[2019-04-01] Making ATM Bitcoin Payments via Lightning Network Is Becoming a Rea

[Jgilpulg]

On March 31, 2019, developer and researcher Felix Weis publicly demonstrated a transaction via Lightning Network at a bitcoin ATM, during the Lightning Hackday, in Hong Kong.

https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-atm-lightning-network/

[1713492924]

1713492924

[hugeblack]

Why do people want to add the lightning network to all of the Bitcoin transactions to become an alternative to the normal payment "on-chain"?
The Lightning Network is designed for daily transactions "micropayment channels," which are often in the range of 1-5 $  per transaction, so it is not appropriate to use them with ATMs where transactions are much more than that and the time is available to receive money.

[Carlton Banks]

Why do people want to add the lightning network to all of the Bitcoin transactions to become an alternative to the normal payment "on-chain"?

Faster and cheaper

The Lightning Network is designed for daily transactions "micropayment channels," which are often in the range of 1-5 $  per transaction, so it is not appropriate to use them with ATMs where transactions are much more than that and the time is available to receive money.

no

maximum channel size is 0.16777 BTC. That's alot more than $1-5

[Naida_BR]

Why do people want to add the lightning network to all of the Bitcoin transactions to become an alternative to the normal payment "on-chain"?
The Lightning Network is designed for daily transactions "micropayment channels," which are often in the range of 1-5 $  per transaction, so it is not appropriate to use them with ATMs where transactions are much more than that and the time is available to receive money.

The Lightning network is by far faster than making the transactions on-chain, and also It can help building ecosystems that will promote the mass adoption. For example ATM transactions fit the Lightning network because clients want to do the process fast. Then, we can go to the next step which is micropayment transactions.

[hugeblack]

maximum channel size is 0.16777 BTC. That's alot more than $1-5

What I mean is the maximum limit of the ATM card, which can be similar to Bitcoin ATM.
Mostly the upper limit ranges from $ 500 to $ 2,500. maximum channel size is 0.16777216 BTC [about 800$]

We need a lightning network but not necessarily all applications, especially Bitcoin ATMs.

[cr1776]

maximum channel size is 0.16777 BTC. That's alot more than $1-5

What I mean is the maximum limit of the ATM card, which can be similar to Bitcoin ATM.
Mostly the upper limit ranges from $ 500 to $ 2,500. maximum channel size is 0.16777216 BTC [about 800$]

We need a lightning network but not necessarily all applications, especially Bitcoin ATMs.

I think the point is that for ATMs, it is nice to have a nearly immediate confirmation vs potentially having to wait for the transaction to be included in a block.  :-)

Certainly lightning isn't for every transaction, but having the option to have a less expensive, presumably faster transaction is a good thing.  A diversity of options using lightning or on-chain is a win-win.  The more options the better and the more implementations for various use cases the better as it can spur additional adoption and provide source code that can be used elsewhere.

[1Referee]

I think the point is that for ATMs, it is nice to have a nearly immediate confirmation vs potentially having to wait for the transaction to be included in a block.  :-)

That also solves the double spending attacks on ATM's because some still offer zero confirmation payouts. Very recently a group of criminals managed to steal very large sums of money repeatedly by double spending, which some said it's the fault of the ATM operator, which is partly true, but a business wants to offer convenience in form of speed, and that convenience comes with a very high risk, one that Lightning eliminates.

Reading about how creative people are with Lightning apps and other developments makes me feel as excited as I was back in 2013 where merchants accepting Bitcoin was still super duper cool.

Fun fact, Roger Ver and Charlie Lee made a friendly bet 7ish months ago where Roger said that he doesn't believe more than 1000 merchants are accepting Lightning payments in 18 months. Well. He lost big time. Somewhere this or next year he'll wear a Lightning or Blockstream shirt. Can't wait.

[BitHodler]

We need a lightning network but not necessarily all applications, especially Bitcoin ATMs.

The more the better. I can see a time where the funds dedicated to LN will remain in LN because there is no longer a need to cash out to the main network. For this we only need a couple of exchanges to kick things off.

I also doubt that we'll be stuck with our current 0.16xBTC max channel capacity. When the network is considered safe/stable enough for mass use, there shouldn't be a limit at all, and I strongly believe there won't be.

[Carlton Banks]

I also doubt that we'll be stuck with our current 0.16xBTC max channel capacity. When the network is considered safe/stable enough for mass use, there shouldn't be a limit at all, and I strongly believe there won't be.

I think the lightning protocol has already been extended to allow limitless channels, the feature's called 'wumbo' (not sure why)

[BitHodler]

I think the lightning protocol has already been extended to allow limitless channels, the feature's called 'wumbo' (not sure why)

Is this feature available in the main implementation(s) already? I have used different custodial wallets for convenience purposes, and they still only offer 0.16xBTC as max channel capacity.

Does this also mean that the max transaction amount limit is lifted? If so, that would be the next catalyst for LN to gain even more adoption. I am not at all a fan of any sort of limit despite the 'beta' status LN still has.

People individually already dedicate more liquidity than lightning labs recommends, which is a clear sign that there shouldn't be a limiting factor. The risk is with the people anyway....

[Carlton Banks]

I think the lightning protocol has already been extended to allow limitless channels, the feature's called 'wumbo' (not sure why)

Is this feature available in the main implementation(s) already?

It might be in the very newest versions, not sure. Certainly both lightningd and lnd are supporting wumbo, so with a bit of time wallets will update their lightning daemon base to a version of either 2 that supports it (I think all wallets are using either lightningd or lnd under the hood)