Lightning network - implementation plan and roadmap or expected sequence ahead?

[doctor-s]

My understand is limited, but from what I've gleamed, the lightning network is the protocol, and for it to be successful, apps and other systems will need to be built on top of it.

So is there a plan of how it will play out?

We're at the live beta testing stage now of the lightning network protocol, however, there is no consumer level software for the network yet.

Is the next step for developers to create lightning network apps for businesses and consumers? If so, who's creating these apps? Is the core team working on an implementation of an app similar to bitcoin-qt?

[1715442469]

1715442469

[1715442469]

1715442469

[1715442469]

1715442469

[BEX]

This article will gelp you better understand the LN and its potential danders....https://www.blockchains-expert.com/en/lightning-network/

[Xynerise]

however, there is no consumer level software for the network yet.

Not true.
There are a lot of LApps (Lightning Apps) available already And new ones are being introduced everyday

If so, who's creating these apps?

Different developers are.
You don't need anyone's permission to create a LApp.
Just read the developer's guide to get started.

Is the core team working on an implementation of an app similar to bitcoin-qt?

There is no "core team" per se.
There's no reference implementation for Lightning.
There are different groups of developers working on different implementations of the Lightning Network, but they are designed for interoperability.
There's Blockstream's c-lightning, Lightning Lab's LND written in Go, ACINQ's Eclair written in Scala, lit, lightning-onion, etc.

Each implementation has its own desktop interface á la Bitcoin-Qt:
There's Zap wallet, LND-GUI, Eclair, etc.
Most are cross-platform and there are also mobile (Android) apps for Lightning eg Eclair -- even though it's on the testnet now.
There are also browser extensions, And web wallets

[Colorblind]

So is there a plan of how it will play out?

Problem with open-source projects of this scale is there is no real deadlines, management and other usual motivators for the team. Not saying this is bad or flawed model, it just different. As a consequence you have to live in environment where "plans", "roadmaps" and deadlines are flexible to such an extent they essentially cease to exist in usual understanding (there is no bonuses for being on schedule or punishment for missing deadline). They surely have plans and dates in mind, but those are as good as anybody's guess.

The paradigm of open source development are in motivation everyone capable to participate instead of simply asking "Is it done yet?". In perfect world instead of asking "SO WHEN I CAN USE LN" you should go there, pick a task you can help with, and bring release date a minute, hour or day  closer. I am strong supporter of exactly this approach to anything I do.

[doctor-s]

however, there is no consumer level software for the network yet.

Not true.
There are a lot of LApps (Lightning Apps) available already And new ones are being introduced everyday

If so, who's creating these apps?

Different developers are.
You don't need anyone's permission to create a LApp.
Just read the developer's guide to get started.

Is the core team working on an implementation of an app similar to bitcoin-qt?

There is no "core team" per se.
There's no reference implementation for Lightning.
There are different groups of developers working on different implementations of the Lightning Network, but they are designed for interoperability.
There's Blockstream's c-lightning, Lightning Lab's LND written in Go, ACINQ's Eclair written in Scala, lit, lightning-onion, etc.

Each implementation has its own desktop interface á la Bitcoin-Qt:
There's Zap wallet, LND-GUI, Eclair, etc.
Most are cross-platform and there are also mobile (Android) apps for Lightning eg Eclair -- even though it's on the testnet now.
There are also browser extensions, And web wallets

Thanks, that's a fantastic post. I wish this sort of info was prominently displayed somewhere or easily found. I often feel like bitcoin would benefit from some kind of promotion group or public info resource.  I know the info is all out there, it's just incredibly hard to find what you're after without asking someone for it.

[Xynerise]

Thanks, that's a fantastic post. I wish this sort of info was prominently displayed somewhere or easily found. I often feel like bitcoin would benefit from some kind of promotion group or public info resource.  I know the info is all out there, it's just incredibly hard to find what you're after without asking someone for it.

Well there are lists of resources out there with useful information.
Usually you should check the Dev resources
Jameson Lopp maintains a list of bitcoin resources
There's also a list of Lightning Network Resources, thanks to Igor Barinov.

Also, Google is usually your friend when searching for new information.

[BenRickert]

This article will gelp you better understand the LN and its potential danders....https://www.blockchains-expert.com/en/lightning-network/

No.....no it won't. It's not accurate and or correct. It seems to state that the "payment channels" will be "regulated". From my reading of the White paper, I do not believe that is either possible or true. This article seems to be spreading the misinformation that Lightning is a venue for Banks and corporations to control the BTC network. I strongly disagree with that premise.

[Carlton Banks]

This article will gelp you better understand the LN and its potential danders....https://www.blockchains-expert.com/en/lightning-network/

No.....no it won't. It's not accurate and or correct. It seems to state that the "payment channels" will be "regulated". From my reading of the White paper, I do not believe that is either possible or true. This article seems to be spreading the misinformation that Lightning is a venue for Banks and corporations to control the BTC network. I strongly disagree with that premise.

Consider the inverse then: your reply suggests that Lightning is unregulated, which is not necessarily true, depending on one's perspective.

While Lightning (like Bitcoin) is unregulated by purpose-built regulatory agencies, it is regulated by it's design (i.e. theft using old channel states is too risky to exploit). This can be regarded as a combination of code-level and peer-to-peer regulation. Possibly incorrect descriptively, but the outcome is the same: users are protected from fraudulent behaviour.


If Lightning (or Bitcoin) is promoted as being "unregulated", then all that does is validate stories in the press about "the wild west of cryptocurrencies". If some people insist on looking at all things Bitcoin from the regulatory perspective, then it's much better if the common knowledge is that the software itself provides the regulation, which makes Bitcoin difficult to corrupt (unlike human regulators)

[BenRickert]

This article will gelp you better understand the LN and its potential danders....https://www.blockchains-expert.com/en/lightning-network/

No.....no it won't. It's not accurate and or correct. It seems to state that the "payment channels" will be "regulated". From my reading of the White paper, I do not believe that is either possible or true. This article seems to be spreading the misinformation that Lightning is a venue for Banks and corporations to control the BTC network. I strongly disagree with that premise.

Consider the inverse then: your reply suggests that Lightning is unregulated, which is not necessarily true, depending on one's perspective.

While Lightning (like Bitcoin) is unregulated by purpose-built regulatory agencies, it is regulated by it's design (i.e. theft using old channel states is too risky to exploit). This can be regarded as a combination of code-level and peer-to-peer regulation. Possibly incorrect descriptively, but the outcome is the same: users are protected from fraudulent behaviour.


If Lightning (or Bitcoin) is promoted as being "unregulated", then all that does is validate stories in the press about "the wild west of cryptocurrencies". If some people insist on looking at all things Bitcoin from the regulatory perspective, then it's much better if the common knowledge is that the software itself provides the regulation, which makes Bitcoin difficult to corrupt (unlike human regulators)

Yes thanks for clarification. My reference to regulated, was specific to outside agencies. ( Governmental ). I keep seeing these posts claiming that Lightning will be forced to be "regulated" by government agencies thereby creating centralization and control by "financial institutions". I may be wrong, but from I have read and watched, this just isn't true. Internally regulated within the platform......I sure hope so.

[Kakmakr]

however, there is no consumer level software for the network yet.

Not true.
There are a lot of LApps (Lightning Apps) available already And new ones are being introduced everyday

If so, who's creating these apps?

Different developers are.
You don't need anyone's permission to create a LApp.
Just read the developer's guide to get started.

Is the core team working on an implementation of an app similar to bitcoin-qt?

There is no "core team" per se.
There's no reference implementation for Lightning.
There are different groups of developers working on different implementations of the Lightning Network, but they are designed for interoperability.
There's Blockstream's c-lightning, Lightning Lab's LND written in Go, ACINQ's Eclair written in Scala, lit, lightning-onion, etc.

Each implementation has its own desktop interface á la Bitcoin-Qt:
There's Zap wallet, LND-GUI, Eclair, etc.
Most are cross-platform and there are also mobile (Android) apps for Lightning eg Eclair -- even though it's on the testnet now.
There are also browser extensions, And web wallets

Thanks, that's a fantastic post. I wish this sort of info was prominently displayed somewhere or easily found. I often feel like bitcoin would benefit from some kind of promotion group or public info resource.  I know the info is all out there, it's just incredibly hard to find what you're after without asking someone for it.

It is still early days and a lot of these apps are still in beta testing phase, with some limitations. The Lightning Network also restricted the amounts that can be send, to prevent large losses if some exploit are found during the testing phase. I think it will be a buzz kill if some LApp goes mainstream now and a exploit was used to drain people's coins.

The Open source nature of most of these projects allow for good peer review, but it is still the Wild West out there.

[cellard]

This article will gelp you better understand the LN and its potential danders....https://www.blockchains-expert.com/en/lightning-network/

No.....no it won't. It's not accurate and or correct. It seems to state that the "payment channels" will be "regulated". From my reading of the White paper, I do not believe that is either possible or true. This article seems to be spreading the misinformation that Lightning is a venue for Banks and corporations to control the BTC network. I strongly disagree with that premise.

Consider the inverse then: your reply suggests that Lightning is unregulated, which is not necessarily true, depending on one's perspective.

While Lightning (like Bitcoin) is unregulated by purpose-built regulatory agencies, it is regulated by it's design (i.e. theft using old channel states is too risky to exploit). This can be regarded as a combination of code-level and peer-to-peer regulation. Possibly incorrect descriptively, but the outcome is the same: users are protected from fraudulent behaviour.


If Lightning (or Bitcoin) is promoted as being "unregulated", then all that does is validate stories in the press about "the wild west of cryptocurrencies". If some people insist on looking at all things Bitcoin from the regulatory perspective, then it's much better if the common knowledge is that the software itself provides the regulation, which makes Bitcoin difficult to corrupt (unlike human regulators)

Yes thanks for clarification. My reference to regulated, was specific to outside agencies. ( Governmental ). I keep seeing these posts claiming that Lightning will be forced to be "regulated" by government agencies thereby creating centralization and control by "financial institutions". I may be wrong, but from I have read and watched, this just isn't true. Internally regulated within the platform......I sure hope so.

I think government agencies will run their own hubs and they will pass laws forcing exchanges to go through these hubs as a part of KYC, or at least exchanges hosted within certain jurisdictions at the reach of these governments. We'll have to wait and see how it develops. There will always be exchanges hosted somewhere in some island that is not impacted by any of that anyway. Decentralized exchanges through LN are also something that has been hyped out for a while but it's still too early.

The LN network keeps growing exponentially, we are at 1200+ nodes, if you keep track you'll see how it keeps growing at a faster rate: network effect kicking in. By 2020 we should have around 100000 nodes and by 2021 we may see a comeback of Steam accepting Bitcoin payments if not earlier. The Bitcoin price itself will also be past $100000. Good times ahead.

[Xynerise]

I think government agencies will run their own hubs and they will pass laws forcing exchanges to go through these hubs as a part of KYC, or at least exchanges hosted within certain jurisdictions at the reach of these governments. We'll have to wait and see how it develops. There will always be exchanges hosted somewhere in some island that is not impacted by any of that anyway.

Exchanges may not even run Lightning Channels because they won't be able to make it KYC compliant since no node on the network truly knows the true origin or destination of a lightning transaction.

Decentralized exchanges through LN are also something that has been hyped out for a while but it's still too early.

There's already sort of an exchange that supposedly works on the Lightning Network

[Carlton Banks]

I think government agencies will run their own hubs and they will pass laws forcing exchanges to go through these hubs as a part of KYC, or at least exchanges hosted within certain jurisdictions at the reach of these governments. We'll have to wait and see how it develops. There will always be exchanges hosted somewhere in some island that is not impacted by any of that anyway.

I wouldn't worry too much. Without financial freedom, what's Bitcoin's selling point? Traders won't be able to set the BTC price on thin volumes of trade, which is what they'll end up with under such an arrangement. Exchanges that don't use KYC Lightning hubs will exist, and they will set a more reliable price.