I'm new on this forum and when I press quote, only comments which you guys quoted from me will be in quote brackets so I'll leave that for now.


@ABCbits

It sure depends on Bitcoin price and sats/vbite. But I wonder if this issue, like many Bitcoin related issues will figure itself out over the years. As Bitcoin miners are forced to find incredibly efficient energy sources, driving prices down so low and with it the necessary sats/vbite needed to be profitable. Making Bitcoin almost unnaturally (or some would say naturally) cheap compared to other final settlement solutions without having to compromise on the hashrate/security of the network.

I've only dabbled with the lightning network as a second layer and I was doubting robustness of it mainly due to things I read about 'The replacement cycling attack' for instance. Furthermore I've watched Stephan Livera's podcast with Ken Sedwig about using HSMs to reduce lightning hot wallet risk. Now do my best to understand these things but must admit that I have to rely on video's explaining me in Layman's terms what this is all about. Have you guys heard of this attacks and these possible improvements to hot wallet risks on the lightning network?


@mocacinno

Quite fascinating to speculate on what fees/tx would have to be to fund miners without the block rewards. What's also funny to think about is that the block rewards we're not only or maybe not even meant to be subsidizing miners but rather users willing to transact.
I agree with you that this is all speculation and things could go both ways. Like I said to @ABCbits, Bitcoin miners in the future, could be forced to find incredibly cheap energy sources, possibly lowering sats/vbite significantly, without compromising on network security.
Good points, thank you.

Hello Bitcoiners,

I think many of us have realised, especially after last year, that in the future plebs with lower stacks will be priced out of the main chain, at least for day-to-day transactions. So if we want Bitcoin to be a global transactional protocol we would need robust second layers.
So let’s say in 2032, when 99% of all Bitcoin are mined and Bitcoin miners will rely mainly on transactions fees, what will be the lowest amount of Bitcoin you will want to hold on chain. I think it will be higher then 3m sats (0,03BTC). So do you feel comfortable to hold this much on second layers like lightning right now? Are second layers robust enough now? Which one and why?
And don’t we need hardware wallet like setups for second layers like we do on the base chain? Especially considering in some countries 3m sats might be a year’s worth of salary right now, which you don’t want to hold all in just an app on your phone.

Or will higher Bitcoin prices also mitigate this transaction problem a little? As miners will be profitable at lower sats/vbite because 1 sat is worth way more?

How do you guys feel about scaling Bitcoin a a transaction layer