Share your opinions of Lightning

[Nathan047]

I've done a little bit of reading about the potential that we will get lightning. I also read a little bit about lightning and its benefits, but could those more knowledgeable then me explain how you expect this to turn out and whether you prefer lightning or not; along with all the pros and cons of lightning.

Edit: Clarification

[1715279886]

1715279886

[1715279886]

1715279886

[1715279886]

1715279886

[1715279886]

1715279886

[1715279886]

1715279886

[gotya1]

I have a feeling that Lightning will pass. It'll bring some new features but I also think that the increase in blockchain size will hurt hobbyists running their own nodes.

[achow101]

Lightning is not the same as segwit2x. Lightning does not need segwit2x to happen, it only needs segwit which has already activated.

[razzbee]

Well then it sounds good

[Wind_FURY]

Lightning is not the same as segwit2x. Lightning does not need segwit2x to happen, it only needs segwit which has already activated.

This should be hammered in the newbies' heads. There is a lot of misinformation going around that Segwit2x is a mandatory hard fork. Another piece of information that newbies should know is Segwit2x does not include replay protection. I am sure many users will lose their Bitcoins because they either did not know what is going on, or because they did not take the time to read about the "situation" on November.

[BitcoinSupremo]

Lightning is not the same as segwit2x. Lightning does not need segwit2x to happen, it only needs segwit which has already activated.

Does this mean it will pass since segwit is already activated ? If it does what will be the true impact on the Bitcoin network ? Personally I have always been a fan of no changes to the original Bitcoin network I found back in late 2013 when I first learned about bitcoin but if change is good for all of us then I agree to this change.

[achow101]

Does this mean it will pass since segwit is already activated ?

Yes. The Lightning Network will be deployed on the main network without 2x. It only needs segwit which has already activated. It is not a consensus rule change so it does not require a fork and does not need anything to make it "pass".

If it does what will be the true impact on the Bitcoin network ?

It will significantly increase the transaction capacity as many recurring small payments can use the lightning network instead of having on chain transactions for all of those transactions.

[Wind_FURY]

I believe that there are many who are still uninformed or misinformed like BitcoinSupremo. Even though he is a hero member, he still needs to be updated with the latest news.

achow101, maybe there is good reason to make sticky threads about what Segwit2x is, and for neutrality's sake why it is good or bad and why there is a need for replay protection.

[Carlton Banks]

achow101, maybe there is good reason to make sticky threads about what Segwit2x is, and for neutrality's sake why it is good or bad and why there is a need for replay protection.

Well, the S2x advocates are arguing that those developing for the "weaker" chain are those responsible for making the changes to ensure replay protection. But they're not trying to force everyone to "upgrade", this is like totally a free choice to choose their 51% attack alternate blockchain, lol

[xFiber]

Does this mean it will pass since segwit is already activated ?

Yes. The Lightning Network will be deployed on the main network without 2x. It only needs segwit which has already activated. It is not a consensus rule change so it does not require a fork and does not need anything to make it "pass".

If it does what will be the true impact on the Bitcoin network ?

It will significantly increase the transaction capacity as many recurring small payments can use the lightning network instead of having on chain transactions for all of those transactions.

So if lightning network doesn't need segwit 2x to function on the the main segwit network. Why did the 2x proposal go through in the first place if it doesn't have replay protection. Unless I'm missing something obvious.

[TryNinja]

Does this mean it will pass since segwit is already activated ?

Yes. The Lightning Network will be deployed on the main network without 2x. It only needs segwit which has already activated. It is not a consensus rule change so it does not require a fork and does not need anything to make it "pass".

If it does what will be the true impact on the Bitcoin network ?

It will significantly increase the transaction capacity as many recurring small payments can use the lightning network instead of having on chain transactions for all of those transactions.

So if lightning network doesn't need segwit 2x to function on the the main segwit network. Why did the 2x proposal go through in the first place if it doesn't have replay protection. Unless I'm missing something obvious.

The only way we found to put together enought hash power to activate Segwit was with the NYA agreement, which was signed by miners that wanted the 2x part. Core never agreed with that, but they are grateful - only - for Segwit.

It was something like "we only agree with that if you accept our conditions";

[BenOnceAgain]

Lightning is not the same as segwit2x. Lightning does not need segwit2x to happen, it only needs segwit which has already activated.

This should be hammered in the newbies' heads. There is a lot of misinformation going around that Segwit2x is a mandatory hard fork. Another piece of information that newbies should know is Segwit2x does not include replay protection. I am sure many users will lose their Bitcoins because they either did not know what is going on, or because they did not take the time to read about the "situation" on November.

I agree with this.  The prospect of uninformed users losing their BTC because of the lack of replay protection is very real.  A strong communications campaign needs to take place to inform users, in plain and simple terms, about this fork, the reason that S2x should not be implemented in core, the fact that Lightning can already be implemented because of SegWit activation, and the dangers of failing to take appropriate steps to protect value stored on the blockchain in the event that this fork does in fact occur.

Well written information should be made available on all the major forums and websites, industry news sites either with articles or interviews with informed people that can explain it in simple terms for a wide and largely nontechnical audience, etc.

[Wind_FURY]

achow101, maybe there is good reason to make sticky threads about what Segwit2x is, and for neutrality's sake why it is good or bad and why there is a need for replay protection.

Well, the S2x advocates are arguing that those developing for the "weaker" chain are those responsible for making the changes to ensure replay protection. But they're not trying to force everyone to "upgrade", this is like totally a free choice to choose their 51% attack alternate blockchain, lol

That is misinformation at its finest. More reason to have an information drive to educate the community about the risks of having no replay protection in case of a hard fork that would split the blockchain.

[Erelas]

So, Lightning is not a UAHF, but is going to pass because Segwit already was implemented?  It's a done deal, or....am I totally missing something?

[achow101]

So, Lightning is not a UAHF, but is going to pass because Segwit already was implemented?  It's a done deal, or....am I totally missing something?

Lightning is neither a hard fork nor a soft fork. It will be deployed on the main network because Segwit has already activated. There is nothing to "pass". Lightning is not a consensus rule change; nothing needs to be activated or passed in order for it to be deployed. It just needs to be implemented. By deployed, I mean used.

[nicosey]

Its implemented from what I know.  Just the network needs to commence.  Anyone know a date?

[Erelas]

So, Lightning is not a UAHF, but is going to pass because Segwit already was implemented?  It's a done deal, or....am I totally missing something?

Lightning is neither a hard fork nor a soft fork. It will be deployed on the main network because Segwit has already activated. There is nothing to "pass". Lightning is not a consensus rule change; nothing needs to be activated or passed in order for it to be deployed. It just needs to be implemented. By deployed, I mean used.

Thank you for being very specific.  Your answer to my confusion certainly illustrates the OP's premise that more information and explanation for those of us technically less savvy.  Hell, I used to be a "rocket scientist" (kind of a joke there) and I can't keep up, not enough hours in the day.

[Kakmakr]

Will governments still support the idea that transactions will not be reflected on the Blockchain, but rather on sidechains where they will not have access to that data? Will they create their own LN hubs to track and trace off-chain transactions? < Like the NSA did with Exit Nodes on the Tor network? >

This is going to become very interesting, I should stock up on the Popcorn. ^smile^ 

[Blakscorpion]

The more I read, the more I understand that I'm far away of the full understanding of blockchain's fundamentals

[LeadS85]

I have a feeling that Lightning will pass. It'll bring some new features but I also think that the increase in blockchain size will hurt hobbyists running their own nodes.

I think so too. Lightning is a bit of a hindrance for lovers of its own nodes, but for the rest of users it will be beneficial, undoubtedly.