Don't we need to increase block weight/size?

[Anti-Cen]

Lightning will let us do 10's of millions of transactions per second with the 4MB block weight Bitcoin has right now. And it was only increased to 4MB less than 6 months ago. That's going to be enough for now.

Billions they say on top of Bitcoin will be worth a billion $USD soon but in the real world you will have to address
the issue of channels and intermediary channels storing private ledgers with each other and these transactions on top
of the ones we already have hitting the block-chain on settlement.

Sure hypothetical I could open a channel with you and we both agree to deposit $1 in the account (Locks it on BTC-BC)
and send $0.10 backwards and forwards a million times to each other but in the real world that's not going to happen
and we know it 

let me draw you a picture of what they have planned where anyone with a wallet can become a bank, err .... sorry,, hub

You---------->Sub branch<><><><>Main Branch<><>Int Bank<><><>Int Bank<><><>Fanny-May<><>MadOff<--------Me
Deposits $100                    $20,000                       $10m               $1bn                  $50m                     $1m              $100

See lightning Network routes, read the document and now tell me that I am wrong and can you not see that
the current miners are going to be the banks because not only do they have the hardware but they also have
the BTC to be used as seed money for the channels.

Anyone in the USA can become the president so long as their name ends in Bush, Kennedy or Clinton so
please bro debate me if you think my version is wrong and Bitcoin is not being programmed to become a central bank
much like the IMF or FED just to make it scale but don't go working for the banksters will you bro!

[1715646003]

1715646003

[1715646003]

1715646003

[Anti-Cen]

centralisation in a true sense would do that, at least it would for me.

Centralization is not as black and white as many people are making out and having the "Lightning Network" with
it major banking hubs is a step down this road anyway which then becomes a single point of failure to anyone
that does not want to open more than one channel because closing a channel can be mightily costly when it
comes to BTC mining fees.

A cluster of specialized nodes in a star configuration acting as route managers is perfectly acceptable to me
and could be quite logical as well and it does not mean that Bill Gates gets to pull the plug on Bitcoin

Quite simply the "Every node for himself" is a system that does not scale and the development team knew that
eight years ago but have now all seemed to have cleared off to live it up in the sun.

The lightning Network creates more problems than it solves so look at the picture I upload here
http://forum.cryptolivecap.com/posts/t31-Lightning-Network
and let me know if you think it is wrong