Lightning Network Discussion Thread

[Yankeeruinx]

Stakenet are doing some cool things with Lightning Network. They have run Lightning Swaps (Atomic Swaps on Lightning Network) on their mainnet and provided a guide so people can try it. They are currently getting ready to release their Multi-currency Light Wallet which seems pretty smart. They are holding the different blockchains on their MN network so the wallet only needs to hold the private keys and interacts with the blockchains by signing Lightning Invoices. This makes it really fast and lightweight as you don't download and sync blockchains. Their MN network will all be turned to Lightning Nodes and hold multiple channels as well as Watchtowers, they currently have just under 2000 MN's so it will open lots of new channels.

Using their Lightning Swap tech they are also building a DEX on top of the MN network so this will bring instant P2P trading on Lightning Network. I think this is going to help Lightning Network grow a lot this year.

Imagine a retailer only accepting BTC, now you can pay in any crypto and it instantly converts to BTC for the retailer. A more likely scenario I think is that retailers will start accepting USDC if Coinbase push it like I expect they will. So now you can pay in any crypto to the retailer and the retailer will receive USDC via an automatic Lightning Swap. Plus the Light Wallet makes it way easier for retailers to integrate as they don't need to maintain channels or keep full nodes open.

I think what they are doing is going to have a big impact on Lightning Network and hopefully massively help with adoption.

[1714063541]

1714063541

[1714063541]

1714063541

[1714063541]

1714063541

[1714063541]

1714063541

[1714063541]

1714063541

[mindrust]

Is there anybody using BlueWallet (IOS)?

I am exploring that one and it feels pretty good at the first glance. No need to setup nodes too. Just install and go. What do you think about it? It is probably the only IOS wallet which is on mainnet and fully functioning. (so they say) I haven't tried if it is working or not though. I'll edit when I do.

Edit: It seems it is not fully functioning at all. You can receive but you can't send your LN funds. :/

Edit2: tried the wallet with this LN faucet. Funds arrived in a few seconds. This is awesome stuff. "fuck bcash" is me btw.





Edit3: Sending works too! I successfully sent 100 sats (50+50) back to the faucet!!!!

[Anon136]

"trust minimalized"

lol im laughing

i think more people really need to actually research LN. its getting obvious who has actually used it and who is just repeating the propaganda promotion material

I've yet to hear complaints from those who have used it that the experience was like dealing with banks. 
I've yet to hear complaints from those who have used it that it is a utopian fantasy.
I've yet to hear complaints from those who have used it that their consensus was bypassed.
I've yet to hear complaints from those who have used it that it is a separate network that supports more than once blockchain.

All that repeated propaganda material is coming from you.

But as long as we agree on the part where people should try using Lightning before forming their own conclusions, rather than simply take your word or mine for it, then that's okay.  However, much like Bitcoin itself, it's only responsible to point out that Lightning is still not at the stage where it is ready for mainstream adoption.  It may be best for most users to wait a while before taking the plunge.  It's also important for users to learn about the differences between sending transactions via LN compared to the standard way of transacting before getting involved.  The security model is different.  Lightning is still beta software.  Users should experiment with only small amounts of BTC, or other compatible cryptocurrency, until LN is more mature.

Honestly, for all it's flaws, it's amazing that someone managed to figure out a way to leverage bitcoins distributed consensus model and create a scaled up product that conserves many if not all of the fundamental aims all while leaving the genuine artifact entirely unmolested. Oh and do it all without bifurcating the currency supply! It's mind boggling. Just...

[Saint-loup]

You can easily and freely send messages and files under 10Kb through Blockstream satellites with https://blockstream.com/satellite-queue/ (Broadcast a Transmission) by "paying" with testnet BTC on testnet LN

[Wind_FURY]

"trust minimalized"

lol im laughing

i think more people really need to actually research LN. its getting obvious who has actually used it and who is just repeating the propaganda promotion material

I've yet to hear complaints from those who have used it that the experience was like dealing with banks. 
I've yet to hear complaints from those who have used it that it is a utopian fantasy.
I've yet to hear complaints from those who have used it that their consensus was bypassed.
I've yet to hear complaints from those who have used it that it is a separate network that supports more than once blockchain.

All that repeated propaganda material is coming from you.

But as long as we agree on the part where people should try using Lightning before forming their own conclusions, rather than simply take your word or mine for it, then that's okay.  However, much like Bitcoin itself, it's only responsible to point out that Lightning is still not at the stage where it is ready for mainstream adoption.  It may be best for most users to wait a while before taking the plunge.  It's also important for users to learn about the differences between sending transactions via LN compared to the standard way of transacting before getting involved.  The security model is different.  Lightning is still beta software.  Users should experiment with only small amounts of BTC, or other compatible cryptocurrency, until LN is more mature.

Honestly, for all it's flaws, it's amazing that someone managed to figure out a way to leverage bitcoins distributed consensus model and create a scaled up product that conserves many if not all of the fundamental aims all while leaving the genuine artifact entirely unmolested. Oh and do it all without bifurcating the currency supply! It's mind boggling.

Plus Lightning has increased Bitcoin's utility by a thousand times by making it possible to transact to the "millisatoshi" level, a thousandth of a satoshi, and without changing the basic parameters of the Bitcoin network.

franky1 believes it's an "abomination" though. Haha.

[DooMAD]

Plus Lightning has increased Bitcoin's utility by a thousand times by making it possible to transact to the "millisatoshi" level, a thousandth of a satoshi, and without changing the basic parameters of the Bitcoin network.

franky1 believes it's an "abomination" though. Haha.

Any positive feature, try to spin it as a negative.  That appears to be the game.  

Still, the best argument remains that no one can prevent people from building this network.  And no one can force others to build every single feature into the base protocol.  Some things are naturally going to be built on top, because it's all permissionless.  As to Lightning's success and longevity (or any other feature built as an additional layer, for that matter), that's entirely up to users.  If it provides them benefit, they'll use it.  If it doesn't, they won't.  So why not just see how it plays out?  Arguing from a theoretical standpoint can only get us so far.  Sometimes you just have to go ahead and do something to find out for sure.

[Wind_FURY]

Plus Lightning has increased Bitcoin's utility by a thousand times by making it possible to transact to the "millisatoshi" level, a thousandth of a satoshi, and without changing the basic parameters of the Bitcoin network.

franky1 believes it's an "abomination" though. Haha.

Any positive feature, try to spin it as a negative.  That appears to be the game.  

Still, the best argument remains that no one can prevent people from building this network.  And no one can force others to build every single feature into the base protocol.  Some things are naturally going to be built on top, because it's all permissionless.  As to Lightning's success and longevity (or any other feature built as an additional layer, for that matter), that's entirely up to users.  If it provides them benefit, they'll use it.  If it doesn't, they won't.  So why not just see how it plays out?  Arguing from a theoretical standpoint can only get us so far.  Sometimes you just have to go ahead and do something to find out for sure.

It's also funny that those are the same people that say the Core developers suppress Bitcoin's growth because of their conservatism in development.

They have their big blocks, they can experiment, and break their network if they want. Which is also good in my opinion, because it would show everyone what not to do. If it's a success, then it's a success.

[the_stars_are_numerous]

Twitter CEO playing with the lightning network. Pretty cool.

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1092892320842706944?s=19

Anyone know who the hodlonaut is here on BitcoinTalk? That space cat is my hero!

[irukandji]

Question. If I put 1 BTC into a channel and one of my connections uses that to make a payment, so it goes to the other end of my channel. Do I have to wait until someone uses that channel to send it back the other way?  Or would I just deposit more BTC? Or would I close the channel and start all over again?

[Rath_]

Question. If I put 1 BTC into a channel and one of my connections uses that to make a payment, so it goes to the other end of my channel. Do I have to wait until someone uses that channel to send it back the other way?  Or would I just deposit more BTC? Or would I close the channel and start all over again?

The maximum amount of BTC that can be locked up in a channel is currently about 0.16 BTC. You would have to wait for someone to send back some coins through you or close the channel and reopen it. If you are not interested in payment routing and want to avoid such situation then you can either create a private channel which cannot be seen by other nodes or set your fee policy so high that your route won't be efficient.

[thecodebear]

Question. If I put 1 BTC into a channel and one of my connections uses that to make a payment, so it goes to the other end of my channel. Do I have to wait until someone uses that channel to send it back the other way?  Or would I just deposit more BTC? Or would I close the channel and start all over again?

As the guy above said, the current cap on a channel is much smaller than 1 Bitcoin.

Anyways, maybe I'm not understanding the point of the question, I don't understand why you would care that the payment is on the other side of that channel. You would still have that Bitcoin in your LN wallet, just on your side in another channel if someone routed a payment through you. All your channels should be connected to the broader network so you should be able to route from any channel, so no need to deposit more BTC or close the channel. Unless for some reason you opened up a channel to a node that is only connected to the whole network through you and therefore you can only send payments from that one channel. But yeah your end of that specific channel would only get filled again once a payment was made to you (or through you) through that channel.

[infofront]

Anonymint recently posted (and has since updated) his analysis of the lightning network. Recommended reading if you want a unique take on LN:

https://steemit.com/blockchain-scaling/@anonymint/lightning-networks-must-fail-if-it-succeeds

[mindrust]

Anonymint recently posted (and has since updated) his analysis of the lightning network. Recommended reading if you want a unique take on LN:

https://steemit.com/blockchain-scaling/@anonymint/lightning-networks-must-fail-if-it-succeeds

This guy is full of shit.

"The altcoin Bitcoin Core forked off from the immutable Satoshi’s Real Bitcoin."

If what he says is true, where the fuck is that real bitcoin now? Can't believe I actually partly read this piece of crap.

[JayJuanGee]

Anonymint recently posted (and has since updated) his analysis of the lightning network. Recommended reading if you want a unique take on LN:

https://steemit.com/blockchain-scaling/@anonymint/lightning-networks-must-fail-if-it-succeeds

This guy is full of shit.

"The altcoin Bitcoin Core forked off from the immutable Satoshi’s Real Bitcoin."

If what he says is true, where the fuck is that real bitcoin now? Can't believe I actually partly read this piece of crap.

Thanks for summarizing that link, and saving some of us from clicking on it.

Yeah.. I have seen quite a bit of anunymint's bullshit crap in the guise of technical expertise, and there is something missing with his acceptance of both the network affects of bitcoin that include how much consensus was mustered up to activate and then implement segregated witness that is NOT going to go back, unless a similar amount of consensus can be mustered up AGAINST segregated witness - which is NOT going to happen without some kind of real major bug or something like that.  He and other nutjob shills are spending a lot of time to argue that such supposed bugs exist, which is neither supported by the evidence unless he can convince the masses that there is evidence in order to attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, which seems to have less than a snowball's chance in hell of happening given continuing apparent successful developments upon segregated witness (including lightning network).

[infofront]

Anonymint recently posted (and has since updated) his analysis of the lightning network. Recommended reading if you want a unique take on LN:

https://steemit.com/blockchain-scaling/@anonymint/lightning-networks-must-fail-if-it-succeeds

This guy is full of shit.

"The altcoin Bitcoin Core forked off from the immutable Satoshi’s Real Bitcoin."

If what he says is true, where the fuck is that real bitcoin now? Can't believe I actually partly read this piece of crap.

http://therealbitcoin.org/

[thecodebear]

Anonymint recently posted (and has since updated) his analysis of the lightning network. Recommended reading if you want a unique take on LN:

https://steemit.com/blockchain-scaling/@anonymint/lightning-networks-must-fail-if-it-succeeds

This guy is full of shit.

"The altcoin Bitcoin Core forked off from the immutable Satoshi’s Real Bitcoin."

If what he says is true, where the fuck is that real bitcoin now? Can't believe I actually partly read this piece of crap.

Thanks for summarizing that link, and saving some of us from clicking on it.

Yeah.. I have seen quite a bit of anunymint's bullshit crap in the guise of technical expertise, and there is something missing with his acceptance of both the network affects of bitcoin that include how much consensus was mustered up to activate and then implement segregated witness that is NOT going to go back, unless a similar amount of consensus can be mustered up AGAINST segregated witness - which is NOT going to happen without some kind of real major bug or something like that.  He and other nutjob shills are spending a lot of time to argue that such supposed bugs exist, which is neither supported by the evidence unless he can convince the masses that there is evidence in order to attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, which seems to have less than a snowball's chance in hell of happening given continuing apparent successful developments upon segregated witness (including lightning network).

yeah thats exactly what i was thinking. I read for a couple minutes and that was enough to conclude the guy is a nutjob using big words and technical terms to try to sound like he has any idea what he is talking about.

"The altcoin Bitcoin Core forked off from the immutable Satoshi’s Real Bitcoin."

Yeah when you read that quote that's all you have to know about that nutjob. He's probably still running pre-segwit biticoin protocol all by himself in his basement talking about the day when its gonna come back and take over hahaha

[Wind_FURY]

I stopped reading anonymint's blog when I saw that he posted this image, comparing the "transaction speeds" of different blockchains.



It's easy to trick the newbies to believe that the other "blockchains", Ripple for example, is faster without context. He is full of shit.

[Carlton Banks]

I stopped reading anonymint's blog when I saw that he posted this image, comparing the "transaction speeds" of different blockchains.



It's easy to trick the newbies to believe that the other "blockchains", Ripple for example, is faster without context. He is full of shit.

If you believe context is important, you should pay attention to the size of the image you linked to. The image is currently huge, and your explanatory text comparatively very small

[Wind_FURY]

Sorry, Mr. Banks. Fixed.

[buwaytress]

Unique takes on Lightning Network, Segregated Witness, or basically anything related (or remotely related) to Bitcoin aren't hard to find if that's what we're interested in. But yeah, when you're trying to peddle "Satoshi's Real Bitcoin", you've just shot yourself in the foot. Not that anony's previous posts haven't already done that.

@Wind I think you should have left the image alone, and adjusted the size of your explanatory text. I like big words or a lot of small words.