The Lightning Network FAQ

[Rath_]

If you want to peer and keep a channel open in general I just made an on chain TX to my main node running LND @ 15 sat /b so it should clear overnight you can peer to it at
0345e4b0a36a5dc56450421637555bf7dc3025b59db78501609b78a7c187d8b346@bajjf27ngq6266p7ol6a36yziuajxedm434z3b4r54aybabqlqofkead.onion:9735

I have just connected to your node. My new node should be reachable at 0273da0a525390c36857841e208f1d289275c76ebfa7ecfde697c6cbf4f235b4f5@fjpmf23cd2c6sqp7e4wzexa6ixkttl3jabivldakwq733tw634ymjbid.onion:9735 . I am about to fund its wallet and start reopening my channels.

[1714950617]

1714950617

[1714950617]

1714950617

[1714950617]

1714950617

[Carlton Banks]

Sounds good, but an UPS would be an overkill for the amount of BTC that I want to lock up on the LN.

right, I'm using a UPS because bitcoind can't handle power-cuts without revalidating some blocks afterwards. I'm trying to make my Pi node as low-maintenance as possible

[DaveF]

If you want to peer and keep a channel open in general I just made an on chain TX to my main node running LND @ 15 sat /b so it should clear overnight you can peer to it at
0345e4b0a36a5dc56450421637555bf7dc3025b59db78501609b78a7c187d8b346@bajjf27ngq6266p7ol6a36yziuajxedm434z3b4r54aybabqlqofkead.onion:9735

I have just connected to your node. My new node should be reachable at 0273da0a525390c36857841e208f1d289275c76ebfa7ecfde697c6cbf4f235b4f5@fjpmf23cd2c6sqp7e4wzexa6ixkttl3jabivldakwq733tw634ymjbid.onion:9735 . I am about to fund its wallet and start reopening my channels.

I have 100k sats there that you can open a channel with.
Just ordered some larger USB portable drives from Amazon to make moving some of the VHDs around easier. Might delay me getting the c-lightning up until the end of the week but it will make doing other stuff easier.

Sounds good, but an UPS would be an overkill for the amount of BTC that I want to lock up on the LN.

right, I'm using a UPS because bitcoind can't handle power-cuts without revalidating some blocks afterwards. I'm trying to make my Pi node as low-maintenance as possible

From the been there done that part of life unless it's a good high end server room UPS check it every 6 months or so. I have had the consumer line of ALL UPS brands (APC, Tripplite, CyberPower) not give any indication that the battery was dead until it just flat out did not work.

-Dave

[Rath_]

I have 100k sats there that you can open a channel with.

I am not sure what you are driving at. Dual-funding is currently supported only by properly configured up-to-date c-lightning nodes.

Might delay me getting the c-lightning up until the end of the week but it will make doing other stuff easier.

Take your time. I am trying to figure out how to use lightning-cli funderupdate which allows you to control the behaviour of your node when some dual-funding compatible node opens a channel to you. I can't find any detailed documentation about it except for a short explanation in the command line.

[PrimeNumber7]

with a fully-fledged server, you can run multiple lightning instances anyway. Maybe running 1 or 2 LND's will prove useful for different reasons, I'm not currently in your position where I have a decent enough machine to try.

Maybe keep the Pi as a local watchtower, powered (also the internet router) with a UPS? Or at some other location, of course.

I would rather keep a watchtower on a VPS versus trusting my local ISP to maintain sufficient uptime. While both are rare, my internet goes down more frequently than my power goes out. If you keep regular backups of information needed to maintain a watchtower, if your VPS goes down for whatever reason, you can easily spin up another VPS in another region or cloud provider and have it watching for old channel state closing transactions quickly. Or better yet, have multiple VPSs by multiple cloud providers always running.

[DaveF]

with a fully-fledged server, you can run multiple lightning instances anyway. Maybe running 1 or 2 LND's will prove useful for different reasons, I'm not currently in your position where I have a decent enough machine to try.

Maybe keep the Pi as a local watchtower, powered (also the internet router) with a UPS? Or at some other location, of course.

I would rather keep a watchtower on a VPS versus trusting my local ISP to maintain sufficient uptime. While both are rare, my internet goes down more frequently than my power goes out. If you keep regular backups of information needed to maintain a watchtower, if your VPS goes down for whatever reason, you can easily spin up another VPS in another region or cloud provider and have it watching for old channel state closing transactions quickly. Or better yet, have multiple VPSs by multiple cloud providers always running.

Slightly OT to all of this but I was at my local Microcenter yesterday to pick up a few things and saw this:
https://www.microcenter.com/product/636691/lenovo-thinkcentre-m90n-1-mini-desktop-computer

Yes it's a bit outdated and more money then setting up a RPi or getting a used machine from eBay.
But it's tiny, has more then enough SSD storage, RAM and CPU (4C 8T) to run a full node, has space for a 2nd drive for mirroring, uses very little power.
It comes with Win10 Pro so it has Hyper-V if you want it.

And you can bury it under / behind something for security and nobody will know it's there.

Not saying you should run out and get one, but with hardware in general spiking up in price it's not a bad option.

-Dave

[Carlton Banks]

And you can bury it under / behind something for security and nobody will know it's there.

apart from the WA Redmond AI analyzing all the phone-home data from Windows

[LoyceV]

Yes it's a bit outdated and more money then setting up a RPi or getting a used machine from eBay.

I've never used a RPi, I use an old laptop for testing. It's cheap, still fast enough, and comes with build-in UPS and display.

And you can bury it under / behind something for security and nobody will know it's there.

If I ever build an underground mancave, a hidden and fire proof backup storage space with power and network connection is on my list

On Lightning Network Stores, I found another LN gambling site: blockbet.club. This site makes you bet on when the next Bitcoin block will be found. You can select the start and end time for your bet. Deposits are anywhere from 10 to 10,000 sats, only through LN. Based on the low deposits, it looks like meant as proof of concept instead of a commercial gambling site. Both deposits and withdrawals work from Phoenix Wallet and BlueWallet.
It's the first site I've seen that only shows a QR-code to withdraw. It's easier than emailing myself a payment request (from my mobile wallet to my desktop).
Update: It didn't pay when I should have won the second time. It's a small amount so I don't really care, but just a heads up: it has bugs.

[DaveF]

Agree with Carlton but if you want to test anyway, let me know and I'll spin up one of nodes running c-lightning and get it updated. Might take a day or 2 since I have not been using them for a while.

Thanks Dave! The mempool is slowly clearing up, so I would appreciate if you could do it in your spare time. By the way, are you going to open any more channels in the near future? I would like to maintain channels with a few forum members but it would nice to improve my node's connectivity this way.

So I was going to do a bunch of things this week with some nodes and other hardware. Ordered some equipment to upgrade some things and move some other things.
I ordered some things from Amazon and some others from NewEgg.
Amazon stuff was supposed to arrive Tuesday. Now scheduled for Saturday....which means next Tuesday since the office building is locked over the weekend.
According to the tracking number the NewEgg stuff is still on their shipping dock so unless it's coming in overnight I guess it's all happening next week.
<sigh>

-Dave

[Rath_]

I have just finished doing some research on LNDHub which is also used by BlueWallet and found out that lndhub.io shows the URI of the BlueWallet's node along with the current state of all of their channels. I expected them to have many small channels, but it looks like they have opened only 3 channels themselves. What a shame that they do not accept channels lower than 0.1 BTC; limits over 0.03 BTC are already absurd to me.

By the way, @DaveF how is your upgrade going?

[DaveF]

By the way, @DaveF how is your upgrade going?

It's not. Lets just leave it at NewEgg and Amazon along with USPS and FedEx Ground have all conspired to screw up my planned hardware work for the last 2 weeks and leave it at that.
I am grabbing a NUC out of storage this week that I am going to see if I can use.
Its actually at the point that I have to get some things moved off of the box since we are eliminating some fiber runs by the end of the month.

-Dave

[BlackHatCoiner]

So by reading the news and some bullish tweets of El Salvador, I saw that people are actually using the LN pretty casually. It seems to me that in this decade we'll get rid of the payment processors.

Although, I found a stackexchange thread and I'd like to ensure that transacting with LN is secure.

— Is it really possible for a LN user to lose his revocation keys or the commitment transactions? Has it ever happened in the past to you?
— Can you really lose your money if the node goes offline? I haven't fully understood this:

Shouldn't Bob update Charlie's balance after Alice confirms that she got the money?

[LoyceV]

It seems to me that in this decade we'll get rid of the payment processors.

I highly doubt that will happen this decade. Except for crypto enthusiasts, the world still revolves around fiat. As long as the seller can't use Bitcoin LN to pay his suppliers, there's not really a point in keeping it.

— Is it really possible for a LN user to lose his revocation keys or the commitment transactions? Has it ever happened in the past to you?

As far as I know, it's possible to lose LN-funds in various ways. That's why you shouldn't deposit more than you're willing to lose. I can't really comment on the technical part though.
It hasn't happened to me yet, apart from losing small amounts on centralized websites (but that isn't caused by the LN-side).

Shouldn't Bob update Charlie's balance after Alice confirms that she got the money?

Bob shouldn't be offline for this long, that's no way to run a LN-node. This will probably lead to more centralized nodes, instead of running it from your home.

[franky1]

needing to run a full LN node to use LN is like telling someone they need to take their desktop computer with them when they go buy a coffee at starbucks

..
what ends up happening is people will end up depositing funds into central payment processors(LN factories) and so users can just have lite wallets and trust their watchtower wont mess around when they are not eyes-glued to their app

LN will not get rid of payment processors. as the whole investment is to offer these payment processors a nice new niche of customers to manage.

i know many people will say that LN will be a bright glittery network of hop model nodes all independant and in unity of allowing their funds to be spend as routers

but the reality will be centralised hubs with reserve sharing channels between hubs offering cheap fast route via the hubs and their own special app so that users dont have to manage their own funds.

by this im not being anti-LM.
im being critical thinking of the real life scenario end-game

[PrimeNumber7]

Although, I found a stackexchange thread and I'd like to ensure that transacting with LN is secure.

— Is it really possible for a LN user to lose his revocation keys or the commitment transactions? Has it ever happened in the past to you?
— Can you really lose your money if the node goes offline? I haven't fully understood this:

In the example you are citing, someone goes offline for a time greater than the amount of time transactions are locked when a channel is unilaterally closed. In order to prevent this from happening, you should use a watchtower that will broadcast a penalty transaction if an old channel state is used.

The primary risk of losing funds when using LN is if you do not properly backup signatures received by your channel counterparty after every step of changing the channel state, every time the channel state is updated.

needing to run a full LN node to use LN is like telling someone they need to take their desktop computer with them when they go buy a coffee at starbucks

You don't need to run a LN node locally in order to use LN. You can run a LN node at home while using LN at Starbucks, using some kind of "light" LN wallet software that connects to your at-home LN node. Or you can run a LN node on a VPS or remote server somewhere, and connect to it whenever you want to transact using LN. 

[BlackHatCoiner]

I highly doubt that will happen this decade. Except for crypto enthusiasts, the world still revolves around fiat. As long as the seller can't use Bitcoin LN to pay his suppliers, there's not really a point in keeping it.

I don't know, but I feel that if more countries behave similar to El Salvador, we may see the adoption growing faster than the internet's. The 90's was the decade when it started, but it became popular and someone could say globally adopted 10 years later. History repeats itself with Bitcoin, but this time it'll change the way people transact value. I like thinking it that way.

LN will not get rid of payment processors. as the whole investment is to offer these payment processors a nice new niche of customers to manage.

That is also a possibility. I recently read that Texas state clarified that banks can custody bitcoins. Sure, the centralized services might find their chance to enter this new system updated. And you shouldn't forget that sometimes people need a third-party. We've all struggled to get rid of it, but sometimes it's important to exist.

We shouldn't devastate the system that existed before just because we've found a way to transact our value with no third parties; remember, some people don't want to be responsible for their own wealth.

The primary risk of losing funds when using LN is if you do not properly backup signatures received by your channel counterparty after every step of changing the channel state, every time the channel state is updated.

But, that's not your fault, right? Your mobile for example could go caput anytime and that may result to loss of money. Same thing could happen in Bitcoin if there weren't things like seed phrases and everything was saved into your hard drive.

[LoyceV]

but the reality will be centralised hubs with reserve sharing channels between hubs offering cheap fast route via the hubs and their own special app so that users dont have to manage their own funds.

I'm okay with that If you want to run your own node, by all means: do so! But if you just want a convenient payment system in which you trust a company with a few dollars: good for you, LN can offer that too!

There's about 100 billion dollars worth of Bitcoin stored in exchanges. Keeping coffee money in a custodial mobile wallet isn't going to get anywhere near those numbers.

I feel that if more countries behave similar to El Salvador, we may see the adoption growing faster than the internet's. The 90's was the decade when it started, but it became popular and someone could say globally adopted 10 years later.

Global internet adoption took longer than that:
1990: 2.6 million users
1995: 44.4 million users
2000: 412.8 million users
2010: 1.992 billion users
2020: over 4.5 billion users

With just 37 million funded addresses, I'd say Bitcoin is like the internet in 1995: it can get 100 times bigger the coming 15 years.

To compare:

(source)

[BlackHatCoiner]

With just 37 million funded addresses, I'd say Bitcoin is like the internet in 1995: it can get 100 times bigger the coming 15 years.

Does the number of funded addresses matter? I could fund 100,000 addresses that are all owned by me. You can't know the Bitcoin adoption rate just like Internet's or any other consumption spread in households. Even these statistics approach the correct percentage, but I doubt if you could find the total Bitcoin users in an approaching scheme.

I agree that it can be a steeper increase in households comparing with the Internet, but I have my doubts for being 100 times bigger.

[LoyceV]

Does the number of funded addresses matter? I could fund 100,000 addresses that are all owned by me. You can't know the Bitcoin adoption rate

I think you missed (and confirmed at the same time) my point: the number of funded addresses is an upper limit for the number of Bitcoin owners. I own more than one funded address, and if every Bitcoin user has a few on average, that quickly reduces the number of individuals holding Bitcoin to (very rougly) give or take 10 million.
The number of users on exchanges is much higher: Coinbase seems to have 56 million registered users, and I can only assume many of them must keep some amount of Bitcoin in their (custodial) account. I used to think those users shouldn't be counted (because "not your keys, not your coins"), but then I realized it's "normal" to keep your investments at your broker. You can't buy Gamestop stock on paper and keep it in your own cold storage. So it's not surprising many people do the same with Bitcoin.

I have my doubts for being 100 times bigger.

Even if there are currently 10 times more people "owning" Bitcoin on exchanges than there are people owning the private keys to their own Bitcoin, those people aren't using it to make purchases. If they start using a LN wallet for small payments, I don't think going from 10 million to 1 billion active users is that far fetched.

[DaveF]

Depends on how banks do it too.
If I have to use the "Chase Bank Lightning App" to use my funds held by Chase. Same way I would have to use there app or webpage to Zelle someone money then adoption might be quicker. Yes the purists like us might be screaming a bit. But if Chase opens a bunch of channels between other places and the app just checks that my account has enough BTC and then sends the coins then I could really see it taking off.

Kind of like now. If I put my paycheck into a banks and then use their online bill pay. Chase might:
1) If it's another Chase account then it's just a few digital entries in a database to them.
2) If the people getting the money have the ability to accept ACH then that's how it's done
3) If the people getting the money can't ACH then they send a paper check.
4) Some utilities just get 1 wire transfer and then the bank sends a separate file with a list of accounts and amounts.
other....

Same with this, if someone puts BTC in and pays someone with BTC. Do they really care about the back end.

WE DO as a group.
Most others will not. So 'generic local coffee shop' using BTCPay get's their lightning funds the second I click send payment.
Starbucks, might just be willing to accept a 'promise to pay at then end of the day' from Chase, knowing that they are going to get 1 TX for all their shops, but all we see on the app is a BTC payment leaving our account.

-Dave