Bitcoin Forum
May 30, 2024, 02:37:32 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Bitcoin Adoption and the Scalability Problem. What can normal users do to help?  (Read 374 times)
squatter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1196


STOP SNITCHIN'


View Profile
March 18, 2018, 07:12:18 PM
 #21

The less you use the network the less load you put on  Grin

There's some truth to this. It's one of the natural strengths of the fee market. When demand spikes, fees naturally force users and businesses to be more efficient -- batching transactions, etc.

In that vein, overpaying (because of bad fee estimation) probably has noticeable network effects during periods of congestion. People should consciously consider the urgency of their payments. Don't pay $5 when the toll costs 25 cents.

You're suggesting that only 2 possible patterns in node topology can exist. That's false.

And you've chosen 2 topological examples that might cause a certain rate of failure. You've painted an incredibly biased picture by assuming there are limits that don't exist.

If only handful of well connected nodes with high up-time were to open channels with each other, both your scenarios won't happen.

Topology aside, he's got a point regarding the security model of LN. Parties must be online and private keys are required to update settlement transactions. I guess it worries me to think about Mastercard/Amex-level scale on the back of hot wallets.

Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2884
Merit: 2327


View Profile
March 18, 2018, 08:17:06 PM
 #22

If only handful of well connected nodes with high up-time were to open channels with each other, both your scenarios won't happen.
A well connected node is another word for hub and spoke...

Also, why don't you explain a topology that could exist in LN that would not result in LN payments failing due to LN peer node downtime? I don't think there is one.
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074



View Profile
March 18, 2018, 09:13:06 PM
 #23

If only handful of well connected nodes with high up-time were to open channels with each other, both your scenarios won't happen.
A well connected node is another word for hub and spoke...

Also, why don't you explain a topology that could exist in LN that would not result in LN payments failing due to LN peer node downtime? I don't think there is one.


I did

If only handful of well connected nodes with high up-time were to open channels with each other, both your scenarios won't happen.

Some nodes would be well connected, but not in a hub & spoke fashion.


This is not hypothetical, Lightning network is currently running and already beginning to resemble my description. 

Vires in numeris
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2884
Merit: 2327


View Profile
March 18, 2018, 09:56:27 PM
 #24

If only handful of well connected nodes with high up-time were to open channels with each other, both your scenarios won't happen.
A well connected node is another word for hub and spoke...

Also, why don't you explain a topology that could exist in LN that would not result in LN payments failing due to LN peer node downtime? I don't think there is one.


I did

If only handful of well connected nodes with high up-time were to open channels with each other, both your scenarios won't happen.

Some nodes would be well connected, but not in a hub & spoke fashion.


This is not hypothetical, Lightning network is currently running and already beginning to resemble my description. 
Quote from: Peter Todd on Twitter
Initial impressions of Lightning on testnet: [...] payments fail more often than not.[...]
(source)
Carlton Banks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 3074



View Profile
March 18, 2018, 11:09:54 PM
 #25

Be a part of the solution. Set up a Lightning node, open some channels with some other well connected nodes. But on testnet of course, mainnet Lightning is still only recommended for dedicated Bitcoin users that can afford to lose BTC in the event of unforeseen bugs.

Vires in numeris
Shenzou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 283


View Profile
March 19, 2018, 08:44:17 AM
 #26

I have reached a conclusion that Bitcoin has almost got to the highest adoption it can sustain and we can't get to a higher adoption without solving the scalability problem first. As:
Higher adoption ----> more transactions per second ----> higher tx fee/time ----> inability to do smaller transactions ----> less adoption.

We can see this happening when Steam stopped accepting bitcoin in December last year after the high surge in its transaction fees.

What I find weird is how slow things are going. SegWit adoption is low and LN is not activated yet. Even when LN is activated I don't know if it would solve things up.

What can we do to help?
What comes to my mind is that we should start using SegWit addresses for all our transactions. I think if more bitcoin users show interest in SegWit and LN it would encourage their adoption among wallets and other services.
Any other suggestions on how we as a community can help solve the scalability problem?

PS: Though technically it's not a technical question but I preferred to post it here and get useful replies rather than posting in bitcoin discussion and having to deal with all the spam.
Most of the bitcoin users don't care about the scalability of the bitcoin, they only care about its price, most of them use online wallets like blockchain and coinbase, and unless they start adapting segwit than the users won't bother sending their funds from there to a segwit supported wallet because they would have to pay for it, i don't think that even if we all start using segwit addresses the problem would be solved entierly, but LN might.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!