Litecoin segwit activation. What happened?

[bbc.reporter]

Has the activation of segwit also failed in litecoin? This site was posted in the forum http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

When I checked how many miners have signaled segwit activation the number was a small 3% of total miners. The litecoin community has said that it will be surely activated because they were so sure at that least 75% of the miners will cooperate. What happened?

I tried asking the same question in their announcement thread but no one answered.

[1715135026]

1715135026

[1715135026]

1715135026

[1715135026]

1715135026

[1715135026]

1715135026

[1715135026]

1715135026

[shyliar]

To soon to say. The number one pool utilizes custom software and is working on that. So what happened? Maybe wait a while more and you'll get a final answer. If your interested Charlie Lee will be involved in an AMA with Chinese miners later on tonight.

Edit: You might also be interested in this interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xM-r7D2EpIg

[shinratensei_]

The litecoin communities are not miners. I just like to call it troll by the litecoin community. I kind feel disappointed. 
You can start in the litecoin Reddit about it.

[ethereumhunter]

i think we need to wait a while before the activation can run smooth and working fine or maybe it is because of the increasing of bitcoin price? we don't know yet until there a clear statement from the dev about the activation. but i don't know about this, maybe i will waiting for next news and see what will happen.

[kiklo]

Segwit is a waste of time!

LTC already has 4X the Transaction Capacity of BTC.

BTC core pushed it as a solution to BTC unconfirmed transactions problems,
by adding segwit they make it easier to run their Offchain Lightening Network (Which is nothing but Banking & Fractional Reserves entering Crypto.)
BTC core wants to use LN to take control of the BTC network , by locking up the majority of BTC Forever.

LN freezes the amount of BTC on the BTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a BTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional BTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the BTC frozen on the BTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started.  
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
BTC        =  Gold

 

[Pursuer]

it is too soon to say anything about it, and signaling was recently started and miners have proven to be too slow because they probably check the code themselves before adopting it.

I read somewhere on reddit that apparently F2Pool announced that they will support SegWit on litecoin soon, although I don't know how reliable that news was.

in any case I hope we can see SegWit on litecoin soon, it is a very good experiment to see it in real action. and I will be a good way of making up minds about SegWit on bitcoin too.

[dwgscale11]

Segwit is a waste of time!

LTC already has 4X the Transaction Capacity of BTC.

BTC core pushed it as a solution to BTC unconfirmed transactions problems,
by adding segwit they make it easier to run their Offchain Lightening Network (Which is nothing but Banking & Fractional Reserves entering Crypto.)
BTC core wants to use LN to take control of the BTC network , by locking up the majority of BTC Forever.

LN freezes the amount of BTC on the BTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a BTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional BTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the BTC frozen on the BTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started.  
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
BTC        =  Gold

 

Good thing Segwit isn't being implemented as a scaling solution!

https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/

BU shills are something else...

[SyGambler]

I'm was wondering before about what kiklo said , like yeah why litecoin would try segwit ?? it's like a pure experiment to benefit bitcoin instead of litecoin and maybe that's why maybe miners aren't sure about what to do
anyways I bought some litecoins last week cause I thought that the news should affect the price soon 

[bbc.reporter]

To soon to say. The number one pool utilizes custom software and is working on that. So what happened? Maybe wait a while more and you'll get a final answer. If your interested Charlie Lee will be involved in an AMA with Chinese miners later on tonight.

Edit: You might also be interested in this interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xM-r7D2EpIg

Yes it is best to wait and see. The litecoin community has overhyped this on social media and led us into believing that segwit activation will come to consensus more quickly that bitcoin. It is still only at 3%. We should see it trending to 5% at least if there was some interest in it.

@dwscale11. I read the link you posted. Thank you. Can litecoin suffer from the same malleability attacks like in bitcoin?

[dhampir-D]

I hoped things would be more advanced in that direction. I see some comments on reddit pointing out as possible cause of this delay the interference of Bitcoin miners with political interests. I have not seen many arguments to support this thesis, but it seems to be a possibility to consider.

[European Central Bank]

i read that charlie lee is expecting two months before it's fully in the bag. like someone else said, the biggest pool is fiddling with its own software still. i kind of got the feeling he's willing to do anything to get it activated too.

[BitcoinHodler]

I'm was wondering before about what kiklo said , like yeah why litecoin would try segwit ?? it's like a pure experiment to benefit bitcoin instead of litecoin and maybe that's why maybe miners aren't sure about what to do
anyways I bought some litecoins last week cause I thought that the news should affect the price soon 

well litecoin is copy of bitcoin and it has all the features the same way. and as the developer of Litecoin has said if SegWit activates on LTC but not on bitcoin it will be the first time they are different.
but it is not just an experiment, Segwit actually has many benefits, i suggest reading more about it from unbiased resources, unfortunately there are too many lies about Segwit both supporting lies and lies against it.

[kiklo]

A meme says a thousand words. That's all there is to it. LTC miners are smart and they are also aware of what's happening in Bitcoin. They will not be pushed around by a dictator.

Totally Agreed.  

Segwit / LN  will directly compete with the Miners for Transactions fees, and the miners know it.


 

[shinratensei_]

http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

Code:

Segwit miner support	330 (5.97%)
Segwit start time	         01/28/2017 00:00:00
Segwit timeout time	 01/31/2018 00:00:01

It seems like possible for SegWit to get his activation on 2018. 10% at the end of February is real. 

[Spoetnik]

I'm was wondering before about what kiklo said , like yeah why litecoin would try segwit ?? it's like a pure experiment to benefit bitcoin instead of litecoin and maybe that's why maybe miners aren't sure about what to do
anyways I bought some litecoins last week cause I thought that the news should affect the price soon  

well litecoin is copy of bitcoin and it has all the features the same way. and as the developer of Litecoin has said if SegWit activates on LTC but not on bitcoin it will be the first time they are different.
but it is not just an experiment, Segwit actually has many benefits, i suggest reading more about it from unbiased resources, unfortunately there are too many lies about Segwit both supporting lies and lies against it.

You forgot about WHY Litecoin was created in the first place.

They changed the algo to stop mining exploitation and it did work.. for a while.
Don't forget when LTC came out it was not like how it is now.. SCAMMY.
back then there was not 1,000 ICO's a month coming out supported by greedy selfish ADD kidiot Investards flocking here.

Wanna bash a coin ? Then line up assholes to rag on Doge Coin the real shit coin clone.

If they wanted to ICO the first coin(s) that came out they could have people.
And you all should start doing your history before talking shit.

So..
If you think about it.. the very spirit of Litecoin was to implement shit BTC guys wouldn't.

[Spoetnik]

Doge coin ? yeah..
I was just pointing out the very real history of Litecoin.

Doge was created as a joke the dev said word for word before he abandoned it publicly.
Litecoin was a response to people exploiting Bitcoin with mining.
For a while it succeeded in this goal with SCRYPT.

No idea why you all love to talk shit so much about Litecoin.
Especially when you know so little about it.

It should be thanked as the project and the related miner coders contributed plenty.
I doubt you would have had any Doge coin or the other 1,000 scrypt clone shad it not been for LTC.
And it's point.. the implementation of stuff that can't get done on Bitcoin. (Such as changing the BTC hashing ALGO)

[kiklo]

http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

Code:

Segwit miner support	330 (5.97%)
Segwit start time	         01/28/2017 00:00:00
Segwit timeout time	 01/31/2018 00:00:01

It seems like possible for SegWit to get his activation on 2018. 10% at the end of February is real. 

Segwit needs 75% to activate on LTC, don't hold your breath til it gets there. 


 

[dwgscale11]

http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

Code:

Segwit miner support	330 (5.97%)
Segwit start time	         01/28/2017 00:00:00
Segwit timeout time	 01/31/2018 00:00:01

It seems like possible for SegWit to get his activation on 2018. 10% at the end of February is real. 

Segwit needs 75% to activate on LTC, don't hold your breath til it gets there. 


 

I will offer a 500 LTC bet that Segwit will be activated on LTC by the end of 2017.  Charlie Lee will hold escrow hehehehe

[Ayers]

Segwit is a waste of time!

LTC already has 4X the Transaction Capacity of BTC.

BTC core pushed it as a solution to BTC unconfirmed transactions problems,
by adding segwit they make it easier to run their Offchain Lightening Network (Which is nothing but Banking & Fractional Reserves entering Crypto.)
BTC core wants to use LN to take control of the BTC network , by locking up the majority of BTC Forever.

LN freezes the amount of BTC on the BTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a BTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional BTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the BTC frozen on the BTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started.  
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
BTC        =  Gold

 

yeah and they are not even using the full block limit, they have plenty of room for many transaction they don't need 8x with segwit, with the volume of transaction that litecoin is currently holding, it's need at best 1MB, it make sense that miners do not accept the soft fork

[shyliar]

Segwit / LN  will directly compete with the Miners for Transactions fees, and the miners know it.

While I don't disagree that some miners might think this way, it represents short sighted thinking that will have a detrimental affect on BTC and LTC. If adoption does not happen the LN will never be used, businesses based on it will simply go bankrupt.

If the LN exists thousands of transactions per second becomes possible. Not just the 2.5 per second that BTC is capable of or 10 that LTC is capable of. That means large scale adoption could actually happen. If adoption happens there will be more than enough income for both miners and LN service providers because cryptocurrency would be worth trillions not billions. This of course requires adoption.

You're suggesting as a competing service that the LN will destroy the settlement layer. That would be a little dumb of the LN  to bankrupt the miners that support the layer that allows the LN to exist. I doubt the LN providers would actually want to end their business by allowing the layer it's based off of to become insolvent.

If adoption does not happen the LN businesses will likely collapse. Cryptocurrency will continue being a niche business and mining will continue in it's current form.

It seems that miners have nothing to fear from advancing technologies. If they choose to not support them eventually a cryptocurrency capable of thousands of transactions likely will leave them behind. It's all about forward thinking and believing in the potential or limiting cryptocurrency to it's current hindered form.

[dwgscale11]

Segwit is a waste of time!

LTC already has 4X the Transaction Capacity of BTC.

BTC core pushed it as a solution to BTC unconfirmed transactions problems,
by adding segwit they make it easier to run their Offchain Lightening Network (Which is nothing but Banking & Fractional Reserves entering Crypto.)
BTC core wants to use LN to take control of the BTC network , by locking up the majority of BTC Forever.

LN freezes the amount of BTC on the BTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a BTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional BTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the BTC frozen on the BTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started.  
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
BTC        =  Gold

 

yeah and they are not even using the full block limit, they have plenty of room for many transaction they don't need 8x with segwit, with the volume of transaction that litecoin is currently holding, it's need at best 1MB, it make sense that miners do not accept the soft fork

More BU shills.
Good thing Segwit isn't being implemented as a scaling solution!

https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/

[topesis]

http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

Code:

Segwit miner support	330 (5.97%)
Segwit start time	         01/28/2017 00:00:00
Segwit timeout time	 01/31/2018 00:00:01

It seems like possible for SegWit to get his activation on 2018. 10% at the end of February is real. 

I know the support would grow as time pass but I won't go to 10% support figure by the end of February, to me it seems some Bitcoin miners are trying to play with some miners head and make them see some reasons not to support SegWit

[shyliar]

I know the support would grow as time pass but I won't go to 10% support figure by the end of February, to me it seems some Bitcoin miners are trying to play with some miners head and make them see some reasons not to support SegWit

Current support is 14.6% of the network for 73 out of the last 500 blocks. I think it looks like support will exceed your prediction of less than 10 percent by the end of February. Will be interesting to see where support ends up when pools that have stated they will update join in.

[andrei56]

The best thing to do right now it is to wait and see if it is ever activated, but as some have said, I don’t see how segwit can benefit LTC since it is bitcoin the one that needs to activate it, maybe they are trying to push the price up by activating segwit before bitcoin does.

[thejaytiesto]

Im not sure about, apparently not even CSV is still yet adopted by litecoin and CSV got adopted by bitcoin very quick.

CSV miner support since activation period start   658 (11.40%)

Why the fuck CSV was never adopted by litecoin? and what about BIP9?

I think litecoin is just tiny coin and miners are too lazy to get anything done.

[dwgscale11]

Im not sure about, apparently not even CSV is still yet adopted by litecoin and CSV got adopted by bitcoin very quick.

CSV miner support since activation period start   658 (11.40%)

Why the fuck CSV was never adopted by litecoin? and what about BIP9?

I think litecoin is just tiny coin and miners are too lazy to get anything done.

At $185 million market cap, I can promise you Litecoin is not a tiny coin. And miners certainly care about it...

[xorlogic]

https://coinidol.com/litecoin-segwit-new-frontier-for-blockchains/

Charlie Lee urges the Litecoin Mining community to support the Segregated Witness Activation proposal now and open the blockchain frontier to amazing new possibilities.

The Litecoin community has a chance to activate the Segregated Witness technology and open a new paradigm for blockchain technology. Charlie, founder and lead developer of Litecoin, urges the mining community to adopt his proposal and open the world to the new advantages that come with SegWit implementation.

[epitome]

People on the litecoin subreddit are going hard on it, telling people to mine on their phones and anything they can to push segwit, how is it being decided in the litecoin community?

Is it even possible to mine litecoin using your mobile let alone any coin.I am just a newbie when it comes to mining as i have never tried mining for a long time because my system do get over heated and i do not want to risky mining with it.

[European Central Bank]

Segwit / LN  will directly compete with the Miners for Transactions fees, and the miners know it.

While I don't disagree that some miners might think this way, it represents short sighted thinking that will have a detrimental affect on BTC and LTC. If adoption does not happen the LN will never be used, businesses based on it will simply go bankrupt.

if bitcoin carries on frozen in time then soon enough miners won't have anything to mine. something needs to kick in because i don't believe the people who really count, the users, will be interested in $10 fees.

[shyliar]

Im not sure about, apparently not even CSV is still yet adopted by litecoin and CSV got adopted by bitcoin very quick.

CSV miner support since activation period start   658 (11.40%)

Why the fuck CSV was never adopted by litecoin? and what about BIP9?

I think litecoin is just tiny coin and miners are too lazy to get anything done.

It's pretty straight forward really the new release just came out. It takes some time. If you take a look at the last 500 blocks 19.0% of the network is signalling support for csv (95 out of the last 500 blocks). That's a growing number. Maybe give it a little time.

[dinofelis]

It is in any case a nice example how it are THE MINERS who decide upon the protocol, isn't it ?  Not the non-mining nodes or anything.  The miners.

[dinofelis]

Segwit is a waste of time!

LTC already has 4X the Transaction Capacity of BTC.

BTC core pushed it as a solution to BTC unconfirmed transactions problems,
by adding segwit they make it easier to run their Offchain Lightening Network (Which is nothing but Banking & Fractional Reserves entering Crypto.)

I agree with you, about fractional banking.  But fractional banking is unavoidable, it is a property of any monetary system.  After all, fractional banking is nothing else but the creation of an IOU of the underlying.  It is the creation of a new monetary asset, which includes some vague promise of exchangability with the underlying.  But nothing stops this new asset from becoming a monetary asset in its own right, in which the exchange with the underlying is first not done often, and in the end, not even deemed necessary.  This is how the dollar did fractional banking with gold between 1914 and 1972, after which the link was severed totally.   In fact, exchanges are already doing fractional banking to an extend.  When the hassle of a block chain currency will be so much that nobody's bothering, whatever asset that "represents" such a crypto token will start living its life as his own asset.  And whenever it gets regulated, it becomes an ordinary fiat.

You can also do that with forks from bitcoin.  You can do it by creating altcoins.  This is why the wet dream of the "sound money doctrine" is ridiculous, it assumes a monopoly of one single currency for the currency market. 

So, there's nothing wrong with fractional banking, there's nothing wrong with the creation of new monetary assets, and it are unavoidable phenomena.

[shyliar]

It is in any case a nice example how it are THE MINERS who decide upon the protocol, isn't it ?  Not the non-mining nodes or anything.  The miners.

Right now it's an example of POOLS determining outcome (although far to early to say what the outcome will be) not miners. Some miners will move their hashing power to pools that support segwit.

As of this posting we have 15.4% of the network (77 out of the last 500 blocks) supporting segwit. That number will likely be close to 20 percent by Thursday and continues to grow.

[dinofelis]

It is in any case a nice example how it are THE MINERS who decide upon the protocol, isn't it ?  Not the non-mining nodes or anything.  The miners.

Right now it's an example of POOLS determining outcome (although far to early to say what the outcome will be) not miners. Some miners will move their hashing power to pools that support segwit.

I should have been clearer: miner deciding nodes.  Not "hardware slaves selling hash power to miner nodes (also known as pools)".  Those that decide upon which block to build, which transactions to include etc...

[shyliar]

Well done. That about covers it.

[alyssa85]

People on the litecoin subreddit are going hard on it, telling people to mine on their phones and anything they can to push segwit, how is it being decided in the litecoin community?

Most of litecoin is mined in China - and if Chinese miners are not sure about segwit for bitcoin, it is possible they arn't sure about it for litecoin too.

[coinling]

It is in any case a nice example how it are THE MINERS who decide upon the protocol, isn't it ?  Not the non-mining nodes or anything.  The miners.

Right now it's an example of POOLS determining outcome (although far to early to say what the outcome will be) not miners. Some miners will move their hashing power to pools that support segwit.

As of this posting we have 15.4% of the network (77 out of the last 500 blocks) supporting segwit. That number will likely be close to 20 percent by Thursday and continues to grow.

Actually longterm the money decides which direction Litecoin or any other coin will go.

Would be great to have prediction markets with a lot of volume out there already so we could bet on Litecoin With or Without Segwit.

Or bet on Bitcoin BU or Bitcoin Segwit...

And then we will see what the money decides.

In the end , miners will mine the most profitable coin and not decide against the market.
If so, they will loose money.

[Ayers]

Segwit is a waste of time!

LTC already has 4X the Transaction Capacity of BTC.

BTC core pushed it as a solution to BTC unconfirmed transactions problems,
by adding segwit they make it easier to run their Offchain Lightening Network (Which is nothing but Banking & Fractional Reserves entering Crypto.)
BTC core wants to use LN to take control of the BTC network , by locking up the majority of BTC Forever.

LN freezes the amount of BTC on the BTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a BTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional BTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the BTC frozen on the BTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started.  
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
BTC        =  Gold

 

yeah and they are not even using the full block limit, they have plenty of room for many transaction they don't need 8x with segwit, with the volume of transaction that litecoin is currently holding, it's need at best 1MB, it make sense that miners do not accept the soft fork

More BU shills.
Good thing Segwit isn't being implemented as a scaling solution!

https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/

it say that miners benefit from segwit, this is not completely true, miners would pay more fee with segwit to the centralization that it will carry with LN and all that crap, you also linked a bitcoin segwit not litecoin, bitcoin have a reason to grow over 1mb limit litecoin no

[bbc.reporter]

I do not know why some think that segwit is a useless upgrade for litecoin because it already can process 4x more of bitcoin's transactions. Segwit is not really a scaling solution but an upgrade to fix the malleablility issue and to open up the network for other layers to be built on top of it. Some say smart contracts will be possible under segwit.

[shyliar]

I do not know why some think that segwit is a useless upgrade for litecoin because it already can process 4x more of bitcoin's transactions. Segwit is not really a scaling solution but an upgrade to fix the malleablility issue and to open up the network for other layers to be built on top of it. Some say smart contracts will be possible under segwit.

Those are all good points that some just seem to want to ignore. The comments indicating miners don't want it because of lost fees is another one that's not logical. Litecoin miners make next to nothing on fees now. If smart contracts, the LN and other types of layers get built on top of it the price is going to go up. That increased value will increase profitability far more than any fees being earned. I guess cherry picking a single point and ignoring the big picture is important to some folks.

[andrei56]

I do not know why some think that segwit is a useless upgrade for litecoin because it already can process 4x more of bitcoin's transactions. Segwit is not really a scaling solution but an upgrade to fix the malleablility issue and to open up the network for other layers to be built on top of it. Some say smart contracts will be possible under segwit.

Those are all good points that some just seem to want to ignore. The comments indicating miners don't want it because of lost fees is another one that's not logical. Litecoin miners make next to nothing on fees now. If smart contracts, the LN and other types of layers get built on top of it the price is going to go up. That increased value will increase profitability far more than any fees being earned. I guess cherry picking a single point and ignoring the big picture is important to some folks.

But if litecoin miners are not earning much with things as they are now then they are going to earn even less if segwit it is activated, it is not about picking a single issue, it is about miners hurting their own interest with no apparent gain for themselves, so it is doubtful it’s going to happen.

[shinratensei_]

People on the litecoin subreddit are going hard on it, telling people to mine on their phones and anything they can to push segwit, how is it being decided in the litecoin community?

Most of litecoin is mined in China - and if Chinese miners are not sure about segwit for bitcoin, it is possible they arn't sure about it for litecoin too.

http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

It seems like more power from the miners to activate segwit in the middle of this year. The current result LTC SegWit has reached 19% signalling by the miners to activate SegWit. I may think if it will get activate in the Q3 of this year.

[kiklo]

People on the litecoin subreddit are going hard on it, telling people to mine on their phones and anything they can to push segwit, how is it being decided in the litecoin community?

Most of litecoin is mined in China - and if Chinese miners are not sure about segwit for bitcoin, it is possible they arn't sure about it for litecoin too.

http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

It seems like more power from the miners to activate segwit in the middle of this year. The current result LTC SegWit has reached 19% signalling by the miners to activate SegWit. I may think if it will get activate in the Q3 of this year.

Segwit miner support (percentage of segwit blocks signaling within the current activation period)   518 (7.73%)
This is the # that matters, still under 10%.
This has to reach 75% to activate segwit.


 

[kiklo]

I will offer a 500 LTC bet that Segwit will be activated on LTC by the end of 2017.  Charlie Lee will hold escrow hehehehe

So kiklo will you take dwgscale11's bet or not? He has challenged you to a 500 LTC bet that Segwit will be activated within the prescribed time. What say you? Many posters here think you're full of air.

Hmm, missed his post, I was busy in
Segwit on Bitcoin has Failed , BTC Core has Lost , The Miners have Won
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1788448.0

500 LTC would be ~$2000 US,
I would hate to have to hunt his ass down and take 2 grand out of his hide for nonpayment.

So we will do a Gentlemen's wager instead , that way he can keep his skin, when he loses.

Here is the Wager,

I bet 1 litecoin that Segwit will not be activated on Litecoin by Nov 15th, 2017.
Against 3 of you that want to give me a litecoin.  Enter your BTCtalk Name beside the Number, and we will consider the Gentleman's wager between us Valid.

#1 =>    Your Name Here
#2 =>    Your Name Here
#3 =>    Your Name Here


So if Segwit miner support is not at 75% activation on Nov 15th, 2017 , each of you will paid me 1 LTC for a total of 3 LTC combined before Dec 1st, 2017 .
If by some miracle or zombie apocalypse segwit is activated on Litecoin by Nov 15th, 2017, I will pay each of you 1 Litecoin before Dec 1st,2017 .

Only accepting 3 suckers, I means wagers.  

 

FYI:
The name that reposts this , must match the name entered beside the # to be Valid.
No Newbies accounts can enter into the wager. Only Full Members or Higher.

FYI2:
This is the number we will be watching for the 75% activation.
Segwit miner support (percentage of segwit blocks signaling within the current activation period)   518 (7.73%)
Disclaimer: If it is only 74% , you will lose. So be aware, I am telling you , you will lose if you make this wager with me.  

FYI3: No suckers/wagers will be accepted after Feb 20th, 2017.
(This is a valid contract and you will be held to it.)

[kiklo]

Little note, by placing your name in the above contract,

If you think you can stay anon, and welch on the wager,

I can use the contract to subpoena BTCtalk to get your real name and address.

So if you are thinking you can welch when you lose, I will out you name home address everything.  

 

FYI:
@INRI666 , is that serious enough for you? 

[John Titor]

#1 John Titor, would be up for a full 500 ltc bet though, I'd love some free money

[shyliar]

I do not know why some think that segwit is a useless upgrade for litecoin because it already can process 4x more of bitcoin's transactions. Segwit is not really a scaling solution but an upgrade to fix the malleablility issue and to open up the network for other layers to be built on top of it. Some say smart contracts will be possible under segwit.

Those are all good points that some just seem to want to ignore. The comments indicating miners don't want it because of lost fees is another one that's not logical. Litecoin miners make next to nothing on fees now. If smart contracts, the LN and other types of layers get built on top of it the price is going to go up. That increased value will increase profitability far more than any fees being earned. I guess cherry picking a single point and ignoring the big picture is important to some folks.

But if litecoin miners are not earning much with things as they are now then they are going to earn even less if segwit it is activated, it is not about picking a single issue, it is about miners hurting their own interest with no apparent gain for themselves, so it is doubtful it’s going to happen.

You misunderstand. Businesses are being built on the concept of the lightning network. It's the lightning network that potentially has some miners concerned when it comes to fees, not segwit. If usage of litecoin does not increase significantly these lightning network businesses will simply go bankrupt (because fees are so low). These businesses are being built on the assumption of adoption and millions of transactions per day. If adoption fails the LN serves no real purpose.

If the LN businesses actually do make money it will be because of large scale usage. That means adoption has happened. Blocks will be more valuable than they are now. Miners make more money as a result.

It all comes down to believing in the potential of cryptocurrency. For miners if adoption happens they win, If adoption fails the LN is not required and it's mining as usual.

[wavespump]

Most miners do not like segwit because the fee will be significantly reduced, they are selfish, so is everyone. They are innocent, but they will accept the best technology eventually. Because segwit the future, otherwise they can't win more customers' heart. Transactions are too dumb slowly.

[shyliar]

Most miners do not like segwit because the fee will be significantly reduced, they are selfish, so is everyone. They are innocent, but they will accept the best technology eventually. Because segwit the future, otherwise they can't win more customers' heart. Transactions are too dumb slowly.

Litecoin doesn't have significant fees. The idea that this should affect LTC is coming from Bitcoin thinking. It's flawed thinking in either case as I outlined above. Additionally, 18.2% of the network (91 out of the last 500 blocks) has signalled segwit. The number of supporters is growing and likely will continue growing.

[Chef Ramsay]

These miners have every incentive to want segwit in LTC: price is mooned for optimal bitcoin purchases or plenty of fiat to purchase a miner's hardware paradise. Maybe not daily, but week by week going forward we'll see the signalling % keep growing.

[bitcoinlitcoinbtcltc]

Litecoin is shit. Its dead. Dont expect a pump because of segwit. Even if CEOs of twitter, facebook and google + the presidents of all world powers simultaneously gave breaking news live speeches on all of the world's major TV networks, in which they announced the superiority of Litecoin above all humans and that LTC was the key to world peace, it still would not pump.

LTC is the biggest scam of all of crypto. Litecoiners have been accusing other coins, e.g. Ethereum and Monero of being "scams" for years, but those coins have dominated LTC and made it look like a pathetic child.

[dwgscale11]

I will offer a 500 LTC bet that Segwit will be activated on LTC by the end of 2017.  Charlie Lee will hold escrow hehehehe

So kiklo will you take dwgscale11's bet or not? He has challenged you to a 500 LTC bet that Segwit will be activated within the prescribed time. What say you? Many posters here think you're full of air.

Hmm, missed his post, I was busy in
Segwit on Bitcoin has Failed , BTC Core has Lost , The Miners have Won
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1788448.0

500 LTC would be ~$2000 US,
I would hate to have to hunt his ass down and take 2 grand out of his hide for nonpayment.

So we will do a Gentlemen's wager instead , that way he can keep his skin, when he loses.

Here is the Wager,

I bet 1 litecoin that Segwit will not be activated on Litecoin by Nov 15th, 2017.
Against 3 of you that want to give me a litecoin.  Enter your BTCtalk Name beside the Number, and we will consider the Gentleman's wager between us Valid.

#1 =>    Your Name Here
#2 =>    Your Name Here
#3 =>    Your Name Here


So if Segwit miner support is not at 75% activation on Nov 15th, 2017 , each of you will paid me 1 LTC for a total of 3 LTC combined before Dec 1st, 2017 .
If by some miracle or zombie apocalypse segwit is activated on Litecoin by Nov 15th, 2017, I will pay each of you 1 Litecoin before Dec 1st,2017 .

Only accepting 3 suckers, I means wagers.  

 

FYI:
The name that reposts this , must match the name entered beside the # to be Valid.
No Newbies accounts can enter into the wager. Only Full Members or Higher.

FYI2:
This is the number we will be watching for the 75% activation.
Segwit miner support (percentage of segwit blocks signaling within the current activation period)   518 (7.73%)
Disclaimer: If it is only 74% , you will lose. So be aware, I am telling you , you will lose if you make this wager with me.  

FYI3: No suckers/wagers will be accepted after Feb 20th, 2017.
(This is a valid contract and you will be held to it.)

Not even worth the bet for 1 ltc.

[kiklo]

#1 John Titor, would be up for a full 500 ltc bet though, I'd love some free money

No Lying ass Newbies Junior ,

Post with your real account that is at least a full member.

Also learn to read instructions newbie.

All 3 positions are still open. 

 

[kiklo]

Not even worth the bet for 1 ltc.

I think what you meant to say , was not worth 1 LTC, because Kiklo is going to make sure no one welchs on the wager.


 

FYI:
It is worth it to me, still waiting on 3 suckers to give me free LTC. 

[kiklo]

These miners have every incentive to want segwit in LTC: price is mooned for optimal bitcoin purchases or plenty of fiat to purchase a miner's hardware paradise. Maybe not daily, but week by week going forward we'll see the signalling % keep growing.

LOL, you have the perfect avatar name : Chef Ramsay

http://www.upi.com/Entertainment_News/2014/08/07/Gordon-Ramsay-fixer-of-other-peoples-Kitchen-Nightmares-nearing-bankruptcy/8411407412848/
According to a RadarOnline report, popular TV chef Gordon Ramsay is more than $50 million in debt.

Neither of you know how to invest and hold on to money. 

Activate Segwit on LTC and then Connect to LN.
Then people start locking up all of their LTC in place on the blockchain Forever, and LN makes all of the money off of Transactions fees and no one buys LTC onchain anymore, because LN offchain is faster & cheaper. LTC miners just put their own asses out of business.

Personally , I don't believe 75% of the LTC miners are that stupid , but time will tell.

 

[kiklo]

Little note, by placing your name in the above contract,

If you think you can stay anon, and welch on the wager,

I can use the contract to subpoena BTCtalk to get your real name and address.

So if you are thinking you can welch when you lose, I will out you name home address everything.  

 

FYI:
@INRI666 , is that serious enough for you?  

It will be taken seriously if you asked for an escrow and called the bet. It will be very exciting following the developments and all the drama this will bring us. Don't get me wrong, I'm not here trying to demean you. I find this forum very lively with everything that's going on in here.

What makes you think I trust the escrow agent,
I trust a contract that I can sue someone with ,
notice no one has accepted even a 1 LTC wager, so their faith in segwit activation for LTC is not as great as they made out.

 

[John Titor]

Little note, by placing your name in the above contract,

If you think you can stay anon, and welch on the wager,

I can use the contract to subpoena BTCtalk to get your real name and address.

So if you are thinking you can welch when you lose, I will out you name home address everything.  

 

FYI:
@INRI666 , is that serious enough for you?  

It will be taken seriously if you asked for an escrow and called the bet. It will be very exciting following the developments and all the drama this will bring us. Don't get me wrong, I'm not here trying to demean you. I find this forum very lively with everything that's going on in here.

What makes you think I trust the escrow agent,
I trust a contract that I can sue someone with ,
notice no one has accepted even a 1 LTC wager, so their faith in segwit activation for LTC is not as great as they made out.

 

If it meant you would stop clogging the forum with your inane garbage, I'd give you 10 ltc right now

[dwgscale11]

Little note, by placing your name in the above contract,

If you think you can stay anon, and welch on the wager,

I can use the contract to subpoena BTCtalk to get your real name and address.

So if you are thinking you can welch when you lose, I will out you name home address everything.  

 

FYI:
@INRI666 , is that serious enough for you?  

It will be taken seriously if you asked for an escrow and called the bet. It will be very exciting following the developments and all the drama this will bring us. Don't get me wrong, I'm not here trying to demean you. I find this forum very lively with everything that's going on in here.

What makes you think I trust the escrow agent,
I trust a contract that I can sue someone with ,
notice no one has accepted even a 1 LTC wager, so their faith in segwit activation for LTC is not as great as they made out.

 

If it meant you would stop clogging the forum with your inane garbage, I'd give you 10 ltc right now

Ignore him

[John Titor]

Little note, by placing your name in the above contract,

If you think you can stay anon, and welch on the wager,

I can use the contract to subpoena BTCtalk to get your real name and address.

So if you are thinking you can welch when you lose, I will out you name home address everything.  

 

FYI:
@INRI666 , is that serious enough for you?  

It will be taken seriously if you asked for an escrow and called the bet. It will be very exciting following the developments and all the drama this will bring us. Don't get me wrong, I'm not here trying to demean you. I find this forum very lively with everything that's going on in here.

What makes you think I trust the escrow agent,
I trust a contract that I can sue someone with ,
notice no one has accepted even a 1 LTC wager, so their faith in segwit activation for LTC is not as great as they made out.

 

If it meant you would stop clogging the forum with your inane garbage, I'd give you 10 ltc right now

Ignore him

I only wish ignoring made it so I didn't have to see his name at all, plus I still have to see his mentally challenged drivel in all the replies.    Am I doing it right?

[kiklo]

I only wish ignoring made it so I didn't have to see his name at all, plus I still have to see his mentally challenged drivel in all the replies.    Am I doing it right?

No you Newbie Dumbass,
you are too stupid to do it correctly .

Like so.

 

[kiklo]

@Dwgscale11  &  @John Titor

Maybe you two Gay Birds should go be alone together, no one wants to watch you make out.
Keep your affections private.




 

[kiklo]

Segwit is a waste of time!

LTC already has 4X the Transaction Capacity of BTC.

BTC core pushed it as a solution to BTC unconfirmed transactions problems,
by adding segwit they make it easier to run their Offchain Lightening Network (Which is nothing but Banking & Fractional Reserves entering Crypto.)
BTC core wants to use LN to take control of the BTC network , by locking up the majority of BTC Forever.

LN freezes the amount of BTC on the BTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a BTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional BTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the BTC frozen on the BTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started. 
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
BTC        =  Gold

 

[losh11]

Y'all have been spreading misinformation. Why are we, the Litecoin Dev team, adding SegWit?
We want Lightning Networks, Confidential transactions and other innovations.
SegWit allows us to implement these new innovations in a much more simpler manner.

Is it a scaling solution? No.
Are we trying to scale? No, absolutely not. We are nowhere near the point where Litecoin needs to increase transaction capacity.
Does that mean we shouldn't add SegWit?

No. The 'innovation' that SW allows severely outweighs this.

For one, I am looking forward to atomic swapping via lightning networks, where you can seamlessly convert Litecoin to Bitcoin.
This would pave way for cryptocurrencies to be used interchangeably, and simplify a lot of the UX.

[kiklo]

@losh11

Ok,

Explain why anyone will use LTC onchain, when it will be faster & cheaper to use it on LN.
How are the Miners going to stay in business as the Block rewards diminish and all of the fees are being consumed by LN.

How is that so called innovation going to help the current LTC miners feed their families?

Answer those questions!

or

Just be honest and admit it is a way to take over LTC by making mining completely unprofitable, unless you are LN.

 


FYI:
Segwit has already failed on BTC , it will never reach 95% needed for activation.
Segwit on Bitcoin has Failed , BTC Core has Lost , The Miners have Won
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1788448.0

[dwgscale11]

@losh11

Ok,

Explain why anyone will use LTC onchain, when it will be faster & cheaper to use it on LN.
How are the Miners going to stay in business as the Block rewards diminish and all of the fees are being consumed by LN.

How is that so called innovation going to help the current LTC miners feed their families?

Answer those questions!

or

Just be honest and admit it is a way to take over LTC by making mining completely unprofitable, unless you are LN.

 


FYI:
Segwit has already failed on BTC , it will never reach 95% needed for activation.
Segwit on Bitcoin has Failed , BTC Core has Lost , The Miners have Won
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1788448.0

Stick to ZEIT Kiklo lmaoooooooooo!!!
ZEIT HAHAHAHAHA

[shyliar]

Litecoin miners have no reason to be concerned about Segwit it's a great improvement. Some folks like to bring up the Lightning Network (which is coming with or without segwit) as a source of concern for miners because it will change the fee structure. This type of thinking assumes that businesses building the LN can survive on these extremely low fees without massive adoption of cryptocurrancy.

Businesses are being built on the concept of the lightning network. It's the lightning network that potentially has some miners concerned when it comes to fees, not segwit. If usage of litecoin does not increase significantly these lightning network businesses will simply go bankrupt (because fees are so low). These businesses are being built on the assumption of adoption and millions of transactions per day. If adoption fails the LN serves no real purpose.

If the LN businesses actually do make money it will be because of large scale usage. That means adoption has happened. Blocks will be more valuable than they are now. Miners make more money as a result. Instead of the pennies that miners currently earn on fees they will earn dollars on the increased value of these blocks.

Some folks will point out that more than 30 years from now that this might create a problem for miners. As if it's reasonable to assume that a miner will give up increasing current income by a large factor now because of what happens 30 years from now. Frankly it's likely some of these miners won't even be alive then.

It all comes down to believing in the potential of cryptocurrency. For miners if adoption happens they win now, If adoption fails the LN is not required and it's mining as usual.

We are currently at 22.6% of the network (113 out of the last 500 blocks) signalling segwit.

[dwgscale11]

Litecoin miners have no reason to be concerned about Segwit it's a great improvement. Some folks like to bring up the Lightning Network (which is coming with or without segwit) as a source of concern for miners because it will change the fee structure. This type of thinking assumes that businesses building the LN can survive on these extremely low fees without massive adoption of cryptocurrancy.

Businesses are being built on the concept of the lightning network. It's the lightning network that potentially has some miners concerned when it comes to fees, not segwit. If usage of litecoin does not increase significantly these lightning network businesses will simply go bankrupt (because fees are so low). These businesses are being built on the assumption of adoption and millions of transactions per day. If adoption fails the LN serves no real purpose.

If the LN businesses actually do make money it will be because of large scale usage. That means adoption has happened. Blocks will be more valuable than they are now. Miners make more money as a result. Instead of the pennies that miners currently earn on fees they will earn dollars on the increased value of these blocks.

Some folks will point out that more than 30 years from now that this might create a problem for miners. As if it's reasonable to assume that a miner will give up increasing current income by a large factor now because of what happens 30 years from now. Frankly it's likely some of these miners won't even be alive then.

It all comes down to believing in the potential of cryptocurrency. For miners if adoption happens they win now, If adoption fails the LN is not required and it's mining as usual.

We are currently at 22.6% of the network (113 out of the last 500 blocks) signalling segwit.

23.4% now. Looks like more miners going online in the pool LYSjBteSBU as we speak.

[kiklo]

Little note, by placing your name in the above contract,

If you think you can stay anon, and welch on the wager,

I can use the contract to subpoena BTCtalk to get your real name and address.

So if you are thinking you can welch when you lose, I will out you name home address everything.  

 

FYI:
@INRI666 , is that serious enough for you?  

It will be taken seriously if you asked for an escrow and called the bet. It will be very exciting following the developments and all the drama this will bring us. Don't get me wrong, I'm not here trying to demean you. I find this forum very lively with everything that's going on in here.

What makes you think I trust the escrow agent,
I trust a contract that I can sue someone with ,
notice no one has accepted even a 1 LTC wager, so their faith in segwit activation for LTC is not as great as they made out.

 

Then you're all talk and trolling. Why don't you declare a bet and make it open to all takers if you're so sure Segwit in LTC will not activate. You're also trying to avoid dwscale's open bet to you it seems.

Are you just a complete dumbass,

All he has to do is post my previous post with his name and the wager is on.
Here=>https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1782081.msg17859335#msg17859335

You stupid chickenshit jackass.

 

FYI:
Why don't you post enough to become a full member so your dumbass can give me an free LTC also.
Their are 3 Slots open for Suckers.

[kiklo]

Stick to ZEIT Kiklo lmaoooooooooo!!!
ZEIT HAHAHAHAHA

You know it is true,

Retards like you can amuse themselves. 


 

[Zer0Sum]

Don't forget when LTC came out it was not like how it is now.. SCAMMY.
back then there was not 1,000 ICO's a month coming out supported by greedy selfish ADD kidiot Investards flocking here.

You have a selective memory...
Crypto was always about greed and scams...
Let's see 2013... Gox, MCXNow, Mintpal, Cryptsy, ASIC scammers, Silk Road hitmen...

The "good old days" for Spoetnik.

[kiklo]

Question for LTC miners

If 75% of the LTC miners are dumb enough to activate segwit.

Once LN has Offchain LTC , that is faster & cheaper than your Onchain LTC,

Why would anyone ever bother to use your Onchain LTC?

I mention this , because when no one uses your Onchain LTC and the Block rewards are dimished, and LN is raking in all of the transaction fees,
How do you expect to make enough money to keep being an LTC miner?

The above questions is what all of these segwit fanatics completely ignore.

There is a reason segwit can't get higher than 30% on the BTC network,
their miners know LN is a hostile takeover of their coin , so they refuse segwit.

 

[NattyLiteCoin]

Kiklo, I'm not a segwit evangelist but I think you have to put it into context as a natural evolution of blickchain technology with specific focus on widespread global adoption. Segwit is not the holy grail, but it has its utility and LTC stepping up to the forefront is good for crypto. If this can't be seen then you're politically compromised. If your an opponent and it doesn't better serve crypto, then it will have empirically shown itself to not do so, and the next trial of technology will move forward. Also, the mining rewards will be relative. If BTC continues to grow, aside from  lock rewards, tx fees may go up an order of magnitude due to traffic and value against the USD, so I think the argument of miner fees being compromised is farfield.

Also, Charlie stated that segwit maybe activated regardless of 75% support, in any regard I've got 50LTC TO WAGER IF YOUR UP FOR IT.

[shyliar]

Question for LTC miners

If 75% of the LTC miners are dumb enough to activate segwit.

Once LN has Offchain LTC , that is faster & cheaper than your Onchain LTC,

Why would anyone ever bother to use your Onchain LTC?

I mention this , because when no one uses your Onchain LTC and the Block rewards are dimished, and LN is raking in all of the transaction fees,
How do you expect to make enough money to keep being an LTC miner?

The above questions is what all of these segwit fanatics completely ignore.

There is a reason segwit can't get higher than 30% on the BTC network,
their miners know LN is a hostile takeover of their coin , so they refuse segwit.

 

As I explained above the concern about fees comes from the Lightning Network not Segwit. The LN can be activated without segwit so not sure why you think it's important to segwit signalling. Also your question why miners don't need to fear the LN was also answered. Please feel free to read and respond.

Maybe you can explain why you think the pennies LTC miners earn on fees should encourage them to abandon the potential to scale and the resulting increase in value if adoption occurs. You might also explain why if adoption fails the LN network is even a threat since all the providers will go bankrupt.

[kiklo]

Kiklo, I'm not a segwit evangelist but I think you have to put it into context as a natural evolution of blickchain technology with specific focus on widespread global adoption. Segwit is not the holy grail, but it has its utility and LTC stepping up to the forefront is good for crypto. If this can't be seen then you're politically compromised. If your an opponent and it doesn't better serve crypto, then it will have empirically shown itself to not do so, and the next trial of technology will move forward. Also, the mining rewards will be relative. If BTC continues to grow, aside from  lock rewards, tx fees may go up an order of magnitude due to traffic and value against the USD, so I think the argument of miner fees being compromised is farfield.

Also, Charlie stated that segwit maybe activated regardless of 75% support, in any regard I've got 50LTC TO WAGER IF YOUR UP FOR IT.

Save your Wager and give it to the LTC miners you are putting out of business by pushing segwit.
They are going to need it.

Because you did not answer the question,
how are they going to make money when all of the transactions are on LN?

 

[kiklo]

Question for LTC miners

If 75% of the LTC miners are dumb enough to activate segwit.

Once LN has Offchain LTC , that is faster & cheaper than your Onchain LTC,

Why would anyone ever bother to use your Onchain LTC?

I mention this , because when no one uses your Onchain LTC and the Block rewards are dimished, and LN is raking in all of the transaction fees,
How do you expect to make enough money to keep being an LTC miner?

The above questions is what all of these segwit fanatics completely ignore.

There is a reason segwit can't get higher than 30% on the BTC network,
their miners know LN is a hostile takeover of their coin , so they refuse segwit.

 

As I explained above the concern about fees comes from the Lightning Network not Segwit. The LN can be activated without segwit so not sure why you think it's important to segwit signalling. Also your question why miners don't need to fear the LN was also answered. Please feel free to read and respond.

Maybe you can explain why you think the pennies LTC miners earn on fees should encourage them to abandon the potential to scale and the resulting increase in value if adoption occurs. You might also explain why if adoption fails the LN network is even a threat since all the providers will go bankrupt.

Whether you know it or not you stated an OUTRIGHT LIE.
This is a LIE =>LN can be activated without segwit

A LN that is TRUSTLESS, which is what they are Promising , CAN NOT BE ACTIVATED WITHOUT SEGWIT!!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5dt8tz/confused_is_segwit_needed_for_lightning_network/

However, without segwit or another malleability fix, LN channels have to deal with situations where transactions get mutated ("malleated"), which makes them get stuck at various steps.
Preventing them from getting stuck permanently requires either introducing trust (which we don't want to do) or setting some annoying timeouts that limit the efficiency of channels.

So if segwit fails to be activated which it will, and you use LN without segwit , their is a very real Chance your BTC gets Locked forever with no way to retrieve it.
That is funny.  

Now we know why they are not running LN, it loses the BTC and makes it irretrievable.  


 

OBSERVE the THUNDER NETWORK (LN Clone) at least they ADMIT the TRUTH.

Thunder Network (At least they admit they need segwit.)  
https://blog.blockchain.com/2016/05/16/announcing-the-thunder-network-alpha-release/

Until both CSV and SegWit are implemented on the bitcoin blockchain, transactions are not enforceable at the bitcoin protocol level.
So, the current Thunder prototype is best suited for transactions among a trusted network of users.
Try this amongst your dev team or amongst your trusted internet friends, but don’t use it for real payments.
Remember: this is alpha testing software.

[kiklo]

FYI:
Even after the LTC miners refuse to activate Segwit , it is not over, which shows Charlie has taken a payoff to shit the Litecoin miners.

http://www.newsbtc.com/2017/02/17/charlie-lee-potentially-enforcing-litecoin-segwit-activation-bitcoiners-concerned/

To make matters even worse, Charlie Lee mentioned how there as an alternative plan.
Even if there is no miner consensus, he can still force SegWit activation for litecoin.
Albeit Charlie Lee did not elaborate on this statement, it is a very worrisome thought.
No one knows for sure how a soft fork would be forced upon the community, though.
Then again, it is not something we should ever hope to experience either.  

 


FYI:
I guess Litecoin is going to have to be renamed CharlieCoin, if he pulls off a FORCED ACTIVATION!!

FYI2:  Charlie is planning to Change the Proof of Work and Kill all of your Scrypt Miners, and make you Change PoW Algorithms .  
https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5uf679/charlie_lee_people_dont_realize_what_segwit_is/ddtrbxe/

If you are talking about changing the POW then I have to notice it is a risky, expensive and difficult-to-coordinate strategy that may not work.
For one, the hard fork could fail to gain consensus.
For another, even if the POW changes, large miners are arguably the best positioned people to quickly deploy hardware that executes the new POW

[peekabootoo]

without segwit and L.N. litecoin will slowly die anyway  ...  it is not profitable to mine, However ! it does have a secure network and it is faster than btc ( along with many others )

the could be !  saviour ! ... segwit / L.N.

Keep btc politics out.......................Let Litecoin make its own choice and walk its own path... its evolution, its advancing crypto... lets see where it takes us   

litecoin miners currently have nothing to lose ( price / ratio consistently dropping , block rewards halving, difficulty rising ) But these miners have lots to gain 

if it doesn't workout then at least its been tried, so miners move to a more profitable coin to mine .. as miners do !
the only loser if it works out is btc losing yet more market to an ALT ( or is this the problem )   

[maku]

The litecoin community has said that it will be surely activated because they were so sure at that least 75% of the miners will cooperate. What happened?

IIRC Same thing happened to bitcoin before.

Bitcoin community was euphoric about SegWit and everyone thought that LN and SegWit will be reality withing a month after signalling will start.
I suspect that it is tht bad press and propaganda of bitcoin anti SegWit front ebbed away that initial enthusiasm of LTC community.
Well, I thought that LTC users form more unitary community, maybe I was wrong.

[kiklo]

Kiklo, I'm not a segwit evangelist but I think you have to put it into context as a natural evolution of blickchain technology with specific focus on widespread global adoption. Segwit is not the holy grail, but it has its utility and LTC stepping up to the forefront is good for crypto. If this can't be seen then you're politically compromised. If your an opponent and it doesn't better serve crypto, then it will have empirically shown itself to not do so, and the next trial of technology will move forward. Also, the mining rewards will be relative. If BTC continues to grow, aside from  lock rewards, tx fees may go up an order of magnitude due to traffic and value against the USD, so I think the argument of miner fees being compromised is farfield.

Also, Charlie stated that segwit maybe activated regardless of 75% support, in any regard I've got 50LTC TO WAGER IF YOUR UP FOR IT.

Save your Wager and give it to the LTC miners you are putting out of business by pushing segwit.
They are going to need it.

Because you did not answer the question,
how are they going to make money when all of the transactions are on LN?

 

Why are you avoiding the bet? I thought you were so confident that Segwit won't be activated in Litecoin? Maybe you're just trolling because you have a lot of free time.

Your pussy ass butt buddy, would not accept even 1 LTC bet.

Alright pussy boy ,

You want a bet , to hell with Crypto ,

Let's Bet 20 Million US $ , PM me your name & address & Contact Info and I will have my Attorney draw up the Papers.
And your ass had better be able to show the money shithead!

 

[kiklo]

without segwit and L.N. litecoin will slowly die anyway   ...  it is not profitable to mine, However ! it does have a secure network and it is faster than btc ( along with many others )

the could be !  saviour ! ... segwit / L.N.

Keep btc politics out.......................Let Litecoin make its own choice and walk its own path... its evolution, its advancing crypto... lets see where it takes us  

litecoin miners currently have nothing to lose ( price / ratio consistently dropping , block rewards halving, difficulty rising ) But these miners have lots to gain  

if it doesn't workout then at least its been tried, so miners move to a more profitable coin to mine .. as miners do !
the only loser if it works out is btc losing yet more market to an ALT ( or is this the problem )  

Groestlcoin has already activated Segwit , where is LN supporting them,
LN is not connecting with Groestlcoin, because all they really care about is BTC.


 

[cryptohunter]

I was very sure that segwit and LN was great for LTC before reading all of this.

However now...

More worrying is how could one person (even the the father of LTC) force changes through? seems impossible?
 
Even if he owns millions and millions of them this is not a pos coin so that will not help him would it?

Could he be considering POS to mitigate the issue kiklo mentions with no fees to keep LTC going after pow rewards run out?


Who here can speculate how this can even be done without miners going for it?

How can anything be altered at all without consensus approval through upgrading to the new wallets?

Why does he want algo change after all the investment in scrypt asics?

I like LTC and this is interesting times. I only hope LTC is not going to get destroyed over this.

[peekabootoo]

without segwit and L.N. litecoin will slowly die anyway   ...  it is not profitable to mine, However ! it does have a secure network and it is faster than btc ( along with many others )

the could be !  saviour ! ... segwit / L.N.

Keep btc politics out.......................Let Litecoin make its own choice and walk its own path... its evolution, its advancing crypto... lets see where it takes us  

litecoin miners currently have nothing to lose ( price / ratio consistently dropping , block rewards halving, difficulty rising ) But these miners have lots to gain  

if it doesn't workout then at least its been tried, so miners move to a more profitable coin to mine .. as miners do !
the only loser if it works out is btc losing yet more market to an ALT ( or is this the problem )  

Groestlcoin has already activated Segwit , where is LN supporting them,
LN is not connecting with Groestlcoin, because all they really care about is BTC.


 

what is groestlcoin.. never heard of it and i would think many others haven't either.. however litecoin is pretty well known and used

but you did make one thing very clear to me
.......................................

all they really care about is btc             litecoin is not btc...    keep btc politics out

and another link you posted up.. with concerns..

 ( http://www.newsbtc.com/2017/02/17/charlie-lee-potentially-enforcing-litecoin-segwit-activation-bitcoiners-concerned/ )

whether charlie wants the best for ltc or has sold out .. it should be activated and seen, as its only some of the btc brigade and their influence on pools that wants it stopped.. so all they care about is btc which must mean its bad for them.

so it must be good for us the litecoin miners

litecoin ,segwit activation....    bitcoiners concerned..........  again litecoin is not bitcoin.. keep the bitcoin politics out ( are bitcoiners worried that it might work or does work, if it works its bad for btc, yet another nail ,  its not being accepted on bitcoin network so should not concern them....   and if it doesn't work then fine its of no loss to the btc crowd, having been tried and tested the litecoin miners proudly move to a profitable coin to mine, because we all know its not profitable to mine ltc. ( unless you have free electricity  ).. so its not about the money for most ltc miners, its about evolution and freedom

anything thing that maybe good ( increased user base, increased investments, market price, speed, etc )   for another coin / network is bad for btc ( btc loses market share ) ( btc bleeds ) and as you have clearly pointed out... its all about btc..

again you make your point/view very clear... its about bitcoins and nothing else..

let litecoin do its own thing, walk its own path.. let litecoin be free from btc politics, let litecoin activate segwit, lets see how it works out.... its litecoins freedom of choice...   or are btc controllers really that worried.

[NattyLiteCoin]

Are you a miner or operate a large scale mining pool? Why do you care so much? Also, Low Transaction fees is a fundamental goal crypto-currency, are you for higher transaction fees?

And I did answer question, I stated that your immediate concern of your primary argument is far-field and should carry no bearing to the immediate integration of segwit. Maybe a decade downstream or more when block rewards are 1.5265BTC / 3.125 LTC, there's a discussion, but segwit will have served its purpose (whether it succeeds or not) and there will be another evolutionary blockchain element that will fulfill shortcomings at that time.

[kiklo]

Are you a miner or operate a large scale mining pool? Why do you care so much? Also, Low Transaction fees is a fundamental goal crypto-currency, are you for higher transaction fees?

And I did answer question, I stated that your immediate concern of your primary argument is far-field and should carry no bearing to the immediate integration of segwit. Maybe a decade downstream or more when block rewards are 1.5265BTC / 3.125 LTC, there's a discussion, but segwit will have served its purpose (whether it succeeds or not) and there will be another evolutionary blockchain element that will fulfill shortcomings at that time.

Why do you want segwit & LN activated , where it can put the miners out of work and give control of the coin completely to LN.
I am against LN completely controlling a coin with an offchain fractional reserves style system, if I wanted fraud banking like the current system, I would have stayed out of crypto.

Segwit will fail and the miners will keep their jobs and we keep those asshole bankers out of crypto.

Observe 
Segwit miner support (percentage of segwit blocks signaling within the current activation period)   261 (18.91%)

Litecoin miner are changing their vote , & voting against segwit
Segwit miner support within the last 24 hours (last 576 blocks)   97 (16.84%)


 

[NattyLiteCoin]

It didn't even take a 10 second relationship with google to quell your fear of fractional reserve and the LN.

It's not possible with Lightning. For each satoshi on the Lightning network, at least one satoshi on the Bitcoin network is tied up and unspendable. Some other hypothetical off-chain systems could allow for fractional reserve. A sidechain could be fractional-reserve in the sense that there are more "bitcoins" on the sidechain than can actually be transferred back to Bitcoin proper, though typically this will mean that the sidechain's security has somehow failed.

[kiklo]

Groestlcoin has already activated Segwit , where is LN supporting them,
LN is not connecting with Groestlcoin, because all they really care about is BTC.


 

what is groestlcoin.. never heard of it and i would think many others haven't either..

LN could work with them , since they foolishly activated segwit.
Then after LN destroys them you would all know the truth.  

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/groestlcoin/

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=525926.0

http://www.groestlcoin.org/

http://www.groestlcoin.org/forum/

 

[kiklo]

It didn't even take a 10 second relationship with google to quell your fear of fractional reserve and the LN.

It's not possible with Lightning. For each satoshi on the Lightning network, at least one satoshi on the Bitcoin network is tied up and unspendable. Some other hypothetical off-chain systems could allow for fractional reserve. A sidechain could be fractional-reserve in the sense that there are more "bitcoins" on the sidechain than can actually be transferred back to Bitcoin proper, though typically this will mean that the sidechain's security has somehow failed.

I see the problem , you lack the ability to think for yourself and need Google.
Kind of proves
Pro Segit Supporters (No Brain whatsoever)


Theymos admits that other side chains can allow fractional reserves,
LN is only 1 software update from also allowing fractional reserves for the LN designers.
LN is a side chain , so think about it.

How do you Counterfeit LTC on LN.

Option 1 :
Form a group of collusion between the Miners that control 51%,
Send 5000 LTC to an address. Now follow the steps on LN to Lock up that 5000 LTC on the Blockchain.
Whether LN requires 1 or 6 confirmations , as soon as LN confirms the representation of LN notes match your amount.
You and your colluding friends, rewrite the blockchain and include a transaction moving that 5000 LTC to another address before the lock took place.
You now still have your 5000 LTC Free & Clear Onchain, and a representation value of 5000 LTC Offchain on LN .(Which you can use for LN transactions forever.)

LTC Onchain Transactions ended Counterfeiting , LN Offchain Transactions will bring Counterfeiting into Crypto.  

Study History, this is exactly how banking was started

LN is offchain , meaning it can never actually be a LTC, when can only truly exist ONCHAIN.

LN NOTES are only a Representation of the value of a LTC Nothing Else.

LN freezes the amount of LTC on the LTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a LTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional LTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the LTC frozen on the LTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started.  
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
LTC        =  Gold

Class Dismissed!    

 

How to Steal LN Funds from the LN WhitePaper itself.

https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf
Page 49 thru 51  

Improper Timelocks
Participants must choose timelocks with sucient amounts of time.  If insuf-
 cient time is given, it is possible that timelocked transactions believed to
be invalid will become valid, enabling coin theft by the counterparty.  There
is a trade-o  between longer timelocks and the time-value of money.  When
writing wallet and Lightning Network application software, it is necessary
to ensure that sucient time is given and users are able to have their trans-
actions enter into the blockchain when interacting with non-cooperative or
malicious channel counterparties

9.2    Forced Expiration Spam
Forced expiration of many transactions may be the greatest systemic risk
when using the Lightning Network.  If a malicious participant creates many
channels and forces them all to expire at once, these may overwhelm block
data capacity, forcing expiration and broadcast to the blockchain.  The re-
sult  would  be  mass  spam  on  the  bitcoin  network.   The  spam  may  delay
transactions to the point where other locktimed transactions become valid

9.3    Coin Theft via Cracking
As parties must be online and using private keys to sign, there is a possibility
that, if the computer where the private keys are stored is compromised, coins
will  be  stolen  by  the  attacker.   While  there  may  be  methods  to  mitigate
the threat for the sender and the receiver, the intermediary nodes must be
online and will likely be processing the transaction automatically. For this
reason,  the  intermediary  nodes  will  be  at  risk  and  should  not  be  holding
a  substantial  amount  of  money  in  this  \hot  wallet."   Intermediary  nodes
which have better security will likely be able to out-compete others in the
long run  and  be able to  conduct greater transaction volume due to  lower
fees.  Historically, one of the largest component of fees and interest in the
 nancial system are from various forms of counterparty risk { in Bitcoin it
is possible that the largest component in fees will be derived from security
risk premiums.
A Funding Transaction may have multiple outputs with multiple Com-
mitment Transactions, with the Funding Transaction key and some Commit-
ment Transactions keys stored oine.  It is possible to create an equivalent
of a \Checking Account" and \Savings Account" by moving funds between
outputs  from  a  Funding  Transaction,  with  the  \Savings  Account"  stored
oine and requiring additional signatures from security services.

FYI:
Since you have chosen Theymos for your authority figure.
Do you agree with his idea of adding PoS to Bitcoin?  
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1654457

[NattyLiteCoin]

You should pray for the LN to be implemented so you can exploit it and be rich.

Bitcoin is not PoS, nor should it ever be.

[kiklo]

You should pray for the LN to be implemented so you can exploit it and be rich.

LN will only make the Bankers that collect all of the Fees Rich.
No one else will profit enough to matter.

Bitcoin is not PoS, nor should it ever be.

Cool , you can think for yourself.  

You decided you did not agree with everything Theymos said.
How can you fault me for not agreeing with the Pro segwitters.  

Especially if you can use Logic, everything I am saying rings truthful.

 

[NattyLiteCoin]

I don't know shit about theymos other than he's polarizing and has a shit ton of Bitcoin. I do know a little about Charlie Lee, enough to know his dedication to satoshi's vision. So while there may be theoretical shortcomings of blockchain solutions that may materialize by latent bad actors, it will still be an important step to a more robust system.

[dwgscale11]

To all BU shills, for the last time, there'll be a balance with LN and litecoin transaction fees there.  Wake up.
If the litecoin fees are too low, it likely won't make sense to keep large LN channels open as that also means there's very little to be gained from routing fees. You do need a secure computer online to route LN payments through your channels, even if keeping the channels open doesn't require an online computer all the time.
When litecoin fees are high, there's a large incentive to optimize your channels and make sure they're open and active (that is routing payments) so that you can profit from offering people cheaper payments than litecoin itself. This means more and more people will pay through LN and transaction pressure on litecoin blocks will drop, causing the fee to drop too.
Between these two, there'll be a point of balance that'll be the actual fee level in litecoin. This is the natural market balance that will form.

[coinphilosopher]

LN, in my opinion, is only a micro-transaction/micropayment solution. It is the same thing like a prepaid card - only that the prepaid card issuer cannot run away with your money. At least not that easy.

So I consider LN an improvement to centralized wallet-to-wallet transactions (e.g. coinbase wallet to other coinbase wallet).

The good thing is that we have plenty of altcoins that can test different scenarios between the extremes "LN for nearly all transactions" and "only on-chain transactions".

Apart from that, Segwit would also facilitate Atomic Cross Chain transfers - no more shady exchanges (Cryptsy!) needed. That would immensely benefit all altcoins out there.

PS: Litecoin adoption seems to have stalled a bit but is pretty good (17-19%) as it's only the second activation period and there is plenty of time still.

[DarkStar1O9]

Now getting close to 60% and higher

[dinofelis]

To all BU shills, for the last time, there'll be a balance with LN and litecoin transaction fees there.  Wake up.
If the litecoin fees are too low, it likely won't make sense to keep large LN channels open as that also means there's very little to be gained from routing fees. You do need a secure computer online to route LN payments through your channels, even if keeping the channels open doesn't require an online computer all the time.
When litecoin fees are high, there's a large incentive to optimize your channels and make sure they're open and active (that is routing payments) so that you can profit from offering people cheaper payments than litecoin itself. This means more and more people will pay through LN and transaction pressure on litecoin blocks will drop, causing the fee to drop too.
Between these two, there'll be a point of balance that'll be the actual fee level in litecoin. This is the natural market balance that will form.

The problem with that is that it doesn't allow miners to squeeze all transactions in a small block, and have users fight for the little room there is to be able to move their funds.  Unlimited blocks give you the same problem, but then, unlimited blocks is just a lure to get very limited blocks and no segwit.
We all know, that something with a hard limit on its supply (like the 21 million coins in bitcoin) can give rise to very high prices.  A hard limit on the amount of transactions will lead also to very high prices (fees).  But then, there shouldn't be any other way to transact like off-chain.

To the ideal to rip off users, are:
1) small blocks
2) LN

We then have two types of industrials that get the money the users are paying: miners and LN banks.  LN banks, most probably, will be exchanges, which have big wallets and can keep open a lot of channels to their customers and between them.  They are the natural LN hubs.  Exchanges, under LN, are going to become the new Citybank.  They are already in the process of becoming regularized as a genuine bank.

The small blocks make that there are huge fees for on-chain transactions and settlements of LN channels.  LN makes that nobody complains, until most are locked up in channels to a few banking hubs.  Then, these banking hubs can increase their LN fees almost to the level of the (very high) settlement fees on chain.  You are locked in, in any case, so you better pay, because otherwise you have to pay the settlement fee, if ever your settlement transaction can get through.

Miners can determine the amount of spam needed to squeeze the on-chain blocks and fees to significant heights, and then the users are at the merci of the LN banks.  So, essentially, you open a LN link to your exchange/bank like you open a bank account, you sign a contract and all that, and then you can use it.  The settlement would also most probably happen with a lot of paperwork.  Like with a normal bank.

Miners are keeping off LN for the moment, because they don't see why they should share the lucrative squeezing of the fee market with newcomers in the field, that *don't need so much investment in ASICS*.  Miners are put on the losing side of control, because LN banks can swiftly become banks, or leave the space by simply selling off their stash.  Miners are invested longer term in the coin with their hardware.  They don't know how the distribution key of the money they suck off users will be distributed between them and the LN banks/exchanges.