Lightning Network Discussion Thread

[DooMAD]

What? IOUs in Lightning? That's why there's a lot of misinformed newbies in the forum who believe, and argue that the Bitcoins in Lightning are IOUs or "pegged tokens". Because there are more misinformed people, who didn't do their research, writing about them, and publishing them.

https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2018/11/19/what-is-lightning-network-scalability/

I don't think that IOUs are that bad a comparison, it's just misleading in that IOUs imply counterparty risk which LN pretty much nullifies (assuming you keep an eye on your channel for adversarial behaviour). While this simplification may lead to fundamental misunderstandings (as simplifications always do) I'm also not sure what other metaphors would be suitable to explain LN to the layman or laywoman.

And the issue we currently find ourselves in is that because there isn't a simple analogy, purely becuase it's radically different to anything we've done before, it's easy for people to spread FUD about it and make it sound worse than it actually is. 

I hope people can keep an open mind and weigh up the cost/benefit ratio for themselves, rather than just taking these people at their word when they are oversimplifying things.

[HeRetiK]

I don't think that IOUs are that bad a comparison, it's just misleading in that IOUs imply counterparty risk which LN pretty much nullifies (assuming you keep an eye on your channel for adversarial behaviour). While this simplification may lead to fundamental misunderstandings (as simplifications always do) I'm also not sure what other metaphors would be suitable to explain LN to the layman or laywoman.

And the issue we currently find ourselves in is that because there isn't a simple analogy, purely becuase it's radically different to anything we've done before, it's easy for people to spread FUD about it and make it sound worse than it actually is. 

I hope people can keep an open mind and weigh up the cost/benefit ratio for themselves, rather than just taking these people at their word when they are oversimplifying things.

I mean that's pretty much what happened when Bitcoin entered the scene as well. Lots of misconceptions and nuances getting lost but the general understanding improved over time. Bitcoin went from "How is this different from Microsoft Points?" to "What prevents people from making their own Bitcoin?" to "Bitcoin is obsolete, it's all about blockchain the technology". All misunderstandings in their own right but at least somewhat getting closer to an actual understanding of cryptocurrencies (if ever so slowly). I presume the public's understanding of LN will undergo a similar evolution.

[achow101]

https://www.trustnodes.com/2019/03/13/lightning-network-has-many-routing-problems-says-lead-dev-at-lightning-labs

according to Alex Bosworth, lead developer at Lightning Labs.

it helps to bear in mind that Lightning works on an I Owe You (IOU) basis.

only promises are moving.

So I make you a promise, and that’s fine, but now you need to be able to receive the promise.
By that presumably is meant that I can prove I have the bitcoin and can send the promise,

Which one of you want to tell the LEAD DEVELOPER at Lightning Labs, he need to do more research. LOFL  

... That's not a direct quote from Alex. That's something the author is saying himself.

[achow101]

Everything below according to Alex Bosworth, lead developer at Lightning Labs.

Was Alex speaking.

So you're wrong about that in addition.  

That's not how "according to ..." works in English. It is not at all saying that everything below is according to Alex. That phrase literally means "the thing in the sentence prior" is according to him. So no, you're wrong. Stop spreading FUD.

[bones261]

That's not how "according to ..." works in English. It is not at all saying that everything below is according to Alex. That phrase literally means "the thing in the sentence prior" is according to him. So no, you're wrong. Stop spreading FUD.

What I am spreading is the truth spoken by a lead lightning developer,

you seem to want the lie to be believed over the truth.

Whatever, spread your lies all you want, but they are still lies and idiots like wind fury believe you,
so you will bear responsibility for his failures based on your lies.
GIGO - Garbage In Garbage Out

Good Day.  

FYI:
You should rename this The Propaganda Forum, because facts seem to upset you, even from the lead lightning developers.

FYI2:  
https://blog.btc.com/ultimate-segwit-lightning-network-guide-b665caf4d16

Alice and Bob can open a payment channel, to transact a collection of signed IOUs between them.

https://medium.com/@Aquentys/bitcoin-is-a-payment-network-and-gold-and-smart-contracts-and-the-internet-of-things-and-a-million-c5f36e58bdb0

with transactions happening on Lightning (an IOU system similar to ripple original) which can only operate through centralised hubs/processors due to the economies of scale.

I guess in this singular case , FUD = Facts UnDeniable  

Um no, the six things the lead developer, Alex Bosworth, stated is in the tweet near the bottom of the article.

Why is my node not routing?
1. You don't have inbound liquidity
2. Low uptime
3. Capital is committed to competitive destinations
4. Capital committed to destinations no one wants to send to
5. Fees are too high
6. Your inbound liquidity doesn't have good inbound liquidity itself

https://twitter.com/alexbosworth/status/1105521307024646144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1105521307024646144&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.trustnodes.com%2F2019%2F03%2F13%2Flightning-network-has-many-routing-problems-says-lead-dev-at-lightning-labs

It's interesting that one of your quotes is from the blog of BTC.Com, which is run by Bitmain.  
 (You know, the one's behind BCH-ABC.)
On the other quote, who the hell is @Aquentys?  

Oh, and by the way, I'm not a fan of the lightning network myself. However, surely you can come up with better material than quoting a poorly written article out of context.  

[Wind_FURY]

Newbies read this. There are no IOUs in Lightning. Transactions in Lightning are signed by both participants of the channel, that can later be broadcasted on-chain and be included in the blockchain.

NO ONE is sending some "IOU pegged token" to the other end of their channels.

[Cypto_Huntsman]

How many people are using the Lightning Network?? I have seen many people are talking about it, but how long have you been using that in the recent days?

[hv_]

How many people are using the Lightning Network?? I have seen many people are talking about it, but how long have you been using that in the recent days?

It's just miles away from being somehow secure (and never will be)  like on-chain was proven for 10y now.

[Wind_FURY]

How many people are using the Lightning Network?? I have seen many people are talking about it, but how long have you been using that in the recent days?

It's just miles away from being somehow secure (and never will be)  like on-chain was proven for 10y now.

No one can debate against "Bitcoin on-chain transactions are more secure than Lightning off-chain transactions". But can you explain the connection between the "amount of Lightning users" and its "security"? I'm confused.

[Carlton Banks]

How many people are using the Lightning Network?? I have seen many people are talking about it, but how long have you been using that in the recent days?

I use a Casa for few months now. That device is literally plug & play, very straight foreward.

It cost $300 but you don't need to do all the hassle by setting up a Bitcoin + Lightning node from scratch by yourself.

It's better to do it yourself really, the Casa uses a regular USB interface for it's storage and a mechanical disk, neither of which are as reliable as they could be. For always-on computers like a bitcoin/lightning node, reliability needs to be high.

There's a great device from Pine called the Rock64pro, it has a little more RAM than the Casa and can use either the SATA or NVME dedicated disk interfaces. It's also an ARMv8 SoC type of device, so all the same guides to setting the node up should work almost identically.

[Wind_FURY]

Can anyone help me find out where franky1 is going with this post? He claims that a fractional reserve on Lightning "has begun".

Is Bitrefill starting a fractional reserve in Lightning? Is that possible? Or is franky1's gaslighting getting better? Hahaha.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5124663.msg50325896#msg50325896

fractional reserve on LN. it has begun

https://www.bitrefill.com/buy/lightning-channel/

500,000 sats capacity You pay 0.000403 BTC
2,000,000 sats capacity You pay 0.001341 BTC
4,000,000 sats capacity You pay 0.002011 BTC
8,000,000 sats capacity You pay 0.003753 BTC
16,000,000 sats capacity You pay 0.004825 BTC

[Bitpie Wallet]

We have an article for Non-tech Readers to know about the Plainest Interpretation of Rationale of Lightning Network.

Feel free to read and ask me questions,


https://medium.com/@Bitpie/bitpie-v3-9-8-now-support-lapps-c1a34344a54e

[IcoRaces]

The problem I've seen so far with Lightning is that the nodes and wallets need to be online in order to send and receive funds.

[Rath_]

Is Bitrefill starting a fractional reserve in Lightning? Is that possible? Or is franky1's gaslighting getting better? Hahaha.

Bitrefill started offering liquidity service just like ACINQ in their recent update of Eclair mobile. Maintaining a node costs a bit so they charge you extra for that. Many people have been complaining that no one is willing to open back a channel to them. Now, it will be less problematic. The only risk here is that Bitrefill or ACINQ can close their channels any time so you don't know for how long exactly these channels are going to be active.

[Rath_]

ACINQ has released a new update for Eclair Mobile. Users are now able to receive payments over the Lightning Network on the mainnet if their node has enough space to accept the incoming funds. ACINQ has started offering a similar liquidity service to Bitrefill. More information can be found here.

[Lee_Mire]

What are the best LN papers/articles I can read? I have a few days off work and would love to learn about the LN in depth.

[ABCbits]

What are the best LN papers/articles I can read? I have a few days off work and would love to learn about the LN in depth.

Papers : https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf

Article/thread :
https://lnroute.com/
Basics of the Lightning Network - explanation and wallets

[Queenvio]

Article/thread :
https://lnroute.com/

Thanks for that link. Is there any other site for LN news you know?

[Wind_FURY]

Is Bitrefill starting a fractional reserve in Lightning? Is that possible? Or is franky1's gaslighting getting better? Hahaha.

Bitrefill started offering liquidity service just like ACINQ in their recent update of Eclair mobile. Maintaining a node costs a bit so they charge you extra for that. Many people have been complaining that no one is willing to open back a channel to them. Now, it will be less problematic. The only risk here is that Bitrefill or ACINQ can close their channels any time so you don't know for how long exactly these channels are going to be active.

I'm confused. But Bitrefill is charging less for more channel capacity. Is this Bitrefill opening a channel to you at a higher capacity to make it bidirectional?

I'm positive franky1 is distorting facts, and gaslighting again.

[DooMAD]

Can anyone help me find out where franky1 is going with this post? He claims that a fractional reserve on Lightning "has begun".

Is Bitrefill starting a fractional reserve in Lightning? Is that possible? Or is franky1's gaslighting getting better? Hahaha.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5124663.msg50325896#msg50325896

fractional reserve on LN. it has begun

https://www.bitrefill.com/buy/lightning-channel/

500,000 sats capacity You pay 0.000403 BTC
2,000,000 sats capacity You pay 0.001341 BTC
4,000,000 sats capacity You pay 0.002011 BTC
8,000,000 sats capacity You pay 0.003753 BTC
16,000,000 sats capacity You pay 0.004825 BTC

You're buying an "empty" channel.  Within the channel, your balance begins as 0 and Bitrefill's balance is whichever option you pay for.  Which is why the channel costs less for you to buy than the capacity.  This allows people to send you payments via Bitrefill.  Taking the largest channel as an example, if you pay 0.004825 BTC, you can then receive up to 0.16 BTC from your customers, which may have otherwise been problematic to receive if your other channels were approaching full capacity.  There is categorically no fractional reserve involved.  Franky1 is a disinformation agent whose only goal is to cause as much confusion as possible.

//EDIT:  And here's an image that shows the 500,000 sats channel being initiated:



Starting share is zero.  It's not money created from nothing as franky1 would have you believe.