Does the Lightning Network still hold a future?

[AakZaki]

I used to be an LN operator and learned how to install it on this forum. The installation is not simple, besides that the operational costs are also high.
And I don't think being an LN operator is suitable for individuals who don't have a lot of Bitcoin, because most of the transaction flows seem to be attracted by the big companies that are the LN operators.

So using LN I think is only suitable for those who make small transactions frequently all the time.

Binance, OKX, and bitfinex seems agree because they already accept Lightning Network deposits

Don't be fooled just because the Exchange already provides LN, I have done it to send BTC in the amount of around 1M Sats to the Exchange, but the cost can be higher than the cost of sending via On-Chain.
Because basically LN is not suitable for large transactions, the larger the transaction, the less efficient the LN. because the routing system can pass through several hops which makes the cost higher.

LN is cheap and good if you only use small transactions, but it can be expensive if you use it without understanding the liquidity and routing in LN.

[d5000]

Actual users but not usage, those are different things.

Yes, I agree, but I would have expected a growth in users and nodes in 2023 and 2024 due to the high fees. I wasn't trying to say that I'm trying to estimate payment volume

The problem is also that service providers and merchants see theses stats and they will think it twice if they want to offer a LN payment option, above all a non-custodial one.

Normally now the time would be fine to set up Lightning nodes too, with the low fees, but it doesn't seem to happen. So at this moment I think it's not unreasonable to talk about a "stagnation". It's by far not "dying", though

[...]since here we are talking about people who are already using custodial wallets then there is no negative effect from enabling lightning payments on the same custodial wallets. I think that is a good way to onboard people of this kind, so they don't have to install additional wallets or open channels. I would say that most people already use custodial solutions unfortunately, but the upside is that they can be adopted to lightning in ways that are not possible with non custodial solutions.

Fair enough. I think the effect of these solutions is a bit ambiguous. The interoperability advantage is indeed quite nice, and in addition you could connect later a non-custodial Lightning node if you familiarize yourself with LN. So if the user is willing to learn, then it can lead to some "true" (i.e. "NYKNYC") adoption. I'm not opposed to it. The reasons why I don't see Lightning as the only "general" scaling solution is more due to some design issues, like the well known liquidity problem, and also the potentially slow onboarding potential if there is really massive Bitcoin adoption (realistically, 20-50 millions per year, while in theory it could be 100 million this would require using all block space for LN).

[Mia Chloe]

The problem is also that service providers and merchants see theses stats and they will think it twice if they want to offer a LN payment option, above all a non-custodial one.
Normally now the time would be fine to set up Lightning nodes too, with the low fees, but it doesn't seem to happen. So at this moment I think it's not unreasonable to talk about a "stagnation". It's by far not "dying", though

Well I do agree lightning network isn't really dying as it stands but regardless it's not really improving much. Currently the problem seems a lot like because the majority of the premise of it's creation was strongly built to combat fee problems, anyfix to fees that happens on chain indirectly make it seem less relevant.

Based on my personal opinion what the lightning network need now is another strong suit that will create the need to use in more often. The possible best I do see at the moment is mixing and coinjoin consolidations.

[Dogedegen]

Actual users but not usage, those are different things.

Yes, I agree, but I would have expected a growth in users and nodes in 2023 and 2024 due to the high fees. I wasn't trying to say that I'm trying to estimate payment volume

Normally now the time would be fine to set up Lightning nodes too, with the low fees, but it doesn't seem to happen. So at this moment I think it's not unreasonable to talk about a "stagnation". It's by far not "dying", though

For me, this topic includes both users and usage. My point is that assumptions are being made about the usage based off of the user data that is public, and this would scientifically be very false since it is only a correlation which will fluctuate at times. I also gave a personal example of usage and how a single user that is myself would be counted in those stats. Obviously it would be better if we had both user and channel growth too all the time, but that is just too optimistic way of thinking. It is probably going to move in cycles related to the market sentiment and then fluctuate also related to its own things. When it comes to the description of "stagnation", I can agree with that because in a way it also reflects what is happening currently with the Bitcoin market and even more with the crypto market.

The problem is also that service providers and merchants see theses stats and they will think it twice if they want to offer a LN payment option, above all a non-custodial one.

I think that impacts more bigger providers rather than ones that were or get personally on boarded, but I agree. But this comes back also to the issue that I mention a bit, imagine that we had data to prove that payment volume right now is very high then people are making the wrong decisions by basing them on conclusions made from data that can't be used to make those conclusions.

[...]since here we are talking about people who are already using custodial wallets then there is no negative effect from enabling lightning payments on the same custodial wallets. I think that is a good way to onboard people of this kind, so they don't have to install additional wallets or open channels. I would say that most people already use custodial solutions unfortunately, but the upside is that they can be adopted to lightning in ways that are not possible with non custodial solutions.

Fair enough. I think the effect of these solutions is a bit ambiguous. The interoperability advantage is indeed quite nice, and in addition you could connect later a non-custodial Lightning node if you familiarize yourself with LN. So if the user is willing to learn, then it can lead to some "true" (i.e. "NYKNYC") adoption. I'm not opposed to it. The reasons why I don't see Lightning as the only "general" scaling solution is more due to some design issues, like the well known liquidity problem, and also the potentially slow onboarding potential if there is really massive Bitcoin adoption (realistically, 20-50 millions per year, while in theory it could be 100 million this would require using all block space for LN).

I am not even trying to say that the benefit is huge from this, it is just a good way for me to give people who use custodial solutions an ability to experience and see lightning in action. I was also personally surprised when I used it the first time with my phone, it was a fantastic experience. Can you tell me more about the liquidity problems? Do you mean in general that liquidity is not that high or something specific because I have never once had an issue making a LN payments over the years? I understand if someone wants to make a big payment it may not work because of liquidity, but that is expected behavior because they are not supposed to use it that way.

[citywise2]

What do you think? Is there still a future for the LN? Or is it game over? Your input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

When I joined the forum in 2023, Lightning Network was the most discussed topic at that time. Most members, especially NotATether, would share opinion like it was as if LN were a solution to fast payments. I saw the excitement, but not until years passed by did the energy go down. Honestly, I dont see a future for LN anytime soon.

Out of 100%, become holders aproximately 65% are long-term holders, excluding traders. Correct me if im wrong. However, what Im trying to say is that people see Bitcoin as a valuable asset. It will be difficult to see people use Bitcoin for everyday transactions, covering fees, so long as volatility still exists.

Back the the cost of a transaction and the time to get your coin was seriously a source of concern to many bitcoin enthusiasts, but after the solution  on boarded but with some bit of technicality needed, the attraction began to fade. I do not see it going extinct, just as I do not see it taking centre stage. Not many are willing to take their time learning the technicalities involve when it can be done otherwise. All the same, it is good to have a number of options, the more the better and cheaper.

[Abiky]

lightning Network is not my ideal kind of scaling solution, even though it's far better option than centralized or privately owned alternatives. It should be one of the many available solutions rather than making it look like it's the only alternative we need.
 By the way, the adoption issue is not limited to LN, it's a general issue in crypto space. I believe it can be solved with independent Bitcoin circular economy rather than trying to penetrate the fiat system to compete with it. The system won't like it at all, and I don't believe it's a good idea to bend to its will. I like how lightning is solving that with Nostr, though alot still need to be done to attract more users and make it a thriving space. It needs to be as safe, easy-to-use, beneficial, useful as possible, and with option for local transactions, including finding local peers.

Finally, an ideal scaling solution should be advanced multi-sidechain modular Bitcoin networks with token pegged to Bitcoin. This is how you can easily bring things like NFTs, DeFi, Dexes, Smart-escrow (or smart-contract), colored coins, etc to Bitcoin.
Hope those with their own agenda or who don't like competition very much don't try to suppress the alternatives

You mean something like blockchain interoperability? Such solution already exists. There are bridges, atomic swaps, and other features meant to make the transition from one coin to another a breeze. Cross-chain atomic swaps are one of the coolest solutions out there, because you can exchange one coin to another without a middleman. Everything works by interconnecting different blockchain networks. I guess this is the future for Bitcoin.

Instead of relying on the LN for fast and cheap transfers, we would have something like a cross-chain interoperability protocol where users can interact with smart contracts, exchange BTC to another crypto (or vice versa), and even stake coins without leaving the Bitcoin blockchain. What matters here is UX (user experience). Because if UX is poor, don't expect mass adoption to happen anytime soon. That's the #1 problem facing the LN today. Hope developers address this before it's too late.

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

You mean something like blockchain interoperability? Such solution already exists. There are bridges, atomic swaps, and other features meant to make the transition from one coin to another a breeze. Cross-chain atomic swaps are one of the coolest solutions out there, because you can exchange one coin to another without a middleman. Everything works by interconnecting different blockchain networks. I guess this is the future for Bitcoin.

Cross-chain bridges or atomic swaps are very good because it does not require to use any centralized exchange that very possibly needs KYC. In addition, using bridges, swaps can help Bitcoin users to have more privacy after their trades. This can be very important with some people even most people don't care about privacy or anonymity. It does not reduce the high helpfulness of bridges and swaps for better privacy.

There are of course security issues and concerns even technically security of bridges and swaps have been improved a lot than years ago, risks still exist and hackers will try to use AI for deeply diving into codes and exploiting if possible.

[drangos]

What do you think? Is there still a future for the LN? Or is it game over? Your input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

When I joined the forum in 2023, Lightning Network was the most discussed topic at that time. Most members, especially NotATether, would share opinion like it was as if LN were a solution to fast payments. I saw the excitement, but not until years passed by did the energy go down. Honestly, I dont see a future for LN anytime soon.

Out of 100%, become holders aproximately 65% are long-term holders, excluding traders. Correct me if im wrong. However, what Im trying to say is that people see Bitcoin as a valuable asset. It will be difficult to see people use Bitcoin for everyday transactions, covering fees, so long as volatility still exists.

Back the the cost of a transaction and the time to get your coin was seriously a source of concern to many bitcoin enthusiasts, but after the solution  on boarded but with some bit of technicality needed, the attraction began to fade. I do not see it going extinct, just as I do not see it taking centre stage. Not many are willing to take their time learning the technicalities involve when it can be done otherwise. All the same, it is good to have a number of options, the more the better and cheaper.

I don't believe that the Lightning Network is game over, but it's also not going to be Bitcoin's primary use case anytime soon, either. As you said, a lot of people don't think of BTC investment as anything to be used often anymore, and the volatility is not that great of an incentive for spending money. But Lightning has a nice use case as it allows for transactions to be made quickly and cheaply without any transactions having to go directly on the Bitcoin base layer. The more difficult part is likely the usability and adoption of the technology, not the technology itself. While wallets and services make Lightning easier for non-technological users, it still has a future.

[goldphysicalbitcoin]

The Bitcoin-based Lightning Network derives its value from being independent of existing fiat payment rails. Its full potential remains unrealized while Bitcoin is not yet a widely used currency, but its true value may emerge over the long term, especially if fiat systems face collapse.

[Outhue]

The controversial L2 scaling solution has been years in the making, yet it has suffered from lack of mainstream adoption. At the time of this writing, there are many merchants and/or services that still don't support LN payments. For something that promises ultra-low fees and blazing-fast transaction speeds, LN should've been accepted almost everywhere by now. Imagine going to your favorite coffee shop or restaurant and paying with the LN like a breeze.

While the LN does have its benefits, it isn't the perfect solution. There are many flaws that need to be addressed. Especially in terms of UX, and high centralization risks.

What do you think? Is there still a future for the LN? Or is it game over? Your input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Many merchants do accept lightning Network, the thing is where you planned to spend your Bitcoin don't accept LN and that's fine, but you instead use this to accept and assume that merchants around the world aren't accepting Bitcoin LN, this is wrong, because I was like this too in the past, I judged things differently then, I have used bitcoin to pay for things online than my credit card but many of those online stores don't support LN, then I used that to judged every stores online until not too long ago, it's probably the same case with you OP, how many online stores have you used so far? You haven't done enough research is all, many are accepting LN.

[Dogedegen]

The Bitcoin-based Lightning Network derives its value from being independent of existing fiat payment rails. Its full potential remains unrealized while Bitcoin is not yet a widely used currency, but its true value may emerge over the long term, especially if fiat systems face collapse.

I don't think that this claim is correct because what you describe is one of the reasons how Bitcoin derives its value, it is supposed to enable peer to peer transactions. So to claim that this is the benefit of the Lightning Network is not really correct, since this is already given with the layer one. The benefit of LN comes with the speed relating to micropayments and more privacy relating to those payments and other things, so while Bitcoin transactions are always public the transactions on lightning are not. There are some methods by which someone could spy on some transactions, but even when they use those methods they can never reach the level of uncovering transactions that the transparency of the layer 1 provides on its own.

Many merchants do accept lightning Network, the thing is where you planned to spend your Bitcoin don't accept LN and that's fine, but you instead use this to accept and assume that merchants around the world aren't accepting Bitcoin LN, this is wrong, because I was like this too in the past, I judged things differently then, I have used bitcoin to pay for things online than my credit card but many of those online stores don't support LN, then I used that to judged every stores online until not too long ago, it's probably the same case with you OP, how many online stores have you used so far? You haven't done enough research is all, many are accepting LN.

We can talk about a potential stagnation of the adoption of lightning network overall, but we can not make conclusions based on our personal experiences. Some friends that I know live in areas that have local adoption of lightning too, and they have showed me a couple of times how they pay with that in restaurants. If you consider in person payments and if the way that the merchant adopted Bitcoin requires confirmations then it can be a bit bothersome to use it in situations like this. Usually in a restaurant you pay at the end or before leaving, and with Bitcoin this way of doing it is not going to work. So you would have to ask to pay much sooner before you leave and if you get unlucky it could take even an hour, but if they have lightning you can pay as if you would go there with cash. It really makes a difference that it is so fast!

[dansus021]

—snip—

• https://btcmap.org/apps

The site makes it easy for us to find any store/hotel that accepts Bitcoin LN readings... and most surprised in Indonesia there are still some stores that accept bitcoin payments, I do not know when this was last updated, after just seeing the data is still there until now.

Several global exchanges have accepted bitcoin LN, it's just that our local exchanges still have not accepted it that's the least I know, what I personally know LN is still much less interested.

Wait what Indonesia still accept bitcoin, if the gov know about this, that would be end for the merchant. Yes I do agree with you LN is not widely accepted especially in Indonesia. LN is considered as Layer 2 of bitcoin if Ln have some dApp like ethereum with Optimism and Arbitrum LN must be popular by now.

Despite Lightning being the fastest Bitcoin transaction network, not many people are okay with it, so many are very okay waiting 30-60 minutes for full confirmation to receive their deposits, the fees are also cheap. The future of Lightning Network is not looking bright enough for massive adoption, It will remain in use, but the best it can survive with is a mid-level adoption.

If LN seriously wants to have a future, there needs to be something more, a very good reason why to choose LN over the main network. I'm personally not convinced to stop or move into using LN over Bitcoin Mainnet, there has to be a stronger reason.

LN network is supposed to close the gap bitcoin trillema but its lack of purposes is just make bitcoin transfer fast and yes people just stay with 30 minutes confirmation because not everyone is using LN. LN with EVM compatible like I was said before it could bring billion user and money.

If I’m not mistaken, the reason you remain very optimistic about LN future is that LN has already been adopted by several major CEX. Compared to three years ago, there are now two major changes "CEX are opening the door" and "wallets are making it easy." So, the Lightning Network has moved past the experimental stage. It has now entered the phase of being used for everyday payments.

Im hoping all exchange started to accept LN too in the future