When someone claims Lightning is too complicated for the average person

[DooMAD]

Increasing numbers of people seem to be expressing the belief that because they can't wrap their heads around how Lightning works, that must mean it's too complicated and that the average person will never be able to use it in the real world.  But the simple truth is, if you don't understand Lightning, it's highly probable you also don't understand how direct deposit, payroll and credit/debit card payments work on a developmental level.  You'll notice, though, it doesn't stop you receiving and spending money with them.  I challenge everyone to sift through this thrilling four-part guide to automated clearing houses:

https://engineering.gusto.com/how-ach-works-a-developer-perspective-part-1/
https://engineering.gusto.com/how-ach-works-a-developer-perspective-part-2/
https://engineering.gusto.com/how-ach-works-a-developer-perspective-part-3/
https://engineering.gusto.com/how-ach-works-a-developer-perspective-part-4/

And, just in case you missed it, don't forget this exciting bonus supplement of ACH return codes:  https://gusto.com/ach_return_codes

Note that this is the simplified version.  Now try telling me how credit and debit cards are too complicated for the average person to use, simply because ACH isn't the easiest thing to comprehend the first time you read about it.  

Long story short, you don't have to understand it.  That's a job for developers.  Just know that when the time comes, it's going to work.  You'll be so busy sending and receiving payments, you won't even give a moment's thought about how or why it works.  It just will.  And that will suffice.  

[1715445318]

1715445318

[1715445318]

1715445318

[1715445318]

1715445318

[1715445318]

1715445318

[1715445318]

1715445318

[Kapyong]

Gday

I read the technical explanation for Lightning - the basic principle seems useful and powerful, but I too found the technical details rather complex.

But you're right - there are many things we use without fully understanding the inner workings.

Meanwhile, Lightning usage is growing rapidly :
https://p2sh.info/dashboard/db/lightning-network?orgId=1&from=1517781557434&to=1522965557434


Kapyong

[Anti-Cen]

I am a bit of an expert at the lightning network having taken the time to read the white paper
https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf and look at the network map
https://lnmainnet.gaben.win/ so when i say that it's a system of centralized mini banks that charge
both transaction and interest fees then you might want to listen up.

Words getting out and the confidence trick is being exposed by a lot more people than me
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYHFrf5ci_g

part guide to automated clearing houses

That's a new name for banks if ever I saw one, intelligent this one must be.

Long story short, you don't have to understand it.  That's a job for developers.

But i am a software developer but Mr P NOON who's team leader on the lightning project is not answering
his emails anymore so does that tell you anything !

[Anti-Cen]

Gday

I read the technical explanation for Lightning - the basic principle seems useful and powerful, but I too found the technical details rather complex.

But you're right - there are many things we use without fully understanding the inner workings.

So you read the white paper but did not seeing the word "Fee" be used more than 45 times not ring some alarm bells
with you and what is you thoughts on people losing all the coins in the private off-chain ledgers if an outdated transaction
is broadcast onto the network.

Maybe you would share with us who they phone up when this happens to complain about the money being gone because I
cannot find the emergency contact number can you ?

[ldah94]

What you mention is what we see in most users of the blockchain, they know how to handle the coins but they do not understand how the technology works, only a small percentage of them really know it because they have had training in computer science. I think that knowing what you are using gives you many advantages over it and allows you to be more cautious

[orions.belt19]

Perhaps for some people, they initially think that it's too complicated to understand upon hearing the words "lighting" or "network". When some people hear "technical" words like this, they tend to think that it's going to be too difficult to understand without even giving a shot of trying to comprehend it. There's a stereotype that only nerdy geeks who have expert knowledge on this field would understand these kind of concepts. But as with how it is easy enough to understand what are direct deposit, payroll and credit/debit card payments work - lighting network is going to be understandable for the lay man as well.

[franky1]

lol

i remember the day when part of decentralisation was that anyone can and should look at how things work to ensure there are no trojans, no way to break the system and ensure there are no back doors.. but now it seems many just wanna say "you don't have to understand it.  That's a job for developers"
seems there are too many suck ups and not enough critics. no wonder bitcoins ethos is dying and LN (banking 2.0) is taking over.. too many centralists saying just trust the devs

so lets make LN simple to understand

channel (joint bank account requires 2 signatures)
open channel(bank deposit)
close channel(bank withdrawal)
CLTV(3-5 day funds held at withdrawal)
CSV revoke(chargeback)

how it works
when you deposit funds into a channel(joint account). the funds do not leave the channel while its open. what the system works as, is many joint accounts
imagine
Alice and Bob are married and they have a joint account[A-B]
bob has a mistress Christy and they have a joint account[B-C]
Christy has a husband Derrickand they have a joint account [C-D]

imagine they all decide to deposit $10 into each of their joint accounts
Alice puts $10 into [a-b]
bob puts $10 into [a-b] and puts $10 into [b-c]
christy puts $10 into [b-c] and puts $10 into [c-d]
derrick puts $10 into [c-d]

again remember the deposited funds dont leave the accounts(channels) while open
[a:10-b:10]    [b:10-c:10]    [c:10-d:10]

now if A wanted to pay D $3..
alice tells bob he can have $3 of [a-b] if bob uses $3 to pay christy in[b-c] if christy uses $3 to pay derrick in [c-d]
so it plays out like this
[a:7-b:13]   [b:10-c:10]    [c:10-d:10]  a&b both sign a tx to agree on B owning $13 of the $20(10*2) of the joint account
[a:7-b:13]   [b:7-c:13]    [c:10-d:10]   b&c both sign a tx to agree on C owning $13 of the $20(10*2) of the joint account
[a:7-b:13]    [b:7-c:13]    [c:7-d:13]   c&d both sign a tx to agree on D owning $13 of the $20(10*2) of the joint account

now D has got $3 due to A's request to pay

thats about as unbiased as i can be without highlighting the pitfulls and limitations of usage.. and it didnt take 4 pages

[DooMAD]

I am a bit of an expert at the lightning network having taken the time to read the white paper

I think it's pretty clear that you are not an expert on anything other than barely being able to count to 45, as you've once again demonstrated in this thread.  Apparently it's all you're capable of.

But i am a software developer but Mr P NOON who's team leader on the lightning project is not answering
his emails anymore so does that tell you anything !

It tells me it's really not that surprising people don't want to talk to you.  That, or it wasn't a typo and you're actually emailing some random person called P Noon.  It would probably help if you got the dev's name right.  How many times did you read that whitepaper again?

and what is you thoughts on people losing all the coins in the private off-chain ledgers if an outdated transaction
is broadcast onto the network.

My thoughts are if you don't send an outdated transaction, you won't have a problem.  The software will eventually be smart enough to prevent you doing anything dumb that might cost you money.

[Kapyong]

Gday all

I am a bit of an expert at the lightning network having taken the time to read the white paper

I don't believe you are an expert in anything more than spreading FUD.

Words getting out and the confidence trick is being exposed by a lot more people than me

What confidence trick ?


Kapyong

[Kapyong]

Gday all

So you read the white paper but did not seeing the word "Fee" be used more than 45 times not ring some alarm bells
with you

Does the word 'fee' frighten you that much ?
BTC has fees, banks have fees, almost everything has fees.

and what is you thoughts on people losing all the coins in the private off-chain ledgers if an outdated transaction
is broadcast onto the network.

What nonsense.
Did you just make that up yourself ?

Maybe you would share with us who they phone up when this happens to complain about the money being gone because I cannot find the emergency contact number can you ?

Please post YOUR phone number so people can tell you what idiotic FUD nonsense you post.


Kapyong

[gua86402]

My understanding is that the so-called lightning network is a centralized system. Similar to the role played by bank intermediaries in traditional transfer operations. If the clients of the same bank transfer money, there is no need to generate actual capital flows. It's just changing the Numbers. Real money is needed only when users withdraw money.

[DooMAD]

i remember the day when part of decentralisation was that anyone can and should look at how things work to ensure there are no trojans, no way to break the system and ensure there are no back doors.. but now it seems many just wanna say "you don't have to understand it.  That's a job for developers"
seems there are too many suck ups and not enough critics.

I would have thought it went without saying that no one is suggesting we should blindly follow developers without question.  Those who are savvy enough to understand it will always have access to look at the code to ensure it's safe.  The point I'm making is that just because some people aren't capable of understanding it, that doesn't mean it's an inherently bad idea, or that it won't work.  People are free to offer critiques, provided the argument is rational and they've demonstrated some working knowledge of why it works the way it does.  Generally, the complaints I'm hearing don't meet that criteria.  

So far, most of the objections seem to fit in one of two categories.  Either:

a)  "I don't understand it, so it must be a terrible idea"

or

b)  "I don't see any immediate benefit to me, so it must be a terrible idea"

But neither of these are valid arguments.  Provided there is some benefit for users and it's a net plus for the health of the network overall, it's a worthwhile pursuit.  And even when people do raise valid concerns, it's not going to put a halt to further development.  If you decide you don't like it, by all means don't use it.  But it's happening either way.

[franky1]

Most of the complaints I'm hearing are far from that.

most of the testing is just to establish a routte to send a single payment. usually in 1-2 hops,, they have yet to really get to the mayhem of their promises in indefinitely keeping channels open and also the fiction of cheap tx's

EG even the OP of the topic said getting a route isnt simple and many channels are needed (something i mentioned a few tims in many topics.. that hops dont work, that hubs are the only way) and meaning many onchain fee's to close and reopen when people go offline or run out of funds to be a middleman route. and many onchain fe's just to open the many channels to be a reliable hub

and also its only cheap if A needed to pay B. but if a needs to pay D so A needs B and B needs C to 'borrow' to D.. then C will wanna be paid a fee too.
and its not going to be often that a route is just going to be 1-2 middlemen fee's

imagine 5 connections is set as safe connectivity..

draw 9 dots and you will see not everyone is connected from 1 peer in one hop.(left side of image below)

yea only 9 people in the network but needing 2 hops to get to everyone with the ASUMPTION everyone is always online at all times and always has funding available.(right side of image above)

now imagine each of those nodes wanted to deposit $50 of their funds for routing.. ($10 per channel)
you might think wow the network is holding $450 ... but it doesnt mean $450 is at play all at one time indefinetly.
it means $10-$20 is at play at any one time, affecting only 1 middle guy..and when one side of a channel has 0 because they already been a route for someone else.. they are out
if $50 was at play at any one time, it would affect many middle guys. and once one side of them many channels are 0 because they have already used thier $10 alotments. their out

now this is a simply 9 node network and already there are limitations being spotted.
now try and draw 64 nodes 8x8 grid. and see how many lines(connections) are needed for everyone to be 2 hops from one another.

we are only talking about 64 users.
then try 1000 users only 2 hops away (1 middle man)

then work out what is the sweet spot is for how many conections are needed for 1000 people but relaxing the hop limit by saying 10 hops
(yes node A has now a bigger risk if 1 other node of a route goes offline it limits how many people it can pay. because it relies on many other as routes)

you start to see nodes just being 2 conction hoppers doesnt work and instead nodes having to be hubs with dozens/hundreds of connections in a hub/spoke model just to get a couple thousand people 'well connected

now expand that to 1 milion users.. now these hubs needs hundreds of connections and each channel(connection) needs funds locked in

now try 50million..
now try 200million

....
the dev's have not really thought through about the nodes needing to fund many channels to be "well connected" and the limitations that would bring
right now all they are doing is trying to make sure just 1 connection works to make single payments. they have yet to shock themselves about the issues of ongoing payments once funds per channel are depleted/users offline severing routes,

and also they have yet to even begine to realise the fund loss risk of HYIP(ponzi) scamming using autopilot
.. but hey. its only been the big PROMO future solution spread as utopia for the last 2 years... and even now people who havnt even looked into it beyond the reddit promo glossy paper.. still think they trust its going to b perfect and free and fast and without headaches and no limits

please runs some scenarios

[franky1]

But neither of these are valid arguments.  Provided there is some benefit for users and it's a net plus for the health of the network overall, it's a worthwhile pursuit.  And even when people do raise valid concerns, it's not going to put a halt to further development.  If you decide you don't like it, by all means don't use it.  But it's happening either way.

its not going to solve scaling (run scenarios)
its not going to be for everyone

but it seems like the centralist mindset is, 'if you dont like it dont use it, devs are following the roadmap anyway
bitcoin needs ONCHAIN scaling sorted FIRST
segwit has not solved it

but hey.. even andreas antonopolous has pretty much (not verbatim) said if you dont like the roadmap plan go play with an altcoin.
(ultimate facepalm)