Bitcoin Forum

https://medium.com/@rusty_lightning/miners-and-bitcoin-lightning-a133cd550310#.o47et1k9x

'TL;DR: The bitcoin userbase is tiny. If we finally make bitcoin catch on for daily usage, miners will be just fine…'

i'd like to know how well informed miners are about the lightning network and what it might mean for them. i kind of get the feeling they regard it as the tap that'll turn off their fees and nothing else.

the most interesting detail from the above article is that lightning network payments are capped at 0.042 btc. i didn't know that. i wonder if that's gonna disappoint or excite people.

I think it will really dissapoint the miners, the transactions without confirmations. Users are excited with the fast transactions which users are really looking right now, low fees, though hearing it to be at that cap, for me it is a dissapointment. Still I am excited not because of its function, but what and how will it affect the users and the miners.

Thanks, didn't know about the cap. For me it's a good thing. Lightning Network should never be used for large and important transactions like salary, but for microtransactions it's great, if it works like expected.

For larger transactions being scalable I have more hopes in sidechains and other "sharding" techniques, but I know that they are not trivial to realize.

Regarding miners I agree with the article. I think LN can give us more use cases for Bitcoin if we don't cap the actual on-chain transaction density too hard. So miners should be actually fine with the fees they will earn.

Been trying to explain this for months, but it gets drowned out in a sea of "you want mining to die, LN to send all transactions and centralise Bitcoin"

And you've been no help at all, d5000. But in fairness, I had no idea a cap on Lightning transaction amounts was being touted.



I hope you are also going to begin to understand that shrinking transactions is the only scaling paradigm possible (whereas you've been another voice in the crowd shouting about the un-scalable blocksize increase paradigm).



Changing to Schnorr signatures (instead of the current ECDSA sigs) and changing to a more efficient transaction encoding scheme could turn 300,000 tx/day into 400,000 tx/day on-chain. More can be done, there's plenty of true on-chain scaling ideas on the shelf.

That's the responsible way to do it, we can think about doing the high-wire dangerous blocksize increases once there's actually a safety net to break any falls.

WHO can read that and NOT be turned on by the idea of LN ??

It. sounds. amazing..

I weep at the thought it may never come to pass..  :'(

If the fees are that high then that is very disappointing. That is a huge amount and we only earn a small amount of satoshi. If that is true the probably I will transfer my bitcoins only every six months si as not to suffer from the killer fees. I am earning 0.06 btc weekly and only 0.018 btc will go to my wallet since 0.042 btc will be eaten by the miners. Many will leave bitcoins if that will come true.

That's the maximum per transaction, not the fee

Did you not read the article?

It will come to pass - as an alt.  Why don't they just go do LN on a bitcoin fork?  Just call it: LNBTC.  Now go do this amazing project. 

Oh wait, LN won't work unless we fuckup and cripple the throughput of the real bitcoin first.  No one needs LN unless we first destroy the capacity at Bitcoin. 

It is all becoming clear now.