Bitcoin Forum
March 03, 2021, 06:15:12 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Going back to Jonald Fyookball's "Mathematical Proof That the Lightning Network"  (Read 304 times)
Wind_FURY
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1092


www.Crypto.Games: Multiple coins, multiple games


View Profile
January 31, 2018, 06:20:03 AM
Merited by achow101 (2)
 #1

The full title is really "Mathematical Proof That the Lightning Network Cannot Be a Decentralized Bitcoin Scaling Solution" but it will not fit in the thread title, from this blog.

https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-network-cannot-be-a-decentralized-bitcoin-scaling-solution-1b8147650800

His argument also included some maths but I skipped those parts, I will leave it to Achow and some math people to comment on them.

But my question is this.



Was Jonald Fyookball's assumption on what he thinks on "what the ordinary people think of what the Lightning Network should look like" wrong?

Because everything looks decentralized on mainnet. Look at this https://lnmainnet.gaben.win/.

Was Lightning supposed to be "distributed"?






████  ███████  ███
██████████
███      ███████
███      ███████████
██████████████████
████████
███   ████  ███████████
███ ███████████████
█████████
█████████████████
███  ███████
██████████████
███        ████████
███████████▀▀███▀▀███████████
██████▀▀     ███     ▀▀██████
████▀   ▄▄█████████▄▄   ▀████
████▄▄▄███▀  ▀█▀  ▀███▄▄▄████
██▀▀▀██▀      ▀      ▀██▀▀▀██
█▀  ▄██               ██▄  ▀█
█   ████▄▄         ▄▄████   █
█▄  ▀██▀             ▀██▀  ▄█
██▄▄▄██▄             ▄██▄▄▄██
████▀▀▀███▄ ▄█ █▄ ▄███▀▀▀████
████▄   ▀▀███▄█████▀▀   ▄████
███████▄     ███     ▄███████
███████████▄▄███▄▄███████████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
..PLAY NOW..
███  ███████  ████
██████████
███████      ███
███████████      ███
██████████████████
████████
███████████  ████   ███
███████████████ ███
█████████
█████████████████
███████  ███
██████████████
████████        ███
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Kakmakr
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2282
Merit: 1516



View Profile
January 31, 2018, 07:16:48 AM
 #2

I think many people are making their own assumptions, based on their own interpretation of the way that things will play out in the end. I think DannyHamilton explained somewhere that the Lightning Network might be implemented faster, if centralized hubs are used to drive the adoption at the start. < It only makes sense to me to get some centralized hubs like exchanges and payment processors to adopt it first and then to link channels from users to these hubs >

My personal opinion on this is that this is not the only method to do this. In the end, we will have a hybrid network of channels running between hubs and even between users and merchants directly. The ideal solution to fast track the technology, will be to create hubs and to get merchants & users to link with these hubs.

Users should still be able to link directly to merchants, without having to link via these hubs. <not practical, but it will give us some redundancy>

.
.Duelbits.
            ▄████▄▄
          ▄█████████▄
        ▄█████████████▄
     ▄██████████████████▄
   ▄████▄▄▄█████████▄▄▄███▄
 ▄████▐▀▄▄▀▌████▐▀▄▄▀▌██

 ██████▀▀▀▀███████▀▀▀▀█████

▐████████████■▄▄▄■██████████▀
▐██████████████████████████▀
██████████████████████████▀
▀███████████████████████▀
  ▀███████████████████▀
    ▀███████████████▀
▄▀▄
█   █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█▀▀▀▀▀█
▀█▀█▀
█▄█
█▄█
▄▀▄
█   █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█ █ █
█▀▀▀▀▀█
▀█▀█▀
█▄█
█▄█
.
         ▄ ▄▄▀▀▀▀▄▄
         ▄▀▀▄      █
         █   ▀▄     █
       ▄█▄     ▀▄   █
      ▄▀ ▀▄      ▀█▀
    ▄▀     ▀█▄▄▄▀▀ ▀
  ▄▀  ▄▀  ▄▀
 ▀▄    ▄▀▀
Live Games

   ▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄
 ▄▀ ▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▄▄ ▀▄
▄▀ █ ▄  █  ▄ █ ▀▄
█ █   ▀   ▀   █ █  ▄▄▄
█ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ █ █   █
█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█  █▄█
█ ▀▀█  ▀▀█  ▀▀█ █  █▄█
█  █    █    █  █  █ █
Slots
.
        ▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
        █         ▄▄  █
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄       █
█  ▄▄         █       █
█             █       █
█   ▄▀▀▄▀▀▄   █       █
█   ▀▄   ▄▀   █       █
█     ▀▄▀     █   ▀▀  █
Blackjack
.
▄▄▀█████▀▄▄
▄▀▀   █████ ▄▄▀▀▄
███▄  ▄█████▄▀▀▄███
██████▀▀     ▀▀██████
█ ▀▀██▀ ▀▄   ▄▀ ▀██▀▀ █
█    █    ███    █    █
█ ▄▄██▄ ▄▀   ▀▄ ▄██▄▄ █
██████▄▄     ▄▄██████
Roulette
.
█▀▀▀▄             ▄▀▀▀█
█ ▀▄ ▀▄         ▄▀ ▄▀ █
▀▄ ▀▄ ▀▄     ▄▀ ▄▀ ▄▀
▀▄ ▀▄ ▀▄  ▀ ▄▀ ▄▀
▀▄ ▀▄ ▀▄ ▀ ▄▀
▄ ▀▄ ▀▄ ▀▄  ▄
█ ▀▄ ▀▄ ▀  ▄▀ █
▄▀▄ ▀▄ ▀ ▄▀ ▄▀▄
Dice Duels
achow101
Moderator
Legendary
*
expert
Offline Offline

Activity: 2422
Merit: 3648


Just writing some code


View Profile WWW
January 31, 2018, 04:11:12 PM
 #3

Was Jonald Fyookball's assumption on what he thinks on "what the ordinary people think of what the Lightning Network should look like" wrong?

Because everything looks decentralized on mainnet. Look at this https://lnmainnet.gaben.win/.

Was Lightning supposed to be "distributed"?
Lightning is supposed to be "distributed", and it has thus far shown to be fairly distributed.

Jonald's assumption of what lightning would actually be like is wrong.

pebwindkraft
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 258
Merit: 266


View Profile
January 31, 2018, 04:32:22 PM
Merited by DooMAD (2), DarkStar_ (2), d5000 (1), achow101 (1), Wind_FURY (1)
 #4

thought I put my comments into a picture - I had some difficulties to upload directly here, maybe it got to big in size...

https://ibb.co/b9AMm6

maybe this ?
(hope I don't overdo it, but just don't like people predicting the future, when starting from incomplete or wrong assumptions)
ahmad21
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 270


View Profile
January 31, 2018, 05:12:38 PM
 #5

What I have understood leaving behind the very deep mathematical things is that the whole protocol actually aims at reducing the burden off the blockchain by creating relay channels off the blockchain based on some central point of trust or hub whatever you may call it. But whats bigger problem is that now I am unable to formulate an opinion about the LN. I think I need to get deep inside the whole LN to understand it and only then I can make a comment upon it.
d5000
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 2224


Decentralization Maximalist


View Profile
January 31, 2018, 06:39:27 PM
 #6

What I see when I watch https://lnmainnet.gaben.win/ is pretty similar to Jonald's "decentralized - with centralized hubs" picture. There are definitively a couple of large hubs, although there are also some connections that circumvent them, so I am also not convinced by Jonald's "not possible" conclusion.

I think we cannot draw conclusions from this early state. There are mostly "interested nerds" and LN-related companies that opened nodes in mainnet as of now, and it's used for testing with very small amounts, not for "real money" transactions. It will get interesting when common people start to use it.

PS: I pretty much agree with pebwindkraft's drawing - the rightmost one is the most likely to happen.

European Central Bank
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1087



View Profile
January 31, 2018, 10:54:39 PM
Merited by cr1776 (1)
 #7

there are certain people whose position is so entrenched and their agenda so obvious that any opinion they come up with is effectively worthless as you know it's compromised before you bother to read it, which i never would.

this fyookball person is probably the most extreme example of this. if there's anyone who wants to scare people away from using lightning networks, it's that guy. he would twist any fact, or conjure up completely fictional ones, to shove his big blocks down your throat.

i can't believe how many people have taken that post seriously.
mda
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 144
Merit: 12


View Profile
February 01, 2018, 01:49:16 AM
 #8

Fyookball is right and money will be moved with atomic swaps across chains.
In the end Lightning 'Network' will look like isolated segments here https://ibb.co/b9AMm6.
d5000
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2744
Merit: 2224


Decentralization Maximalist


View Profile
February 01, 2018, 03:44:26 AM
 #9

there are certain people whose position is so entrenched and their agenda so obvious that any opinion they come up with is effectively worthless as you know it's compromised before you bother to read it, which i never would.
I honestly don't know if jonald_fyookball is paid by anyone (Jihan or Roger, for example). However, he has never given the impression to me of a paid shill, more of a very convinced person. (This impression may be wrong, naive, or whatever.)

I consider the "big blocker" stance not a scam, but a valid stance. I personally - after having informed myself about its implications and consequneces - don't share it. Big blocks could work, in my opinion, only in two cases:

1) we have a magical quantum leap in hardware capacity and internet technology in the coming years;
2) that "big blocks" are accomplished with some sort of sharding (dividing the load of validating blockchain contents to several groups of nodes). A big-blocker-friendly sharding technique could be extension blocks.

Regarding LN, I think some of Big blocker's fears regarding centralization are valid. But the outcome depends mostly of ourselves, the Bitcoin community.

We can make LN a success, and we can accomplish it to stay decentralized.

But it wouldn't come "on its own". We have to fight any attempts to establish hubs of more than ~100.000 users, because these hubs would be a systemic risk  - like big mining pools are (Big hubs are more likely to be able to revert channel states massively).

So we have to make people conscious of that we ourselves, the Bitcoin users, are building the Lightning Network, and not "some sort of unknown group of businesses".  We are those who decide if we want to be lazy and only open a channel to our favourite exchange, or to open various channels with respected community members, for example.

I am a bit skeptic, but I think if the Bitcoin community really wants a decentralized LN, we will get it.

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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