Any timeframes for full Lightning Network implementation?

[Kakmakr]

In the discussion between Samson Mow and Roger Ver, Roger mocked Mow by saying that there are only 3 merchants accepting Lightning Network <LN> payments <Which we know is wrong and irrelevant, because it is still in a testing phase>.

Roger totally misconstrued the facts to suit his agenda and Mow did little to point that out. He just gave the podium to Roger to continue with his crusade against Bitcoin and the Core developers. <Stabbing at the amount of years that the Lighting Network has been in development>

I know we should not rush perfection and we should not risk a multi Billion dollar network, by going LIVE before it is 100% tested, but is there any timeframe for this?

The funniest thing to come out of this discussion was that Roger said, that the Lightning Network will work better on Bitcoin Cash. <without SegWit> They cannot come up with their own code, they have to fork from Bitcoin and then use Bitcoin's scaling solution to scale.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSbPz4g9rZQ

[ABCbits]

There aren't any and there won't be any because :
1. LN continuously improved even when it's "ready" for most Bitcoiner.
2. With LN development complexity, developer might found bug that could slow down the development.
3. Since it's open source, there's no "deadline" which means developer/contributor might don't focus on LN development.

But TBH, i think we should ignore Bitcoin Cash in Bitcoin Development & Technical Discussion since both coins have/will have totally different scaling solution/approach.

[TheQuin]

There aren't any and there won't be any because :
1. LN continuously improved even when it's "ready" for most Bitcoiner.
2. With LN development complexity, developer might found bug that could slow down the development.
3. Since it's open source, there's no "deadline" which means developer/contributor might don't focus on LN development.

That's true but is there any discussion about removing the channel funding and transaction size limits? It's pretty much impossible for any large site or merchant to use while those are in place.

[LoyceV]

I'm going to respond to just one line from the OP:

because it is still in a testing phase

So is Bitcoin
I'm running Bitcoin Core 0.15, the lastest is 0.16. Anything under "version 1", is considered experimental, and that's exactly what is says:

About Bitcoin Core
~
This is experimental software.

That being said, I can't wait to see LN become mainstream. But https://lightning.network/ still has the same video from more than 3 years ago, where some nerds tell a long boring technical story. I have nothing against that, but it's not what will draw the larger public into using LN.

That's true but is there any discussion about removing the channel funding and transaction size limits? It's pretty much impossible for any large site or merchant to use while those are in place.

I don't think LN is meant to be used for large transactions. If $1500 per channel isn't enough, you can just use on-chain payments.
The only common scenario I can think of to use larger channels, is a gambler who often deposits and withdraws large amounts to the same online casino.

[TheQuin]

The only common scenario I can think of to use larger channels, is a gambler who often deposits and withdraws large amounts to the same online casino.

That was very much the scenario I was thinking of. Also, the same usage could apply to regular traders who don't want to leave large amounts on exchanges when they're not actually in a trade.

[r1s2g3]

The only common scenario I can think of to use larger channels, is a gambler who often deposits and withdraws large amounts to the same online casino.

That was very much the scenario I was thinking of. Also, the same usage could apply to regular traders who don't want to leave large amounts on exchanges when they're not actually in a trade.

Even if there is no Lightning Network, Can this gambler and casino set up a "Micro payment channel" between them.

I am still in learning phase but my understanding is that if we have a daily recurring business we can create a Micropayment channel .

[Kakmakr]

I'm going to respond to just one line from the OP:

because it is still in a testing phase

So is Bitcoin
I'm running Bitcoin Core 0.15, the lastest is 0.16. Anything under "version 1", is considered experimental, and that's exactly what is says:

About Bitcoin Core
~
This is experimental software.

That being said, I can't wait to see LN become mainstream. But https://lightning.network/ still has the same video from more than 3 years ago, where some nerds tell a long boring technical story. I have nothing against that, but it's not what will draw the larger public into using LN.

That's true but is there any discussion about removing the channel funding and transaction size limits? It's pretty much impossible for any large site or merchant to use while those are in place.

I don't think LN is meant to be used for large transactions. If $1500 per channel isn't enough, you can just use on-chain payments.
The only common scenario I can think of to use larger channels, is a gambler who often deposits and withdraws large amounts to the same online casino.

Yea, that is the general response to these types of questions <Bitcoin is still experimental> but I am looking for some game plan or project plan or at least some goals. If you work for a customer and you are tasked to create a gambling site, then the customer cannot wait indefinitely for you to develop that site, because he has to plan his business and he has to get the edge over his competition.

We are in the same boat, because a lot of "customers" are waiting for the "ultimate" scaling solution to start their new business and if we take too long, he or she will turn to the competition for a solution. In a sense, this already happened and this is also one of the reasons why BCash is used by a lot of people. 

Let's just get some road map for the future and some targets to work towards.