Bitcoin Lightning Network

youtube.com/watch?v=ueRVkxrGtLA

If I knew you irl I would burn your house down with you trapped inside.

whales are dumping on normies around activation time. Bitcoin will rise a bit slower for now. Once LN and futures are in place, the price will bleed for a few months because bitcoin is still the same thing and the hype is over. Since big money dumped, there's nothing holding the price

Oh no don't point that out OP, otherwise the ponzi collapses because they've pumped something up with no use. They'll call you a BCasher even without bringing it up, they'll call you a shill. None of these retards have even read (especially not understood) the white paper where it LITERALLY says right at the top "PEER TO PEER".

this is why you diversify

you should be holding at least 33% BTC and 33% ETH for save gains and the rest shoulb be smaller cap coins like Neo or Solarcoin for a bigger gain in %

Edgy

Cool story bro. I don't even want to explain to you why BTC is garbage and why BCH will win. I have a 100k bonus coming at the end of the year and I want BCH prices to stay low.

Sick, just bought 100k.

This is a good start you seem geniune.
twitter.com/adam3us/status/923309367260274688

>my sides

>ETH

What are the technical and economical implications of LN?

You realize bcash only has bigger blocks and that literally solves no problems? Were you paying attention to what happened to ethereum network this week?

Youre. A. Newfagt

you guys say youre all in the know, but did you know satoshi's original whitepaper basically outlines the LN, and its where we got the idea for it in the first place?
>not "satoshis true vision"
sure kids. youre not in the know, you just think you know. well move over, btc is about to win the crypto game.

>i have no idea what the scaling debate even is

The reality is that most people won't use the lightning network. The majority of the congestion on the network is just from people buying bitcoin and transferring it to their own wallet. They have no incentive to use payment channels.

Opening a payment channel takes a BTC transaction, so $10-$20, then closing takes another transaction so $10-20. You also have to lock up your BTC WITHIN the channel you put your money in. People don't realise this. So if you want to buy coffees every day for a month you have to do two bitcoin transactions $20-40, and also lock up 30 coffees worth of BTC, so about $100. Lightning will work pretty well for exchange to exchange transactions as they will probably have channels open with each other, but that's mostly it.

Coinbase isn't even implementing segwit in the near future, so there's no way they are going to use lightning network anytime soon. This is really a lot of hype for a very small number of use cases. The only way it works is with ALL of BTC locked into payment channels with VERY LARGE CENTRALISED PAYMENT HUBS. That's not what BTC is about. Lightning is a meme. Raiden is working on ETH, and no one is using it...

What about having a channel just with certain sellers? Would be great for centralized things like content micropayment services, or if you have an amazon account and know you'll spend your money there in the future.

The true scalability is in the lightning network, but the tech without it is pretty useful, too.

What is Lighting Network?

THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF BIZ

When did big money dump?

Satoshi's whitepaper outlines a 1-to-1 lightning channel, which is like a bar tab that you can close out.

Lightning Network is nothing like that. You just proved you don't know what the fuck you are talking about newfag.

Kek. Mastertroll

You have to lock up those funds in that payment channel. You have to spend $10-20 to open the channel and then how much BTC do you lock up in there? Once you have no BTC left in the channel you have to again pay $10-20 to close the channel, and then pay $10-20 again to open a new one and lock up more BTC.

yeah keep saying easy to understand words that everyone keeps saying, its going to help destroy the evil bitcoin you never bought in to

do you want to be right or do you want to make money?

the only question that matters if do you think the price will continue to increase? If they answer is yes, buy until you think it'll crash. Don't be an emotional or ideological trader.

LN fudders are mostly chinese miners, who are salty because they are not going to get as much in profits anymore. We will no longer have to pay 40 dollars to send 1 dollar of BTC anywhere. I fucking hate these miners. They can go fuck themselves for all I care. I hope chinese gubermint arrests them all and "convinces them" to give gurbminet the private keys. why? because the greedy fucking miners fucking deserve to lose it all. AAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHAH

Even if very large centralized payment hubs were needed, you wouldn't have to trust those hubs at all. You still control the bitcoin you haven't spent with lightning, and if they want to fuck you, you just got free btc.

I agree that this might not be what people had in mind for bitcoin if it stays centralized like that, but that's why they want to do a network on top of it. If that fails to work, the other tech will be nice to have while they figure out how to scale differently. There is no reason why we can't change to something better later on when it's finished if the network part doesn't turn out to work as intended.

LN kikestream will get BTFO. BTC whales will crush them

>never bought into

Some of us just sold when the fundamentals went to shit, like investors do.

>The only way it works is with ALL of BTC locked into payment channels with VERY LARGE CENTRALISED PAYMENT HUBS.
This sounds terrible for buying drugs.

You make the claim, you prove buddy ;)

Well trying to predict the irrational market is just gambling at it's core. If you put money into BTC at this point you are gambling. If you buy BCH it is for technical and fundamental reasons aka investing.

You got me fuck. Really easy to troll people with all the retards running around now.

Bigger blocks solve the problem of full blocks you idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BCH is literally the steamy pile of shit Jihan ASICBOOST Wu left on Craig Faketoshi Wrights chest after a naughty scat love making session

lol first off, bad move.
secondly
>like investors do
holy shit man, i like to actually drink my coke, not have it plastered all over my monitor. put your fingers away, thats enough typing i think

If adoption grows though it's going to be $50-100 to open and close a channel. So in reality literally everything will have to go through the lightning network. And so wouldn't it be in the hubs best interest to steal money from you, without making it enough that it's in your best interest to close the channel and dispute it? In reality couldn't a large payment hub steal $20 from a person and if the fee for a transaction was $50 it's in the person's best interest to not dispute the hub because it would cost more to open and close than it would to just take the $20 loss?

I would argue that BCH is more Bitcoin than Bitcoin, but honestly, both are shit. ASIC resistance and fast/cheap transactions (aka being an actual currency) are key if a cryptocurrency is ever going to replace fiat and subvert the power of central banks and financial institutions.

>when you realize normies don't care about decentralization
Buy Bitcoin and sell the news

Investing is all about fundamentals. You're not a genius because you gambled on a ponzi and made it out okay.

>ASIC Resistance
>Being decentralized
You will just have botnets controlling everything instead of legitimate mining ASICs then. ASIC resistance is terrible for decentralization.

Bitcoin Cash is literally just Bitcoin following the original white paper. So you'd be calling Satoshis pile of shit. Just saying.

Why does everyone have a boner about ASIC resistance. You realize without ASIC miners your network is open to botnet attacks right?

You can only steal money by announcing an old transaction where you had less money than you have in a more recent one. But if they announce that one, you know a secret that will allow you to get ALL the funds, theirs and yours, of the channel.

If you had less money in the channel (in total) than the fees cost you, then they can make you lose money while losing all of their own money in the channel in the process.

Sorry. I meant to say THEY can only steal money by annoucing ... (and so on)

number of btc transactions at ATH, miners making more per Tx than ever before. Your argument makes zero sense.

Centralized miners bad, centralized (((lightning hubs))) good? Makes no sense. The free market will decentralize miners, bitmain won't be top dog forever. Blockstream literally wants bitcoin to be their company asset, charge people for off chain channels.

But bro, that makes the blockchain bigger, I'll have to spend $50 on a new hard drive. I don't understand Moore's law, miners are evil! Don't price out full nodes for the homeless.

You are correct.

Bitcoiners kept saying Segwit would lower fees, than segwit didnt. Then now they are saying Lightning Network is just around the corner, just hodl some more guys haha.

It's funny because ln cannot be stopped, so these threads accomplish nothing.

When it costs more to send a transaction than it is to run a node

segwit usage is around 10%.
Bech32 adoption is almost non-existent.

Oh come on, please at least try to discuss this honestly.

I was making an argument why it doesn't hurt Bitcoin because it can be an interim tech. Centralized miners are bad because they can double spend/51% attack. Centralized lightning hubs can't do shit but make lightning not work, there is no danger to them. Worst case is that the tech doesn't work and we need to figure out something new. Bitcoin security is not affected at all.

I like how economic incentives are okay for LN hub owners but not for miners. Miners are evil! Down with big blocks! People forget that Chinese miners used to be against big blocks due to bandwidth limitations in China. Where did the narrative change? (((Who))) got involved?

>You will just have botnets controlling everything instead of legitimate mining ASICs then. ASIC resistance is terrible for decentralization.
Finally someone with intelligence in this thread. Cashies are utter retards.

t. Brainlet

When LN goes live the adoption of btc is going parabolic.

Normies don't give a shit about muh satoshis vision.

Botnets aren't profitable for high difficulty mining though?

As soon as miners double spend, the coin loses all value. The block reward provides better economic incentive than trying to attack the network. Please read the white paper you moronic shill, it literally explains all of that.

normies dont care about using bitcoin for anything either
normies buy it cause they hear its gonna raise in value
they probably dont even know what LN does or who runs it

Once LN comes out it'll have been over 4 years since the movement was started. When it doesn't work bitcoin still has absolutely nothing. No need to figure out anything new when onchain scaling + graphene + hardware optimization is enough to take us 10x faster than visa.

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=58&v=uL9VoxCFqT0

Here are Vitaliks thoughts on the Bitcoin fork and r/bitcoin's censorship of any and all Bitcoin Cash debate.

Another thing, you could say bigger blocks are an interim fix. You could increase to 2mb and see if it works, if not, undo the change. The problem is they KNOW bigger blocks fix the problem outright. They can't make money off bigger blocks. They intentionally stifle scaling in order to market their own solution.

Not sure what you are saying about the difficulty part but it is definitely profitable. Every advanced RAT being used right now pretty much has a miner of some sort.

Big blocks only scale transactions linearly, from a measly 3-7 tx per second.

Have you done or seen some calculations to get us to VISA/Mastercard levels of transactions per day, including bursts? Running a full node will require buying 8TB disks every few weeks.

The lightning paper talks about increasing the block size, too, btw, so miners will profit from widespread bitcoin adoption. The block size increase is much smaller than you'd need if you scaled linearly, though, and thus even you and me will be able to run a full node. THAT is something that's important for Bitcoin to stay Bitcoin. If I have to trust other people to validate my transactions, the whole Bitcoin experiment is over.

They really don't and it's currently being used as a bullshit attempt to lead them on.

No you fucking retard, LN fudders are literally everyone except you blockstream shills.

when Lightning Network is released, things will change. get rekt, scum.

Look up Moore's law, read the white paper. Go look at the actual size of the blockchain. Bigger blocks fix everything and they fix it now. Look at the incentives blockstream has to stifle growth.

Think. Use your brain.

>thus even you and me will be able to run a full node

Running a full node without mining actually just degrades and slows down the network.

GOOD THING YOU ARE SO SMART THOUGH RIGHT

Why the fuck did it have to be this way. This should have happened years ago when we still had some commerce and adoption.

>literally everyone
sure... "everyone" wants to pay 40 dollars to send 1 dollar. The truth is that you chinese miners are a vile group of people and Lightning Network will fucking destroy your scheme. Can't fucking wait to see your pink wojaks. hahaahhaahah.

Nodes don't even utilize more than one core, this is going to change on bitcoin cash. Look up graphene it changes it to 30-70 by compressing transaction data.

What are you even replying to. I was talking about Lightning and why it's not a liability unlike centralization of mining power. If you think centralization of mining power is not a problem, be my guest, I don't care. Lightning still doesn't introduce any problems in Bitcoin security, the 51% attack was just an example why someone might see centralization as a problem there, whereas centralization in lightning is a non-issue security wise.

The white paper is only 9 pages long. If you only read that, you are missing out.

medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800
not even a real scaling solution
twitter.com/adam3us/status/923309367260274688
weeeeeeeeeeeeeee the retards never stop flowing

>Fuck Satoshi's vision xD
>normalfags are going to destroying my ticket to ancapistan paradise

Fuck it. Im cashing out and buying a pirateship and naming her Ron Paul's Revenge. Time to plunder

my nigga

>he actually thinks bitcoin and LN will work without miners
lets all laugh at him

If you don't think locking up your funds in a payment channel controlled by a centralized hub is a problem, use a bank. Stay the fuck outta crypto. If shit hits the fan while funds are locked in the LN, your funds are gone.

at least we will not have to pay 40 dollar transaction fees. that alone crushes all your arguments, you disgusting maggot.

I'm not disagreeing that increasing the block size would be a way to increase performance. It's obvious and I agree. Maybe it would even be the right thing to do right now. But it only linearly increases performance, and we need something better.

Even the lightning paper talks about increasing the block size (to 133MB) so we can get to world wide adoption. Look at their calculations, they assume ONE lightning channel per person, open for a full year, and the pruned (not full!) blockchain will only be storable on 2TB of storage. (7TB per year for unpruned)

133MB blocks at the current level without lightning will just give us about 500-600 tx per second, and that's not enough for any meaningful adoption of Bitcoin as a currency.

Your coin is the only one with this self induced problem.

Uh, by your logic Cashies crush all your arguments because they pay cents to send any money at all while Corecucks pay 10$ minimum. You disgusting maggot.

>133MB blocks at the current level without lightning will just give us about 500-600 tx per second, and that's not enough for any meaningful adoption of Bitcoin as a currency.
So it's time to move onto something better right?..or are we forced to stay with king shitcoin

I just transferred $120k worth of BCH last night for 50 cents when the BCH network only had 2.5% of the hash power.

NICE TRY THOUGH LOL

>trade away everything that gives bitcoin value for convenience
Why don't you just use fiat?

Slows down the network? I run my full node on a small server 24/7 and help the p2p network to send transactions and blocks to actual miners, fast.

But please humor me: How does this hurt the network? It's kind of like seeding in bittorrent, and I seed way more than I consume, obviously.

What a stupid response some I can understand but why can't you elaborate on why lightning network is such a bad thing?

Because after you finished reading all these responses you can only conclude.... the lightning network is the only way forward.......

Im friends with Luke-dashjr brother

Ask me anything Reddit!

Hello trader. I don't care about how many $$$ you can get for a bitcoin, I care about bitcoin as an actual currency and store of value. Lightning channels lock funds of both parties, and you can close them within the next block if both parties agree on the outcome.

I'm sorry, but it's all there in the Lightning paper and while 60 pages are a bit hard to digest, that part is actually pretty clear from just one read. They even have diagrams to make it more digestible.