Bitcoin Forum

A few months ago, when bitcoin transaction costs had reached almost 50 dollars per TX, there was a lot of buzz about LN just around the corner. Now that the price of bitcoin as well as costs associated with the transfer of coins fell dramatically, no one seems to be talking about LN any more. I don't question its technical feasibility, it is definitely possible. I'm more interested whether anyone will be using it given today's conditions apart from a few die-hard enthusiasts. Exactly one year ago LN had been activated in litecoin, but no one is using this technology for real with this coin.

So, where are we now with LN in bitcoin? Has it been abandoned and forgotten?

The Lightning Network is just about always "just around the corner", according to people who are desperate to preserve a herd mentality so that people will continue buying BTC.

Now that the bull market appears to be over, there is less desperation and thus less pressure.  I expect that the LN will take a very long time to get past its development stages and even longer to become used by a significant amount of people.

The same thing has happened with SegWit - several months after activation, only about a third (http://segwit.party/charts/) of transactions sent are SegWit transactions.

Fortunately, since the fees are low, most people aren't too desperate for LN to have widespread use at the moment, so it seems OK for it to take ages.

I just read news on news.bitcoin.com that BCH community is in hot discussion and preparation for "Zero-Confirmation" transactions, which is BCH version of lightning network, the technology standing behind both are different of course but that's another topic. I think if BTC does not deploy LN soon, the risk of being replaced by BCH will expand, considering the recent tidal acceptance of BCH all over the world, I am sure BTC community and Lightning Network organizations are now under great pressure to push forward LN deployment and application. I am huge fan of BTC but recently I have bought just the same amount of BCH as a hedge. Who knows which will win in the end after all, isn't it?

At present, although the deployment of LN has a certain progress.
But large-scale use of the LN may still take a long time, so we need to become more patient.

It is not abandoned and neither forgotten but its being ignored in the long run. The thing is we hear about the LN a lot when the transaction fees starts increasing and people around the crypto start arguing that the fees are huge and we need to workout the way to minis the fees. Then rest of the people say this can be done with the help of LN and the whole buzz gets started with that one. Now the values are dropped as you said and the fees too so people are not arguing about it at all.

They dont care about the fees anymore because they dont have pay anything now. They are just behind the prices now! Now what buzz you will see is why bitcoin is dumped so much and what the hell is happening with it. When will it rise again and stuff like that!!!!

So its all about the time. Now if by the December the prices grow back to the ATH then there might heavy transaction and fees will increase again to avoid the congestion over the network. This will again make people aware that fees are gone wild and the cycle repeats !

Ignorance, thats all.

If we  use LN in the system that would make the system faster and more reliable and it would become and edge another capability that makes bitcoin more reliable and more attractive to the investors and if this will happen the price will surely soar high.

I have hope that this will happen for real and soon too. Bitcoin has shown me times without number that the possibilities are endless and I know for certain that at this point there is nothing that can't be done if a couple of people put their minds to it.

Honestly, I don't get this thing very well. Really, how could it solve the small payment problem if just to open a payment channel you have to make a separate transaction on the blockchain? It seems to be useful for payment processors and users of online wallets like Coinbase, but for a "stand-alone" user, with his desktop wallet, it doesn't look like a big improvement, if improvement at all. If fees are low, on the scale of cents, LN doesn't offer a major improvement unless you need instant transactions. But then again, you have to first open a payment channel which is the same as making a regular transaction, so it won't be of great help if fees start to skyrocket again.

I second this view. Payment channels may be useful for major players like exchanges, wallets, and their likes - theoretically, but for a small guy there are hardly any benefits. But even with the big guns it is not all that simple and straightforward. For instance, if you use an online wallet and your merchant uses it too, then Lightning Network will offer no particular advantage to either of you. Exchanges don't need this technology either simply because it is their clients who pay the fees and minimizing it via Lightning Network doesn't look like a trivial thing even if an exchange wants to implement it.

Here is a list of all of the known nodes as of now, and how they're being used. https://explorer.acinq.co/#/

The list has gone up more recently, which makes me believe that the lightning network will actually be used soon into the future. I guess the one issue will be the learning curve; people are always anxious when something new like this comes into play because it's hard to adapt to that change. All in all, if you're looking for the lightning network as a way to raise the bitcoin price super quickly, I don't think that's going to be the case.

I know about that list, but I'm more interested about how LN is going to be used in real life and by whom. Does it give any real advantage to small users who run something like an Electrum wallet? As I understand the technology, to make an LN transaction you need to open a payment channel, and this basically already means making a transaction. So why all the fuss if you can get around by simply sending the coins with this very transaction? I see how LN can benefit big users in a major way but I don't get what it could do for the small fish like myself.

I am guessing it will be too much for the users.
Look, some of us will know how to work it out but some cannot. So they need make it as basic as possible. I have read it one time and didn't understand it at just one read. Tried to read back and forth and it came to me that it is going to be hard for others.

That is why it is taking more time than it should be. They know it and will be working it out some more to make it as easy as it should be for most of the users.

Today's conditions probably aren't the best criteria.  At the moment, it's only really recommended for the technical users.  None of the stuff that will make it user-friendly or simple to understand is finished yet.  Plus with the general current lack of network effects (which I'll get onto shortly), the benefits of using it are still quite small.  People ask questions like this under the assumption that Bitcoin (and Lightning in particular in this case) is a finished product.  It's far from that.  Most people wouldn't have been in a position to use the early internet years ago, simply because it wasn't the ubiquitous, massively accessible and easy to use gateway it is today.  The same applies to Lightning.



That all depends on how you generally transact and also how many people you interact with are using Lightning.  Right now?  Today?  I'll be perfectly honest, there's probably not much advantage to be had for the average person.  Before large scale adoption occurs (which may not be for a while), if you only need to send the occasional Bitcoin payment and they tend to go to a different recipient each time and none of these people use Lightning, the benefits won't be that noticeable at first.  

But, if you pay someone at regular intervals, like a recurring bill, subscription fee, a local convenience store or newsagents that you make frequent small payments to, or even if you have a habit of either ordering takeaway from, or going out for a meal to your favourite place on a regular basis, the potential savings for having a channel open will become pretty obvious.  Those are just some examples.  But again, much of this will only be relevant once more companies begin to accept Bitcoin (and consequently Lightning) payments.

Then, as time goes by, adoption increases, we start to see network effects and more people decide to start using Lightning to save on fees, you'll find that because you already have a channel open with one person or business, your wallet software will likely be smart enough to inform you that you don't need to pay a fee to open a new channel in order to pay someone else, as there's already a route to the new person you want to pay through an existing channel.  The whole thing will gradually get more interconnected as more people use it.  

All of these transactions occurring off-chain means there will be more space available in blocks in the event that you do need to send a standard on-chain transaction.  Plus, as a bonus, it will also give you the option to migrate to other blockchains without using centralised exchanges.  It's all going to take time, though.  There's quite a bit of "looking at the big picture" involved if you want to understand Lightning right now.  Otherwise it definitely won't make any sense.

You think if Bitcoin did not immediately deploy LN, the risk of being replaced by BCH would be widespread, given the recent ups and downs of BCH worldwide, you believe the Bitcoin community and the Network of Lightning Network are currently under great pressure to drive LN deployment and application.

I think LN is being forgotten because the bitcoin prices are down and cheap so that the cost goes down, and probably will come back again after the bitcoin price starts up again in the market.

Lightening network would happen but it might not have that much buzz anymore. It was only talked about at those times when the mempool was flooded with tx and tx costs skyrocketed. Lightening bitcoin futures are already trading so I'm sure It'll soon be implemented on bitcoin. Can't wait to feel the speed.

We need to see that scaling tweaked up. With the consensus, everything could be changed and Bitcoin needs a rehaul to step up the game...like every other coin.

on 15 March yesterday, lightning labs, startup lightning network bitcoin announced beta software LND (lightning network daemon). and serves to move the network lightning network. with this beta, then the LND is ready to run on the mainnet.

I think LND is activated, because a few days ago, I made a transaction with a cheap fee, and also fast. besides that also because of the correction conditions that make bit people doing transactions.

The lightning network goes against decentralization.

Since they're all in the lightning network. What about distributed bookkeeping? The equivalent of an external transfer, an internal transfer, everyone in the so-called channel.

I find it hard to achieve!

It'll come, due to the fact that other cryptos have done it before us so it's going to be possible on the bitcoin network. The big thing that is going to be the problem is the fact that miners aren't going to want it, and there's no reason for them to want the LN at all.

Who knows when it will happen, but I know it will happen and it will be the bitcoin that we REALLY NEED. This is what's going to bring bitcoin to the next level.

I genuinely don't believe the market price will have much bearing on Lightning.  The primary driving force will be Bitcoin adoption.  The more merchants and businesses we have channels open to, the greater the utility for everyone.  But more companies need to start allowing us to spend our bitcoins with them before the benefits will become apparent.  In the immediate future, potential savings will be minimal, unless you need to make repeated payments to the same recipient.  But once lots of people are making repeated payments to the same nodes, they'll be able to make payments to each other via those nodes.

Example:
My friend and I both happen to like the same pizza delivery chain.  Let's assume they've started accepting Bitcoin.  We don't live together, but we both order from this same place all the time, at least every other week.  We both decide it's better value to open a channel with this pizzeria, rather paying a mining fee every time we want to get a pizza.  My friend decides he wants to sell a few of his console games he got bored of and I offer him some BTC for them.  Rather than paying a fee for sending a standard on-chain transaction, or opening a new channel to my friend, I can simply route the payment through this pizza place with practically zero fee.  I can also transact with anyone else who gets pizza there with practically zero fee.

It works the other way around too.  If you have a friend you're always buying stuff from, you could have a channel open with them.  They've been raving about how good their favourite pizzeria is, but you haven't tried it yet.  Because you already have a channel open with your friend and they already have a channel open with the pizza place, you don't need to open another channel with the pizza place and can simply route payments through your friend to pay for the food you've ordered.  You can also transact with any of the other places your friend orders food from and has channels open with.  It's probably the less likely example of the two, since people tend to transact more with businesses than they do directly with other individuals.  Hence my view that companies accepting payment with Bitcoin will be the main boost Lightning needs.

But the good news is, the closer Lightning gets to being user-friendly, the more businesses will be likely to try it out.  

Already happened.
https://twitter.com/acinq_co/status/981588999121850368?s=19

R.I.P alts.

This will completely change the crypto world as we know it.

With this kind of sales pitch LN network will never take off from the ground. It is just 1000 times too complex for something that should be very simple and has already been very simple for decades. Try to explain your example to your mom and see what she thinks of this new payment system and whether she likes it and thinks this an improvement over how she does her shopping every day.


This scenario is just completely unrealistic even among crypto enthusiastics. With LN you cannot realistically pay to your friend or any individual. To make a purchase from your friend you need to call them first to find out whether they are going to keep their computer on and not shut it down at an inconvenient moment  when you are just sending the payment. Now imagine calling your friend to inform him that you are going to pay for pizza so he is not allowed to turn his computer off during the next 10 minutes when you need it to be up for the routing to work.

Never going to be happen in real life.

The network of lightning continues to be tested so that there are no failures after mass introduction into bitcoin. It is planned to be launched in bitcoin around September. Therefore, it is not forgotten, experts continue to work on it. Let's hope that it will help bitcoin become a crypto currency for everyday purchases.

I remember when people said the same thing the first time they saw a Bitcoin address.  "Oh my god, it's so complicated.  Why can't it be more simple?  Let's make it use email addresses instead.  We'll never have mass adoption if no one can even remember their own address", etc.  If you do a search, you can still find such threads from a few years ago here on the forum.  Notice how nearly everyone who uses Bitcoin doesn't think that's an issue anymore?  Lightning will undoubtedly begin to make more sense as people start using it.  It'll eventually become second nature.  You won't even be thinking about it.  No one is suggesting you have to "get it" right away.  It took me a while.  And even now, I'm hardly what you'd call an expert on the subject.  Just moderately well informed.

Also, my parents can't even make sense of regular Bitcoin transactions, so that isn't really an argument.  We're on the bleeding edge of technology here.  "Normal" people aren't ready for this stuff yet.   :D



People are talking about the 'Internet of Things' where your fridge and toaster will apparently be online 24/7 and you can't allow yourself just a hint of imagination to see how this will work?  Again, look at the big picture.  Once it's all automated, idiot-proofed and simple, you'll wonder what you ever thought the problem was.  And even before we reach that stage, you don't have to use LN for every single transaction.  Send a standard transaction if your friend isn't online and there aren't any other open routes.  Hardly a catastrophe.  Still don't think it's a good idea?  Cool.  Don't use it then.  I'm not here to provide a "sales pitch", just trying to help people to understand it without resorting to technical jargon.

LN will no doubt become easy to use. But the way how it will become easy to use is going to be completely different from what you were suggesting. The most probable way is that LN is going to be used only between banks/exchanges and normal people only use the services that these banks/exchanges offer to consumers. Nobody wants to admit this though. People are peddling the scenario that LN is going to be like bitcoin that normal people can use themselves and directly and this was what I was responding to.


Of course this was what I was also suggesting. Normal people continue use standard bitcoin as LN is not suitable for their needs. But using standard bitcoin is not going to be limited to some odd moments when somebody is not online. It makes zero sense trying to use several methods when standard bitcoin works 100% of the time. Why bother with LN for the odd chance that it might work some of the time.

Banks are going to use Lightning?  I'll believe that when I see it.  Bitcoin isn't going to submit to the pressure of enforcing KYC/AML, so it's unlikely any traditional banks will be permitted by their regulators to dive in and play by our (distinct lack of) rules.  I also think Lightning is eventually going to put a significant dent in the overall popularity of exchanges.  It will only be the day-traders that still use them once atomic cross-chain transactions become commonplace.  If you want to use an altcoin, for example, LTC, Lightning will allow you to migrate some funds to that blockchain without using a centralised exchange.  And yes, it's absolutely true that normal, everyday people are categorically not the target demographic just yet.  All of that comes later.  No one sensible is suggesting that the average person is even going to be using Bitcoin regularly in the near future, let alone Lightning.  We're simply not ready for them yet.  This is where we once again draw that now slightly clichéd analogy with the early internet:

http://www.wearedecentralised.co.uk/bitcoinforbeginners/images/adoption_curve.png



Because it won't always be the most cost-effective option if fees for standard on-chain transactions happen to be high during peak-traffic periods.  Lightning will grow from financial incentives and network effects.  If it saves people money, they're going to use it.  But again, only when the time comes where it's simple and easy to use, so you might have to put up with the occasional high fee until we reach that stage.  

Also, as mentioned above, you'll be able to use LN to hop to another altcoin to make regular on-chain transactions on marginally less secure, but still incredibly safe blockchains, which may have lower fees and specialise in dealing with smaller sums.  It's likely that Bitcoin will become the backbone that supports multiple commerce layers consisting of all the worthwhile altcoins and LN will be the mesh that ties it all together.

But we'll agree to disagree, since you've clearly already made your mind up about this.

Yes, I understand that it is far from finished, but the question is when will it be finished, if ever? Why not make it usable right now when the TX fees are low and not when they skyrocket again (let's assume that for a moment)? In short, when will LN be ready to use by common people and we can test it out on major wallets? When will major wallets like Bitcoin-Qt and Electrum embrace this technology in full?


But how much time is it going to take? I'm afraid that if Bitcoin price starts to rise again (which I welcome anyway), we will be back where we were in November/December transaction-wise, with LN still being "under construction".

I'm sure if the devs could magically snap their fingers and manifest the finished product into existence, they'd be happy to.  But development is never that simple, open-source even less so.  Deadlines are flexible at best and unenforceable at worst.  These are big ideas and those don't tend to materialise overnight, even with the numerous talented people currently working on it.  

The question is always going to be "when?" when no one has the answer.   ;)

We're clearly on the right path, though.  Progress is being made.  We can see it coming piece by piece.  That should be enough for anyone to know for now.  If anyone wants it happening any faster, they're going to have to learn to code and be willing to surrender their own spare time to help out.  That, or hire some more developers with their own money.  Beyond that, it's just a matter of patience.



Perhaps that wasn't exactly comfortable, but the network easily survived it.  I used to believe quite strongly that there would be some form of mass-exodus if fees got too high, but it seems like enough people understand the situation for it not to be a deal-breaker for them.  I guess BCH technically qualifies as a minor exodus, but nothing that jeopardises the network.

Inconvenience, it seems, isn't an existential threat, but security or stability flaws potentially could be, so it's better to go slow and steady, ensuring Lightning works as intended, with no issues or exploits.  

That said, keeping in mind the first Lightning alpha release was only published in January 2017, I'd say it's quite impressive some people (admittedly mostly boffins for now) are already using it to pay for things on mainnet.  It appears to bode pretty well for the overall pace of development.  It has come a long way in a relatively short space of time.

Higher transaction fee issue being almost solved with active application of segwit itself,i don't think that LN is needed now for bitcoin.

It's possible that SegWit is only one of the reasons for the fees currently being low.  Another large factor may be exchanges and webwallets finally implementing transaction batching, which is more efficient.  If, for example, I have 50 people all waiting for a withdrawal from my service (I don't actually run one, though), it's wasteful for me to make 50 separate transactions.  It uses less space in the block if I were to make one transaction that pays out to 50 recipients.  As a bonus, I'll also pay a smaller fee that way. 

But generally, as we attract more people and businesses to Bitcoin, that means potentially more transactions, so it's still vital to continue working on supporting those future anticipated volumes.

It's probably not needed now, as you said, but as things stand, Bitcoin can't handle mainstream demand for transactions. Something is needed to address this, preferably  sooner rather than later, so the world can start taking Bitcoin seriously as an alternative payment option.

The Lightning Network is simply one of those somethings. I personally think it has a long way to go because it's just too complex as it currently stands, which is bad for regular joe adoption. It has to be noted that it's still in the very early stages though, so it could still very well live up to its potential as the solution to Bitcoin's scalability problems in the near future.

Lightening network will happen. It has to happen because bitcoin needs a boost like this for it to start being an accepted form of payment in everyday life and shopping.

It's currently in beta and is quite slow in regards to development for something called "Lightning" Network. Many people are in anticipation of this next big upgrade to BTC as this can possibly tip off to another bull run in BTC.

Lightning is a decentralized network using smart contract functionality in the blockchain to enable instant payments across a network of participants.

Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude. Attaching payment per action/click is now possible without custodians.

I agree with your points. At the moment, there does not seem to be much demand for Lightning Network, but this can quickly change at any point of time if more and more investors invest into Bitcoin driving up transaction fees and times making LN all the more necessary in this case. I have already made the move to segwit and it is easily one of the best decisions that I took in recent times.

The Lightning Network will surely enhance Bitcoin in a positive manner which is why I think we need to wait patiently to observe how exactly it helps Bitcoin since the advantages might not necessarily be clear at the moment. Whatever the case, I am an active supporter of this feature.

I don't have much hope for lightning. I think it's a half-measure. Developers will still be faced with the problem of scale the issue of segwit2x still remains relevant. I don't understand why nobody has solved this problem now. When the demand for bitcoin was at the very bottom. Too bad the last six months have been wasted.

Then how do you propose to fix the scalability of the bitcoin network? We all know that only on-chain upgrade, increasing block size over and over again is not gonna work in the end.
At some point, we will hit the wall and some sort of off-chain solution will be needed, sadly we cannot have everything packed in one little solution.
Or if someone will find a way to increase the capacity of the bitcoin network without affecting decentralization, please let me know.

your comment proves that your source is social media, and you are correct the "hype" about Lightning Network on social media like bitcointalk and reddit has died because the fees have come down. (by the way this has nothing to do with litecoin! not that many were using LTC itself before LN)

but that is only hype and people talking about it and talk has always been wind, nobody cares about it. the reality is that Lightning Network development is still ongoing as strong as before. the network is also growing but not as fast as early days or first week for instance but it is still growing nonetheless.

if you are really interested in it then here is a bunch of links (wallets, services) you can follow: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3315816.0

here is some active Github projects you can follow:
https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd
https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning
https://github.com/LN-Zap/zap-desktop

here is an explorer:
https://lnmainnet.gaben.win/
also https://explorer.acinq.co/

and there is always google to find even more.

But I don't deny it. Wasn't that what I made clear in OP? There is not much talk about Lightning Network on "social media like bitcointalk" nowadays, yeah. That's why I decided to ask this question here. Of course, I could have looked through all the sources you provided myself (and use Google too), but I thought the current standing and situation with LN might be of interest to other people as well.


Well, to tell the truth, I'm not really fascinated when someone uses phrases like "development is still ongoing as strong as [never] before". Most of the time, it pretty much means that the real development has stalled. For us, people who don't follow such questions very closely, "strong development" means introduction of respective features in major apps, even if only as beta versions and pre-releases.

So, is there any change we are going to see LN make its way into major wallets any time soon?