, it reduces on-chain fee pressure

On whether micropayments can be profitable

Again, with enough circularity I think they could be. I don't understand the min-htlc stuff too well, but I assume it's related to channel congestion of some kind. Again, it seems like that could be resolved by smarter route-finding algorithms and a dense enough network of connections.

Still, it's always good to hear negative opinions, that's the only way make improvements

105 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 10 May

I was going to bring something like this up.

Depending on what other layers are developed, on-chain fees may never become prohibitively expensive for lightning channels.

Also, there's no particular reason to close existing lightning channels, just because on-chain fees go up. And, as bitcoin appreciates, what are currently small channels will become larger in their real financial capacity.

I agree about the derivative point, but it may be a fairly high order derivative.

30 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b OP 10 May

Great point! It's hard to account for a feedback loop like that.

105 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 10 May

Yeah... any kind of payments network (or any network, I suppose) is going to have feedback loops (vicious and virtuous cycles) that make prediction difficult

In formal game theory, we say that the game has multiple equilibria