lol whistles in the wind

research harder.

1. if dynamic blocks occur, there are A DOZEN diverse brands all functional to work on the sam PEER network
 if segwit occur, there are A DOZEN diverse brands all semi-function as the lower TIER with core as the upstream filer upper TIER

..

2. where is cores elections
.
3. where is cores vision of a PEER network of not REKTing anything thats not blockstream sanctioned.

FTFY

though i care more about he diverse network of many brands doing dynamics.
you do realise the context of your quote is taking something thats tongue in cheek and intentionally left off the part that the tongue in cheek comment of a dictatorship due to no way to kick off a project without an interim leader.. was a temporary thing until they held elections a few months later..

do you understand tongue in cheek.. do you understand humour?
oh wait.. you failed to research that.

where is blockstreams election process
where is cores election process..

you need to learn..

blockstream(core) want a TIER network of dev control that bypasses community node consensus..
going soft by only miner vote. then going bilateral with bip9, uasf and Pow nukes
..
other implementations want a sing DIVERSE and decentralised PEER network of different brands.
its only core that dont want to step down to be on the same equal playing level as other brands.

wake up.
its like you understand all of blockstreams faults of dictatorship/control. and have very lazily just done a find/replace word to swap out blockstream and replace it with anything thats not blockstream

and who let the community vote who gets to be CEO CTO of blockstream

oh. and when satoshi left who voted gavin as the core top guy.
oh. and when gavin left who voted Wladimir as the core top guy.

are their yearly elections for core. is their a boardroom team of VC investors that can sack adam/greg from blockstream, or elect someone else to replace them...

.. hmm seems not

i have been using multisig for offchain transactions for a long while already.

but, its worth those looking into all the LN's, to concentrate on the DNS seeds as that is the most exploitable point of setting selves up as a superhub
to grab the max routing fee's.

have you seen where blockstream have actually been TRULY decentral and diverse.
seen any cases where they have welcomed different brands of nodes(which are not just blockstream with a different sticker.. EG knots (Luke Jr->Blockstream)

or

have you seen all the REKT campaigns against anything not blockstream sanctioned/employed/funded.(xt, classic, bu, and others)

..
imagine it this way
"its decentralised because there are atleast 100 superhubs in the DNS" .. (100 nodes owned by core devs/intern spellcheckers)

amiko-pay: "Cheap Amiko Pay transactions are expected to be much cheaper than regular Bitcoin transactions,"

eclair "default-feerate-perkw = 1000        fee-base-msat = 546000"
.. and so on..

none are offering zero fee for hopping(spoke)/routing.. but where some are charging 500-1000sat. blockstream are charging less (in millisat amounts in some cases)
oh.. and if the others are running hops(spoke) expect each hop to cost. EG if it takes 10 hops.. thats 9 perks/tips/thankyous the initial person has to pay to ensure each of the other 9 parties route the payment

this is where blockstream will be the mega hub because people only paying 1 sat to blockstream is savvi compared to just being a hop(spoke)  where it but costing the user 9000sat internally to hop(spoke) through 10 channels

all blockstream need to do is limit the hops needed (centralise it to a hub) and then they can have the lowest fee's around while rake it all in by being centralised.


whats better occasional ~700sat nor and again if lucky.. or 1sat each from millions of people...
people wont pay 9000 just for the sake of 'oh it took 10 decentralised hops.. happy days' they would be like 'i wanna pay 1sat'

that was about BLOCK SPACE that needs to inflate.. nothing to do with the coin cap.
do your research better. did you even watch the first 60 seconds of the video.
yep 0seconds->60 seconds listen for the words BLOCK SPACE

someone making 1mb of spam today will make 1mb of spam filling the baseblock after segwit activation with native keys.
so that no segwit tx's can fit txdata in the baseblock, thus not hang their sigs outside the baseblock.. thus not even use any of the 3mb extra weight but still have the 'blocks are full' issue.


someone making 1mb of spam today will make 1mb of segwit txdata spam filling the baseblock after segwit activation using segwit tx's. so that it has 2mb of txdata+sig spam and still no moral / normal user transactions able to get in

inshort: segwit does not stop spam because segwit is reliant on the baseblock.

a DNS is like a directory of who and where..
its used to link people together by listing the routes in the DNS.

simply by only listing blockstream in the DNS. everyone connects to blockstream making blockstream the super hub



there are other brands. for instance bitfury have Flare. another brand has Thunder.

but as we all know.. if its not blockstream sanctioned and managed.. expect them to be REKT with all the accusations of 'its not good enough' its an altcoin service, its not been independently reviewed. its buggy, their devs are crap. etc (standard blockstream shill script)

which is where i told you the utopian dream of decentralsied nodes getting paid for just being routes wont happen
blockstream owning the LN DNS SEED. to ensure everything routes through them. will make sure they get the fee's to repay their $70m debt to VC

i realised my scenario was where you were connected to bob and it was alice that wanted to pay bob

if its just inside channel.. EG you and alice NO FEE either side for all the offchain payments of just you and alice..

but whoever is acting as a route to another channel deserves a thankyou fee in which case

if alice had 2 channels YOU-alice... bob-alice.
and you wanted to pay bob... you would give alice a small fee, a tip as it were..

if alice had 2 channels YOU-alice... bob-alice.
and alice wanted to pay bob... you have no involvement. as its all done on bob-alice channel. costs you nothing. you see nothing . know nothing

if you had 2 YOU-alice. You-bob
and you wanted to pay bob... alice have no involvement. as its all done on you-bob channel. costs alice nothing. alice sees nothing . knows nothing

if you had 2 YOU-alice. You-bob
and alice wanted to pay bob... alice you would give you a small fee, a tip as it were..

now your flipping the scnario.. edit... oops sorry i flipped it.. anyways

if alice has one with you..
and alice has one with bob

then alice does not need you to pay bob.

so you wont get a thank you as you are not involved with alice paying bob.

but if you want to pay bob. without you having a channel with bob direct... you then need to pay alice a small thank you fee as she was the router between you and bob..

anyway. lets go back to the first scenario(they way i wrote it) where alice and you have a channel .. and you and bob have a channel.. and alice wants to pay bob via you...

this image may help

the onchain transactions would be
you deposit $60  - pay the onchain mining fee of say $1(whatever the onchain mining fee is at the time)
alice deposit $60  - pay the onchain mining fee of say $1(whatever the onchain mining fee is at the time)
this then logs the opening of the channel

and when you close its 1 onchain tx of $1(whatever the onchain mining fee is at the time)
 to payout whoever has whatever share of the $120(combined funds of the channel)

..
but within LN
if its just you and alice buying stuff from each other then no internal fee unless one of you demand it.
...

but if alice wanted to pay bob. firstly you would have to have a channel between you and bob aswell.
you deposit $60  - pay the onchain mining fee of say $1
bob deposit $60  - pay the onchain mining fee of say $1
this then logs the opening of the 2nd channel

so now you have 2 channels open..
alice<> you <> bob

now because you are just being used as a hop(spoke)/hub to bob.. alice must pay you something as a 'thankyou' for routing it.
just to ensure you dont mess things up for alice and bob. so thats where you would get your 1sat from.

all of the OFFCHAIN 1sat fee's are YOUR PROFIT..
the onchain settlement closing fee is still $1 per channel(whatever the onchain mining fee is at the time) no matter how many offchain payments were made in that month. or how much you earned OFFCHAIN by being a hub/spoke route.

but for alice in this example if she had to pay bob 1000 times in that month. it has cost her 1000sat as she has had to say thank you to you 1000 times for helping her and bob.
meaning out of you and alices channel of $120 combined.  to cover the thank you's for being a route to bob

http://dcg.co/portfolio/#r
DCG (the blockstream cartel group that think anything not core is an alt) have invested in rootstock

all the dynamic and diverse nodes want consensus of one single network of diverse peers.

core have the ban hammers. the plans to change the network into a tier network and cause the actual forks win or lose.
AND to make sidechains(altcoins) and LN(offchain networks)..

even if core become moral again by getting rid of blockstream puppet masters.. and just add a few lines of code to be on the same level playing field as the other peers. and (yep they get cake) they get to have segwit too(should they want that half gesture empty promise).. meaning a community win win..
but down the road there will be
Lightning NETWORKS
sidechain NETWORKS
emphasis on the word network.

so yes people will be spending funds on alternate networks.. but all triggered by cores intentions of what they think is best. and the fools who follow core all the way no matter what

lol
you have no clue
seems you are scripted by billybobzorton and pereira4

1. dynamic implementations including BU. are not touching the 21mill cap.. secondly its segwit that need people to move funds to segwit keys after activation to achieve anything.

2. dynamics does not give control to miners. remember its segwit that bypassed node consensus going soft. its the blockstreamists that are shouting that nodes dont matter.. while the other dynamic groups know nodes do matter.
as proven by the 1.000250mb block that got rejected in 3 seconds without any technical drama(because NODES disagreed with a block pools made.. literally saying not yet no consensus reached)

3. having diverse nodes like bitcoinj, classic, xt, bitcoinruby, btcd and a dozen others means that if one codebase has a bug. the network continues as proven by when bu was hit the other diverse codebases continued. however if everyone was to centralise to blockstream(core). then big nasty events like the 2013 core leveldb event will happen again. which cant be mitigated or toned down due to the fact that everyone would be ALL using the same codebase
.. this is why decentralised diverse nodes are important

4. segwit have not got consensus. and its segwit with all the intolerance of decentralism code. treating anything not segwit as second tier.. they have high ban scores, bip9 uasf and Pow changes.. all to FORCE segwit into activation. blockstream dont care about consensus. going soft then going bilateral split but always skipping real consnsus in the middle.. very bad tactics.

concern#1 --[1].. hint: LN DNS seed.
located on a blockstream server containing IP's of hubs/spokes that blockstream can prioritise/handpick

concern #2
say we have
alice<>bob<>chuck<>dave
and say a 'ln payment' was just 1sat (lowest allowable amount)

for alice to pay dave. alice has to pay bob and chuck too. so it costs alice 3sats to pay dave
decentralised hop(spoke) models cost more than hub
making the whitepaper utopian dream of cheap hop(spoke) model costly because you got to pay each peer on the route.
many naive people think they will get a free sat per payment just by being on the route. and thats where all the excitement is coming from.. people thinking they finally get paid to be a node..

however knowing hop(spoke) model costs fee*hops-1. can end up being alot compared to hubs. so naturally. spenders would find the cheapest method.. leading to hubs

now imagine the hub model
               bob
                ^
                v
alice <> blockstream <> dave
                ^
                v
              chuck

now alice can pay anyone for 1 sat and blockstream are the only ones that get the fee.
blockstream can go one step further by 'pretending' to be more decentralised by making it 'appear' like a hop/spoke model

alice <> BSemployee <>blockstream <> BSemployee <> dave

now alice is back to paying 3sat and being told her payment needed to loop through 3 nodes.. but guess who owns the nodes..
this is a hub emulating a hop/spoke model.. similar to running a sybil / pool of nodes to take advantage of getting more fee's.

all because of the LN DNS seed being in the hands of blockstream

..
as for concern 2 about someone else coming in in 5..10 years with a better plan with a proper open LN DNS seed. forget it
blockstream will REKT campaign it and suggest that the DNS seed of anything not blockstream invented is prioritised in favour of the opposition (turning their own trick to sound like only the opposition are doing it even if the opposition are not. as seen already with current blockstream plans)

calling segwit a scaling solution.. lol
1. its a single step .. not a scale. you cant resegwit a segwit
2. its not a fix/solution. even if activated it then requires people to be in a tier network and then move funds to new keypairs..
3. the moving of funds is a half promise gesture which wont meet the promises/expectations because not everyone will move funds to disarm themselves.
4. segwit is just about letting in more "soft" changes without consensus.. in technical terms this is called opening a backdoor into bitcoin

if you think LN is a scaling solution then get your calculator out.
1. it take 3tx to open/close a channel so not everyone will see the benefits of it.
2. not everyone uses bitcoin daily. LN has a niche for things like faucets. but most are already using xapo offchain already. so not much change
3. neither LN or segwit stops spamming. by keeping the 1mb base limit nothing has made it harder for spammers.
4. if spammers stick with native keys, it limits how many segwit tx's can get in and how many LN channels are used.

read the code next time not the reddit utopian 30 second elevator sales pitch thats full of holes.
oh. i havnt even told you all the new attack vectors segwit and LN open. but ill leave that for a different topic