The great Lightning scam

[1legalco]

So the tech ignorant have a new drum to beat as to what can 'save' Bitcoin.

The reason Bitcoin will never scale is the public ledger block chain can never handle all the billions and trillions of transactions it would need to record.

So the solution lightning.

It's off chain and centralized in power to the channels being created to run it.

So none of it hits the block chain nor the public ledger.

None of it involves proof of work.

It's not crypto and is complete crap and it sure isn't Bitcoin.

If you think bch is crap, well lightning makes bch looks like a rolls Royce.

Why isn't anyone here talking about how lightning is bullshit and has nothing to do with Bitcoin or it's blockchain?

Oh that's right you need dummies to think it's the Bitcoin fix to scaling

Lol
Lightning has nothing to do with bitcoins block chain problems period

All it does is trick dummies into thinking their lightning transactions are related to Bitcoin

Well they're not

It's OFF CHAIN

Complete crap

[1714990239]

1714990239

[1714990239]

1714990239

[cry4crypto]

I'm not a big fan of the Lightning Network either, but I wouldn't go as far as calling it a scam. It's not a long-term scaling solution either in my view. It's not very convenient to use, at least to me, since it requires both parties to be online at the time of a transaction. What's worse though is that it requires its users to put their private keys on an internet-connected device, which is the primary reason I will never use it. I am sure there will be some use cases (maybe some people eager to pay with Bitcoin for coffee will have their dreams fulfilled for example). What would you propose as a solution though? An increase in block size?

[1legalco]

I'm not a big fan of the Lightning Network either, but I wouldn't go as far as calling it a scam. It's not a long-term scaling solution either in my view. It's not very convenient to use, at least to me, since it requires both parties to be online at the time of a transaction. What's worse though is that it requires its users to put their private keys on an internet-connected device, which is the primary reason I will never use it. I am sure there will be some use cases (maybe some people eager to pay with Bitcoin for coffee will have their dreams fulfilled for example). What would you propose as a solution though? An increase in block size?

Core overhaul, abandonment of blockchain, a super network of servers Funded by .1% network fee to pay for servers.

Then Bitcoin could scale and run the world's economy.

You can't have billions of daily transactions on nodes doing game theory proof of work calculations wasting all this energy.

So BTC stays a slow antiquated expensive network or it relaunches as lean digital currency set to run the world.

With no company and no CEO to lead BTC it will stay as it is, a broken P2P currency  project that can't scale and is nothing more than a. Footnote in the future age of a real digital currency.

Bitcoin also needs a centralized marketing group focused on merchant acceptance.

None of these things will happen in Bitcoin so that's why I'm. Investing in projects developing a real digital currency.

[RawDog]

Lightning has nothing to do with bitcoins block chain problems period
All it does is trick dummies into thinking their lightning transactions are related to Bitcoin
Well they're not
It's OFF CHAIN
Complete crap

Bitcoin Cash is actually Bitcoin. 

[Aura]

You don't have to use it, see it like an extra feature.
As for scaling, it is a solution to reduce scaling problem because even if only 100 people would use then they still used less space than that they would do with a normal transaction. A blocksize increase to 8Mb isn't a infinite solution either.

[BillCoin]

I totaly agree with you.
People represents Lightning network as it is going to be the whole cure for the bitcoin problem, and every time someone complains about the fee or about the transactions speed, Lightning Network instantly comes out as " the cure".
The true fact about Lightning network that the whole bitcoin network has to be prepared for it, and it is going to take years until lightning network receives a massive adoption, we could see how segwit came out about a year ago, and still more then 90% of the network is using non-segwit addresses although segwit is much more cheaper.

Also, those people forget to mention that new users will have to open a new channel within the Lightning network, which means that they are going to pay a full transaction fee for that, so it doesn't prevent new users from paying the tx fee.

[GraciousBanshee47]

I'm not a big fan of the Lightning Network either, but I wouldn't go as far as calling it a scam. It's not a long-term scaling solution either in my view. It's not very convenient to use, at least to me, since it requires both parties to be online at the time of a transaction. What's worse though is that it requires its users to put their private keys on an internet-connected device, which is the primary reason I will never use it. I am sure there will be some use cases (maybe some people eager to pay with Bitcoin for coffee will have their dreams fulfilled for example). What would you propose as a solution though? An increase in block size?

Thank you for sharing this.. It wasn't explained this way when I googled it.. I don't want to share my private keys and they are the reason why I use cryptos in the first place, to have private keys no one would possibly know about...

[abhishek273b]

  You don't have to use it, see it like an extra feature.
As for scaling, it is a solution to reduce scaling problem because even if only 100 people would use then they still used less space than that they would do with a normal transaction. A blocksize increase to 8Mb isn't a infinite solution either.

[green547]

It's pretty well known that bitcoin cash is the faster bitcoin and is better for payments.  The original bitcoin is more like gold and acts as a store of vlaue.

[1legalco]

Lightning has nothing to do with bitcoins block chain problems period
All it does is trick dummies into thinking their lightning transactions are related to Bitcoin
Well they're not
It's OFF CHAIN
Complete crap

Bitcoin Cash is actually Bitcoin. 

Lol

No it's not, it's a fork of BTC and I do like it for speed and TX fees over BTC.

But bch is not BTC

I'm amazed anyone would say that here

Only coin I've seen buy a cup of coffee instantly with no fees is in SFL

One of the beta merchant markets for BizBytes

They have a nice pool of local merchants taking the coin.

Consumers get 50% off exchanging the top coins into BizBytes

So $100 in BTC or eth or xrp gets consumers $200 in BizBytes

So far this is what I bought
Coffee and muffins local coffee house cool spot local artists
Great meal at nice restaurant
Tons of booze at a nightclub
Used it in a local strip club
Took a limp with it
Treated my girl to a day spa
Had a massage for me and my girl

So the first real life use of a digital currency I had and everything was 50% off because I had some crypto they took.

I asked some merchants in their network if they also took Bitcoin or Ethereum.

They all said no.

So they must have great sales people selling their coin in SFL to have such a nice local network taking it.

Their coin is tied to USD so the merchants want it.

No fees, they get new customers and don't have to discount sales

They spend on network

[bitcoinfan421]

The lightning network will easily improve the transaction speeds and lower payment costs for the coin thereby increasing its utility

[cry4crypto]

With no company and no CEO to lead BTC it will stay as it is, a broken P2P currency  project that can't scale and is nothing more than a. Footnote in the future age of a real digital currency.

Bitcoin also needs a centralized marketing group focused on merchant acceptance.

Both these arguments are essentially what Bitcoin stands for. There are dozens of centralized altcoins with CEOs, marketing teams and whatnot, I don't think Bitcoin has to become one of these to succeeed. Decentralization is one of most important core values stated in the white paper. Don't get me wrong, I understand where you're coming from - it's hard to treat BTC as currency in its current shape, I 100% get that. I just believe that the scaling issue is complex and it simply has to take time to implement the right measures to solve it. The community has come a long way and the core contributor numbers have increased significantly. I still have faith in Bitcoin, and I have patience, which you seem to lack. Either way, there are some other interesting projects that are definitely worth investing in. I wish you good luck, but I'm personally sticking with Bitcoin.

[1legalco]

It's pretty well known that bitcoin cash is the faster bitcoin and is better for payments.  The original bitcoin is more like gold and acts as a store of vlaue.

Sorry bch is not BTC

Two separate coins since fork

Like I said I like bch but none of these coins have merchant adoption

Above I explain only coin I've seen and used with real merchant adoption is BizBytes

One of their beta markets is SFL

Nice pool of local merchants take it now

It's not global in local merchants but they have nice pool of global companies taking it.

I bought some music and ebook files with it.

I'm about to order some business services with it.

So the coin focused on merchants not speculator investors.

By passed the exchanges and now they turn the top coins with no merchant use into a coin you can spend.

It's doing what Bitcoin promised, an alternative currency that is working in beta markets

[1legalco]

With no company and no CEO to lead BTC it will stay as it is, a broken P2P currency  project that can't scale and is nothing more than a. Footnote in the future age of a real digital currency.

Bitcoin also needs a centralized marketing group focused on merchant acceptance.

Both these arguments are essentially what Bitcoin stands for. There are dozens of centralized altcoins with CEOs, marketing teams and whatnot, I don't think Bitcoin has to become one of these to succeeed. Decentralization is one of most important core values stated in the white paper. Don't get me wrong, I understand where you're coming from - it's hard to treat BTC as currency in its current shape, I 100% get that. I just believe that the scaling issue is complex and it simply has to take time to implement the right measures to solve it. The community has come a long way and the core contributor numbers have increased significantly. I still have faith in Bitcoin, and I have patience, which you seem to lack. Either way, there are some other interesting projects that are definitely worth investing in. I wish you good luck, but I'm personally sticking with Bitcoin.

Look, the big data needs of a real global currency will take over $100 billion to build.

It's going to be centralized, it's going to have mass merchant adoption.

It will cross borders and be a significant part of the world GDP.

It won't have a public ledger or a block chain.

I know of two projects now saying what I'm saying both have $100 billion projects, first $10 billion in are being called the founders.

So that core group of investors that want to see a real global coin are putting $10 billion into stage 1 and then stage 2 is the core users

With $600 billion in crypto floating around I think they will raise the first $10 billion

I'm testing one coin now in real life in SFL

Bought $200 BizBytes for $100 XRP

It worked

Bought $2000 more for $1000 in crypto

It really works since I used lots of local merchants treated my girl to nice day and saved 50% using their network

So I decided to be a founder

Sank some crypto into it

For one reason it is working and imo they understand what a global digital currency needs local merchants

BizBytes Google or Bing  it

Or their site is

www.bizbytes.org

[cry4crypto]

Sorry bch is not BTC

This is something that we can 100% agree on.

Like I said I like bch but none of these coins have merchant adoption

Mass adoption will take time, there's no shortcut. I think the worst thing that happened to Bitcoin recently was gaining mainstream attention. We simply weren't ready for that big of an influx of new users and possibly won't be in the next couple of years.

Above I explain only coin I've seen and used with real merchant adoption is BizBytes

Are you seriously suggesting that there are more currently more merchants accepting BizBytes than Bitcoin?

[1legalco]

Sorry bch is not BTC

This is something that we can 100% agree on.

Like I said I like bch but none of these coins have merchant adoption

Mass adoption will take time, there's no shortcut. I think the worst thing that happened to Bitcoin recently was gaining mainstream attention. We simply weren't ready for that big of an influx of new users and possibly won't be in the next couple of years.

Above I explain only coin I've seen and used with real merchant adoption is BizBytes

Are you seriously suggesting that there are more currently more merchants accepting BizBytes than Bitcoin?

Yep,. It's the only coin with nice local merchant adoption in any area.

SFL is one of their beta markets, it's everything Bitcoin white paper promised ability to do fast n cheap transactions

So at this stage in crypto one project focused on local merchants and it works

Best part I saved 50% on everything

A few merchants I used before with fiat, now I use BizBytes

Easy enough to buy crypto I used to get their coins merchants are taking in SFL

Plus for business owners they have a huge number of business services already

The key guy has 300+ business  portal network

He's created a digital currency with merchants

No other coin has it

You go to one site in members area you search what you need

Business lawyers
Website developers
App developers
Graphic artists
Biz video producers
Art galleries
A famous psychic
Ebook portal
Indy music portal

It's well developed

Now show me a coin where I can go a different find lots of global merchants taking it?

Show me one beta market where lots of local merchants take it

Quite amazing what they did already

www.bizbytes.org

The coin you can actually use today

That cup of coffee I got with it convinced me it was real

[krishnapramod]

I totaly agree with you.
People represents Lightning network as it is going to be the whole cure for the bitcoin problem, and every time someone complains about the fee or about the transactions speed, Lightning Network instantly comes out as " the cure".
The true fact about Lightning network that the whole bitcoin network has to be prepared for it, and it is going to take years until lightning network receives a massive adoption, we could see how segwit came out about a year ago, and still more then 90% of the network is using non-segwit addresses although segwit is much more cheaper.

Also, those people forget to mention that new users will have to open a new channel within the Lightning network, which means that they are going to pay a full transaction fee for that, so it doesn't prevent new users from paying the tx fee.

With Segwit, almost all major exchanges/wallets haven't implemented it yet. How many new Bitcoin users rely on wallets with access to private keys? A very small percentage, rest keep funds on centralized exchanges/custodial wallets, that's one of the main reasons behind lack of Segwit adoption. Secondary, Segwit was a temporary solution to implement further scaling solutions. Increasing the blocksize to 2 MB would have the same results within a year.

With Lightening Network the argument is always about centralization and offchain transactions, again my above point, if a service like Coinbase has a payment channel, wouldn't a good number of their users use it, thus taking the load off Blockchain, and lowering on-chain fees. As far as I have seen, people don't have much issue using well-established centralized Bitcoin services/exchanges/wallets. Offchain transactions, although it's security is enforced by Blockchain, isn't?

Well, according to Forbes, on-chain global Bitcoin transactions are around $2 Billion a day. A big number, yes, but off-chain transaction (exchanges, wallets, others) are roughly estimated at around $30 Billion a day, but the real number is probably much higher. This can all be done on the Lightning Network, eliminating exchange counter-party risk and even allowing near-instant and cheap inter-exchange deposit and withdrawal transactions.

LN isn't going to fix anything until it gets adopted at a large scale, the same Segwit scenario. The developers can roll out upgrades, but it's the ecosystem consisting of big services that have to implement it to deliver it to the user.
 
https://decentralize.today/struck-by-lightning-bitcoins-true-killer-app-491092574cd8

[ActiveWizard77]

I totaly agree with you.
People represents Lightning network as it is going to be the whole cure for the bitcoin problem, and every time someone complains about the fee or about the transactions speed, Lightning Network instantly comes out as " the cure".
The true fact about Lightning network that the whole bitcoin network has to be prepared for it, and it is going to take years until lightning network receives a massive adoption, we could see how segwit came out about a year ago, and still more then 90% of the network is using non-segwit addresses although segwit is much more cheaper.

Also, those people forget to mention that new users will have to open a new channel within the Lightning network, which means that they are going to pay a full transaction fee for that, so it doesn't prevent new users from paying the tx fee.

With Segwit, almost all major exchanges/wallets haven't implemented it yet. How many new Bitcoin users rely on wallets with access to private keys? A very small percentage, rest keep funds on centralized exchanges/custodial wallets, that's one of the main reasons behind lack of Segwit adoption. Secondary, Segwit was a temporary solution to implement further scaling solutions. Increasing the blocksize to 2 MB would have the same results within a year.

With Lightening Network the argument is always about centralization and offchain transactions, again my above point, if a service like Coinbase has a payment channel, wouldn't a good number of their users use it, thus taking the load off Blockchain, and lowering on-chain fees. As far as I have seen, people don't have much issue using well-established centralized Bitcoin services/exchanges/wallets. Offchain transactions, although it's security is enforced by Blockchain, isn't?

Well, according to Forbes, on-chain global Bitcoin transactions are around $2 Billion a day. A big number, yes, but off-chain transaction (exchanges, wallets, others) are roughly estimated at around $30 Billion a day, but the real number is probably much higher. This can all be done on the Lightning Network, eliminating exchange counter-party risk and even allowing near-instant and cheap inter-exchange deposit and withdrawal transactions.

LN isn't going to fix anything until it gets adopted at a large scale, the same Segwit scenario. The developers can roll out upgrades, but it's the ecosystem consisting of big services that have to implement it to deliver it to the user.
 
https://decentralize.today/struck-by-lightning-bitcoins-true-killer-app-491092574cd8

The problem with these new developments are the adoption to it in a large scale just like you said. The main reason is the concerns of the pools if it could be effective or not.

[1legalco]

I totaly agree with you.
People represents Lightning network as it is going to be the whole cure for the bitcoin problem, and every time someone complains about the fee or about the transactions speed, Lightning Network instantly comes out as " the cure".
The true fact about Lightning network that the whole bitcoin network has to be prepared for it, and it is going to take years until lightning network receives a massive adoption, we could see how segwit came out about a year ago, and still more then 90% of the network is using non-segwit addresses although segwit is much more cheaper.

Also, those people forget to mention that new users will have to open a new channel within the Lightning network, which means that they are going to pay a full transaction fee for that, so it doesn't prevent new users from paying the tx fee.

With Segwit, almost all major exchanges/wallets haven't implemented it yet. How many new Bitcoin users rely on wallets with access to private keys? A very small percentage, rest keep funds on centralized exchanges/custodial wallets, that's one of the main reasons behind lack of Segwit adoption. Secondary, Segwit was a temporary solution to implement further scaling solutions. Increasing the blocksize to 2 MB would have the same results within a year.

With Lightening Network the argument is always about centralization and offchain transactions, again my above point, if a service like Coinbase has a payment channel, wouldn't a good number of their users use it, thus taking the load off Blockchain, and lowering on-chain fees. As far as I have seen, people don't have much issue using well-established centralized Bitcoin services/exchanges/wallets. Offchain transactions, although it's security is enforced by Blockchain, isn't?

Well, according to Forbes, on-chain global Bitcoin transactions are around $2 Billion a day. A big number, yes, but off-chain transaction (exchanges, wallets, others) are roughly estimated at around $30 Billion a day, but the real number is probably much higher. This can all be done on the Lightning Network, eliminating exchange counter-party risk and even allowing near-instant and cheap inter-exchange deposit and withdrawal transactions.

LN isn't going to fix anything until it gets adopted at a large scale, the same Segwit scenario. The developers can roll out upgrades, but it's the ecosystem consisting of big services that have to implement it to deliver it to the user.
 
https://decentralize.today/struck-by-lightning-bitcoins-true-killer-app-491092574cd8

Is lightning Bitcoin? No
Is lightning on bitcoins public ledger? No

It's a centralized attempt to confuse public it's Bitcoin

Where can I get lightning? No where in reality

What merchants take it? None in reality

[Kprawn]

Well BCrash is even worst, because bigger Block sizes {to scale to VISA & PayPal} would centralize Bitcoin even more. Just

do the math on Block sizes needed to scale to VISA/PayPal levels and imagine how many people would be able to run FULL

nodes to accomplish that. Bitcoin has to scale with second layer applications to compete with other big payment networks.

It takes no genius to see that... but people are still jumping on that boring bandwagon.  

Your BCrash price is going one way, once the Lightning Network is running ....DOWN. {Reason for your post?}

Edit : VISA processed 141 billion tx in 2016. That is 4471 tx/sec! We would need 1.49 GB blocksize to process this, and it

would grow blockchain by 214 GB every day, and 78 TB every year!