Lightning Labs (devs of LND) trying to kill open source and hijack the protocol

[pi5hxaeb]

There has been recent upheaval within the lightning community about the behavior of Lightning Labs

First, @L0laL33tz raised the issue that Lightning Labs was associating with the World Economic Forum and others who are behind the Great Reset plans. Here are the main threads.

Opening salvo, Clarification, Doubling down

This all seemed fishy, but then things got worse: many open-source developers came out in the open, airing out frustrations they have had with Lightning Labs over the way they have been engaging in the open-source space. The short version is that LL has been using the tried and tested "embrace, extend, extinguish" policy towards killing open-source.

EEE's playbook is to enter product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences in order to strongly disadvantage its competitors.

Here are the main tweets: From ACINQ, RustyTwit and BlueMatt (bonus)

We need to root out Lightning Labs, stop using LND, and move towards alternative implementations like C-Lightning.

[1714058439]

1714058439

[BlackHatCoiner]

The short version is that LL has been using the tried and tested "embrace, extend, extinguish" policy towards killing open-source.

But, why? What's the point of doing such move if the entire purpose of your project relies on the fact that it's transparent?

EEE's playbook is to enter product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences in order to strongly disadvantage its competitors.

And by competitors you're referring to C-Lightning and eclair? Judging by this scandal, Lightning Labs is currently rather in a disadvantageous position.

[n0nce]

I had actually created a topic about this subject, but you add a few new bits of information that I didn't yet know about, thanks for that!

Honestly, I've been following Lightning development for years now and I can tell you guys Rusty has put in a ton of work, not only in implementation but also in the specs & if he speaks out against LL, it has to be taken seriously.
The whole story seems messy and not trivial to answer - in my opinion, the WEF didn't just put LL on their site without asking and without them noticing; I am pretty confident they knew about it and made 0 efforts (not even now) to have it removed from their website. That is already a big red flag. All the further stuff like LL guys putting specs into question etc. don't make it better.

For my part, I'm glad I use C-Lightning exclusively. I will soon make an 'Apollo BTC + C-Lightning' setup guide as well, hopefully adding many many more C-Lightning nodes to the network. Hopefully, when Futurebit will add Lightning natively, it will be built on C-Lightning. I will also make sure to open a few new channels, especially at these lower prices that we currently have.

[pooya87]

But, why? What's the point of doing such move if the entire purpose of your project relies on the fact that it's transparent?

I don't want to raise accusations but considering how people have been using closed source wallets (eg. Coinomi) and not care, they could do the same with a Lightning Network client and end up very easily monitor their behavior with shady undetectable things the client does in the background and make a ton of money.

[BlackHatCoiner]

[...]

I'd say that the majority of those users don't have a Lightning channel either. They just want to use Lightning without the fatigue of maintaining a channel e.g., by using hubs such as BlueWallet's.

monitor their behavior with shady undetectable things the client does in the background and make a ton of money.

Such as? Private data?

[pooya87]

Such as? Private data?

From your private keys to what addresses you own, how much bitcoin you have, what channels you connect to and what transactions you make on LN, how much, etc.

[DooMAD]

I'm glad people are drawing attention to this.  Code can be as much about ethos as it is about function.  It does raise serious concerns if companies are trying to exploit the very environment that allows them to operate in the first place.  Talk about biting the hand that feeds.  I know participants in this community will fight tooth and nail to keep open-source as the only viable default.  It's a fundamental tenet.

[franky1]

and now people are suddenly opening their eyes.
took them a while

exploits available in lightning(mentioning just a few of many):
open channels with no funding locked (turbo channels)
'triangular liquidity reorgs', to put certain channels in liquidity favour while emptying out other users possible routes
the flaw of hop-route liquidity structure, pushing users into hub and spoke model (bank2.0)
bootstrapped 'network map' and default public allowing chainanalysis and other surveillance methods

ever wonder why the main influencers have been pushing for years to tell the community that blockchains are broke. cant work. not useful, just to get users to flock over to altnets of no blockchain security.

as for the links to the WEF. thats just a side show. look more into the hyperledger(bank, institutions and CBDC) stuff, thats where it gets real interesting

[DooMAD]

*usual horseshit*

Stop trying to change the subject, you opportunist shitehawk.  We're not talking about the protocol or your fevered delusions of what you think might be wrong with it.  This topic is regarding an ethical problem with 'Lightning Labs' (a company), and is no reason why people shouldn't use Lightning (the protocol).  Take your verbal bile elsewhere.  Loser.

[DaveF]

Hmmm a new user comes in and bashes Lightning Labs because of some shit on Twitter and a fight between some developers.

I use both LND and C-lightning. I can say from what I have seen LND has a larger community of users and developers. C-lightning is very tied to Blockstream, yes it's open source but, at least for me, LND seems to have more people working and developing and supporting us dumbasses when we screw something up.

Just my view, take it as you will. Also, keep in mind it's a bit of a loop in the fact that as of now LND has more wallets supporting it, so if you want to promote C-lightning instead of promoting it by itself getting some of the wallet people behind it may help.

-Dave

[franky1]

We're not talking about the protocol..
This topic is regarding an ethical problem with 'Lightning Labs' (a company) control of the protocol

fixed that for you, you forgot to include what their [lack of] ethics is concerned with
..
seems someone still has their eyes closed again, and living the dream utopia

ill remind him what is at risk.. and it is not a companies social reputation. but exploitation of the protocol

I'm glad people are drawing attention to this.  Code can be as much about ethos as it is about function.  It does raise serious concerns if companies are trying to exploit the very environment that allows them to operate in the first place.  Talk about biting the hand that feeds.  I know participants in this community will fight tooth and nail to keep open-source as the only viable default.  It's a fundamental tenet.

they're not fighting to report a company to some ethics board about some social drama(as much as doomad loves only social drama topics). they are fighting to stop the protocol from being exploited more than it has, more then some would like

but hey, he doesnt want people talking about the exploits.. so shh children go back to sleep. he doesnt want people talking about the risks to the protocol. so shh, dont say a word, he needs to sleep.

if people want to use a network that does allow people to have channels and balance and able to spend/receive that balance when that said balance is not even pegged/locked to any real btc confirmed transaction(using certain implementations, but becoming more universal). then stay asleep and dont worry.
else, for those that do want to be aware of exploits.
keep looking out for them. draw attention to them, dont let silly people try to tell you to not talk about protocol risks just so they can discuss social drama of personalities

[BJ2gCFtGbiVK]

For my part, I'm glad I use C-Lightning exclusively. I will soon make an 'Apollo BTC + C-Lightning' setup guide as well, hopefully adding many many more C-Lightning nodes to the network. Hopefully, when Futurebit will add Lightning natively, it will be built on C-Lightning. I will also make sure to open a few new channels, especially at these lower prices that we currently have.

I look forward to that. In the meantime, this Raspibolt issue on installation of C-Lightning may be of interest to you and others:
https://github.com/raspibolt/raspibolt/issues/857