any second now

hello i'm a 2MB moron  
i still dont see how LN is going to make one time payments ( these are the only types of payments i have ever done with bitcoin ) cost less.
from my understanding LN is good for poeple like bitpay accepting 1000's of TX coming from coinbase.
but if i want to send 0.01BTC to alice and thats the end of it, LN is useless to me... is it not?

edit: maybe i'll indirectly benefit from LN taking away 1000's of TX going directly from coinbase to bitpay now happening on LN, greatly reducing the traffic onchain making fees onchain lower.

they should create 2 new versions of core the sole purpose of this new version to signal their readiness for 2MB blocks, or signal their opposition for 2MB .

miners can use the BIP9 block version number

for users we count the number of nodes updated to the latest version of core that is FOR 2MB and the ones Against it..

wait if we makes bitcoin to simple to use before we solve the scaling problem we might run into problems

let's keep bitcoin nerdy till its ready for mass adoption

OPs right.

here's a possible solution

web browser plug-ins

make a plug-in has a built in bitcoin wallet
the browser recognizes  and replaces bitcoin addresses with Send Payment buttons
user clicks the button and is prompted to enter the amount to send.

or append to the HTML language <BTC_PAY addr="1asfk8234msdkfal8934nasdf908sad"  amount="10$" >click here to pay</BTC_PAY>

this would be cool
we need to have bitcoin wallet stuff buried under the covers as much as possible
poeple should be able to send payments to email addresses or usernames

nodes could be made to understand what "send a payment to adamstgbit" means, it could mean, all they have to remember is adamstgbit = 1zjdafky293487sndafj9sadf8

the analogy fits quite well...

I think IPv6 will eventually be widely used and at one point IPv4 will be dropped entirely. its only a matter of time IMO.
sure we have mitigated the problem with NAT, but its has only delayed the problem ( and created a bit of a headache for network apps. )
just like 1MB blocks we can mitigate the issue by using LN, but in the end eventually 1MB is simply not be enough space.

i think the moral of the story is to design things in such a way that they dont have limits, or put in place retardedly high limits.

you think 4billion IP address is enough? think again

you think a 3 lane highway is enough? think again!

This proves that they will upgrade in a timely manner. the fork you're pointing to had no grace period, it was an unexpected fork, and when it came time to upgrade they did so in a matter of hours.

if your node is not servicing other poeple ( ex. coinbase's node ) then you fall in the home user side and i dont care if you upgare or not, if you dont upgrade you'll be bumped of the network and that only affects you really...


[/quote]
you're being paranoid, did you lock yourself in your basement for the Y2K bug ?
yes its safe to assume that ( coinbase, bitpay, bitfinex, Purse.io  etc etc) will all upgraded in time.
they will likely receive 100's of emails from concerned users asking them if they will be ready for the coming HF.
along with several general announcements from the dev community warning them of the coming HF.

maybe pizza4coins.com will not upagred ( and lets assume he dosnt use bitpay ) but whats that going to do? users will send him funds and his wallet wont see them confrim until he upgrades, not the end of the world...

yes this is all Speculation, best guess, assumption and estimates. but have no fear, Gavin said its would all be just fine 

if your node is responsible for handling other people's monies you have a responsibility to run a well oiled machine.

node operators have not be faced with a HF before, of course i would expect them to not upgrade on every minor release, if it doesn't affect their ability to service their clients they probably hold off upgrading to allow that new build to be tested by everyone else and or plan to upgrade after a few minor releases have been piling up.