time for them to scrap it and start afresh, new model, new method. les flaws, less bugs
we should not be forking bitcoin just to make a subnetwork function.. a subnetwork should function prebridge.. and then program itself on its side to interact with bitcoin
if they cant even have a working prototype thats secure. they failed at the first post
I do not know if now is the right time to completely scrap and give up while looking for another solution. There has been a lot of time, effort and collaboration that was put in to creating what is being used now therefore an alternative might not be the nest thing to bring forth right now.
I believe Lightning Network initially was designed for off-chain transactions with small or not too big value so how recently it becomes a big problem.
initially yea. but these days majority of the liquidity is linked to 3 large companies. and they will want to further protect their locked liquidity by disavowing its customers control of the agreements/commitment states.
this topics flaw is not even a major problem but when lightning devs admit they cant fix something within their own network and resign. it shows not only they need to want bitcoin to fork to fix THEIR error. but also that when the other flaws get publicised which also cant be fixed. more and more will start to realise its time to break their sponsored contract. and try something new
I did not read anything about three large companies dominating but after a look around I found the pool of stakeholders with serious interests seems more than three. River seems to have just completed a
$35 million fundraising round therefore it is getting some publicity:
![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.cointelegraph.com%2Fuploads%2F2023-05%2F2e2efd71-6d2e-44ff-91f2-024a8c2cf980.png&t=665&c=FaKUCEECMCIQIw)