that drops a channel from its routing table and refuses to treat them as a possible route/destination if the same txid is used in another channel.. thus a nafarious person can use the same 'lock' with multiple partners.. AKA FRACTIONAL RESERVE
Could you explain me how's that possible? Can't you check that a Lightning nodes use a duplicate channel?
again there is no network wide consensus to enforce this check!!!!
thus guess what. people can make fake balance channels or many channels with the same utxo
also its not just about checking 1 node for its many channels.. to see if it has the same UTXO because a HUMAN can decide to 'sybil' many nodes and have them atleast 20 hops away from another node it owns. (outside the distance allowed in routing gossip) that way the partner(victim) again wont be checking the full network (yep another flaw) to even see the 'promised' utxo is not used elsewhere
there are many many many ways to cheat LN, and many flaws in LN that prevent those cheats being dealt with
again. its time you stop listening to your LN fangirl friends PR scripts. and start actually using LN as if you are critical bug finding/fixing and looking for flaws to fix, or speaking with devs about the actual issues you and your buddies should be aware of
you have spent too much time only learning the utopian fantasy stuff of positive PR spin of snake oil sales.
so now go spend some time learning about the risks and issues. if not for making others risk aware, but for your own regards to your own safety of joining partners that might secretly want to steal from you while they kiss your ass to sucker you into locking more value with them.
now go do some research
anyway folks. sorry for the interuption by the certain LN fangirl that plays dumb when they do know the available flaws he describes as features.. and earns the title of idiot by wanting to play the part of an idiot to avoid admitting he knows of the flaws.
i do occassionally act like he doesnt know the flaws(although this conversation with him is not the first). but thats more for the sake of other readers that might think he really is an idiot that doesnt know. so i pretend that im teaching him something new
but back to the topic.
LN is not the solution to the fee problem.
people in, for instance africa (min wage 20cent/hour) are not going to pre plan 6 months of spending. and then make 5 channels where they split up 6 months worth of spending into those channels for a weak hope of being able to make a possible future payments on a network that allows fractional reserving and balance stealing. where 6 months of spending is at risk, just for the hope of cheaper fee's
.. because the cost of setting up 5 channels to have a modecome of chance of reliable routes. is going to cost alot more in set up fee's than it costs for a few hours of real life wage..
EG if paypal said their fee's are 1cent to do paypal user to paypal user but it comes with a US $30(3x min wage) set up fee every 6 months. would you use it. . especially if your not even sure if all the people you desire to pay in the next few months are even paypal users
..or would you see what other payment methods have to offer.
they wont wont to have to keep having to open and close these channels(accounts) every one/two months either if they cant afford to lock up enough for lengthy 6-12 month spending plan timescale either, as the onchain fee's would ruin any net positive they can gain on any altnet.
the actual solution is to make bitcoin fee's cheaper and make bitcoin more accessible,
otherwise africans would prefer to use altcoins like LTC for the 'blockchain reserve' with cheap onchain fee's and then have LTC as the gateway blockchain to bridge to altnets. avoiding btc completely
..
eg ever noticed how although ethereums blockchain is bigger than bitcoin. no one is crying about the blocksize/blockchain length.. and yet ethereum is becoming more popular as a gateway blockchain to many altnets(NFT and such)
yep. FUD propaganda of "bitcoin shouldnt grow its blockchain size coz its 1990's dial up and computers cant handle it" is a dead argument.we are in 2022.. fibre and 5g exist.
ethereum has proven people dont care about stifling the blocksize.
ethereum is half the age but double the size and no one is crying that ethereum breaks their computer
the only reason certain people want bitcoin blockchain size halted and fee's to be made high is so they can advertise their crap-nets as solutions. again idiots. all they care about is profiting from off-ramping people into their risky and flawed altnets. its done out of greed